Dokiman ki tache

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE AGENDA February 25, 2008 - 6:00 P.M. - Council Chambers - City Hall - City of Dover Public comments are welcomed on any item and will be permitted at appropriate times. When possible, please notify the City Clerk (736-7008 or e-mail at Tmcdowell@dover.de.us) should you wish to be recognized. AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS 1. Independent Accountant Report by Haggarty & Haggarty 2. Amendment to Robbins Hose Company Annual Contribution in the CIP (Tabled by Committee Pending Haggarty & Haggarty Report on February 11, 2008) (Due to time constraints, this item has been placed on the Council agenda for the meeting being held later in the evening) 3. Status of Incentives for Downtown (Deferred by Committee on February 11, 2008 Due to Lack of Time) 4. Contract with IAAO for Technical Assistance - Review, Analysis, and Evaluation of City Assessor’s Office 5. Disposition of City Owned Land – Property Located at 101 Jefferson Court 6. Adjournment by 7:00 P.M. /tm S:\ClerksOffice\Agendas&Minutes\Committee-Agendas\2008\02-25-2008 LF&A.wpd THE AGENDA ITEMS AS LISTED MAY NOT BE CONSIDERED IN SEQUENCE. THIS AGENDA IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE TO INCLUDE THE ADDITION OR THE DELETION OF ITEMS, INCLUDING EXECUTIVE SESSIONS.

ACTION FORM PROCEEDING: Legislative, Finance & Administration AGENDA ITEM NO.: 02/25/2008 DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN: FIRE DATE SUBMITTED: 01/11/2008 PREPARED BY: Chief David Carey, City Manager SUBJECT: Amendment to Robbins Hose Company Annual Contribution in the CIP to Reflect New Cost of Engine 5 Replacement REFERENCE: RELATED PROJECT: APPROVALS: Finance Director, City Manager EXHIBITS: Modified CIP sheet EXPENDITURE REQUIRED FY08/09 – FY11/12: $180,300 or $195,300 annually as explained below AMOUNT BUDGETED IN CIP: $450,000 ($150,000 annually in FY 08/09, FY09/10 FY10/11). FUNDING SOURCE (Dept./Page in CIP & Budget): Fire CIP Page: Page 171 TIMETABLE: Upon modification of the CIP, equipment will be ordered; order and down payment of $5,000 must be in by February 27, 2008 to secure current prices. Estimated delivery would be the late 2008. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approval of amendment to Robbins Hose Company CIP sheet of the City 07/08 Budget, down payment of $5,000 and ordering of replacement Engine #5. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS In accordance with the CIP for next fiscal year the Dover Fire Department sent out a specification for a replacement piece of fire apparatus to replace the current Engine 5 which is a 1989 Mack/Pierce. There is a long delivery time for fire engines which require the order to be placed well in advance of the fiscal year. Engine 5 is 19 years old and we currently have a 15 year replacement program. The current engine lacks dependability which could jeopardize firefighter safety. The specification was sent out to four vendors, American LaFrance, KME, Seagrave, and Pierce. Pierce was the only vendor to submit a proposal. The proposal for the specification came in at a cost of $588,614. They also bid an optional cab which would lower the cost to $539,299. The engine committee chose to go with the optional cab and also deleted several safety items to bring the truck close to the City’s projected budget (CIP). That price is $512,764, inflating for a 3% maximum change order limit the price is $528,146. To finance this option over three years (using current market rates) would translate into a loan payment of $180,300 for a total financed cost of $540,900. The Fire Chief wants Council to be aware of the following crash safety options : Advanced ABS System, Tire Pressure Management System, Seat Belt Alarms, Side Roll Protection, Additional LED Warning Lights on Cab Doors (exit), Insta Chains, and Frontal Impact. These would bring the cost to $555,478 including the 3% maximum change order limit. To finance this option over three years (using current market rates) would translate into a loan payment of $195,300 for a total financed cost of $585,900. Research was completed to determine if the City paid for the truck being replaced. The files are not complete; however we were able to determine $120,000 of City monies were used to pay for the 1989 Mack. * The payments are subject to change based on prevailing interest rates at time of financing.

City of Dover Annual Contribution to Robbins Hose Company FISCAL YEAR: 2008 - 2012 PROJECT NO: n/a CATEGORY: General DEPARTMENT: Fire DEPT. RANKING: 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This contribution covers payments to the Robbins Hose Company to cover the Major Fire Apparatus Replacement Plan and the annual mortgage payment for Station #2. NEED, JUSTIFICATION, BENEFIT: The annual mortgage payment is based on an earlier agreement that the City has with the Robbins Hose Company. The Major Fire Apparatus Replacement Plan ensures loan payments for replacement according to a schedule which guarantees equipment will not be outdated and unserviceable. This plan is based on replacing one of the Company's five engines and one rescue vehicle every three years which would put the average replacement age at 18 years. The two ladder trucks would be replaced every 15 years depending on condition and current needs. This schedule would reduce overall maintenance costs because fire apparatus would be replaced before major problems occur. By providing the Robbins Hose Company with the needed payments for the Major Fire Apparatus Replacement Plan, the Robbins Hose Company will be enabled to pay for a $5.5 million door rehabilitation of the Company Headquarters on Governors Avenue. This renovation is designed to handle 25 years of growth of the company and would preclude any need for an additional fire station in Dover. The Robbins Hose Company will also cover costs associated with miscellaneous apparatus and equipment such as command units, utility vehicles, and large hose replacement. CONSEQUENCES OF DELAYING OR ELIMINATING THIS PROJECT: increased maintenance costs; possibility of not meeting ISO requirements and NFPA standards THIS PROJECT IS RELATED TO THE FOLLOWING: n/a EXPLANATION OF IMPACT ON OPERATING BUDGET: n/a TIME-LINE/CURRENT STATUS: Fiscal Year 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 TOTALS Mtge Stat. #2 35,000 $ 35,000 Ladder 1 (2001) 70,000 $ 70,000 Ladder 2 (1993) 92,910 92,910 92,910 92,910 92,910 92,910 $ 557,460 Engine 4 (1989) $ - Engine 5 (1989) 180,300 180,300 180,300 $ 540,900 Engine 7 (1997) 160,000 160,000 $ 320,000 Totals $ 197,910 $ 273,210 $ 273,210 $ 273,210 $ 252,910 $ 252,910 $ 1,523,360 COMMENTS: None FIVE-YEAR COST BREAKDOWN SCHEDULE: Prior to 2008 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 TOTAL Planning and Design Land Construction Miscellaneous Equipment 197,910 273,210 273,210 273,210 252,910 252,910 1,523,360 Other TOTAL 197,910 273,210 273,210 273,210 252,910 252,910 1,523,360 FINANCING: Prior to 2008 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 TOTAL General Fund 197,910 273,210 273,210 273,210 252,910 252,910 1,523,360 TOTAL 197,910 273,210 273,210 273,210 252,910 252,910 1,523,360 IMPACT ON OPERATING BUDGET: Description Prior to 2008 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 TOTAL

file:///S|/ClerksOffice/PACKETS/2008/Committee/LF&A/02-25-2008/Evaluation of Engine From: DePrima, Tony Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 3:52 PM To: McDowell, Traci Subject: Evaluation of Engine #5 Bid by Peter Gregg The following is Pete Gregg's evaluation of the Fire Truck bid. Please include this in the LFA packet for next meeting thanks. Tony, I have reviewed the Pierce submission for the Pumper. I have also contacted the vendors who did not submit a bid. Please keep in mind that I am not a functional expert on Fire Trucks. All documents were submitted by Singer Associates as required by the bid instructions. The bid submitted the Pierce truck met, almost exactly, all the requirements of the vehicle specifications. Therefore the Pierce should be considered as a responsive and responsible bidder. When only one bid is received, my advise to all Department Heads is paraphrased from Delaware Code, Title 29 which states if only one response is received, an award may be made to the single bidder if the Department determines that the price received is fair and reasonable and other prospective bidders had a reasonable opportunity to respond, or, there is not adequate time for re- solicitation. If the bid is rejected, they may solicit new bids or cancel the proposed procurement. I received and email from Rick Strauss, Vice President of DPC Emergency Equipment, Sales representative for American La France. I will forward it to you for your review. I also spoke to Rob Mortka from Emergency Products Inc, representative of Seagrave, and Skip Stringer from James B. Hunt MFG Co, representative of KME. They all stated that they did not bid because the specification was proprietary and only a Pierce truck could meet all of the requirements. I can not verify this claim. Only someone knowledgeable about the details of this type of vehicle would know. It is the responsibility of the specification author to ensure that the specification is not restrictive. If this specification had been bid through me, following the City of Dover Purchasing Policy, I believe that we would have had the same result. I will forward any emails I receive on this subject as I get them. Please let me know if you need anything else from me on this matter. I want to state that Chief David Carey was extremely cooperative and provided answers to all my questions. It was a pleasure working with him on this review. Pete Peter K. Gregg Contract and Procurement Manager City of Dover (302) 736-7795 file:///S|/ClerksOffice/PACKETS/2008/Committee/LF&A/02-25-2008/Evaluation of Engine (1 of 2)2/22/2008 8:13:28 AM

file:///S|/ClerksOffice/PACKETS/2008/Committee/LF&A/02-25-2008/Evaluation of Engine Anthony (Tony) J. DePrima, AICP Dover City Manager P.O.Box 475 Dover, Delaware 19903 PH: 302-736-7005 FX: 302-736-7002 Check out our website www.cityofdover.com This e-mail, including attachments, is confidential and intended only for the designated recipient(s). If you are not an intended recipient, please delete this e-mail. The unauthorized use, dissemination, distribution or reproduction of this e-mail, including attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. file:///S|/ClerksOffice/PACKETS/2008/Committee/LF&A/02-25-2008/Evaluation of Engine (2 of 2)2/22/2008 8:13:28 AM

Page 1 of 2 Gomes, Linda To: Mitchell, Donna Subject: RE: Dover Fire Department Bid Mitchell, Donna From: Rob Mortka [mailto:rob@emergencyproductsinc.com] Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 11:20 AM To: Mitchell, Donna Subject: Fw: Dover Fire Department Bid ----- Original Message ----- From: Rob Mortka To: Gregg, Peter Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 7:12 PM Subject: Re: Dover Fire Department Bid Pete, Thanks for the opportunity, and I hope this will assist in your Endeavour. It is fact, by virtue of the postage date on the envelope, that it was mailed on the 11th of December, certified. I believe our offices received it no later than the 14th, you should be able to validate that with the certification of receipt. However, I am comfortable stating that it was on my desk by that date. The cover letter inside is dated the 10th of December, additionally, it states that the bids were due back no later than the 31st (Noon). If I had begun to work on it immediately, that would give me 16 days for a turnaround. However, what needs to be taken into account is that we have six (6) days off the bat, that are either Saturdays or Sundays, days traditionally not worked, so now we are down to 10. Out of those 10, two of the days were holiday, the 24th and 25th, now we are at 8. Say what you want, but when the calendar falls the way it does, the whole nation takes advantage of the four day holiday, especially Christmas. Eight days. Hardly not enough time, even if you have the inside track. I am sure you are aware of the time it takes just to turn a bond around! I (Reality is seven, cant work the day it is due!) On page 2 of the specifications, there is a requirement for the unit to be delivered by the 31st of October. An approximate 10 month turnaround. Penalty would ensue for everyday there after. The statement is very bold with no consideration for the details of a contract to be worked out and some pre-approvals that are customary in our business. My guess is that Pierce Mfg. having the lead, would have all of these details already worked out, so they could commit to the timeline. The remaining boilerplate pages up to page 7, are indicative of items that I have seen in the past in an effort to exclude as many builders as possible. The technical portion, specific to the apparatus itself, there are items in there that are proprietary. Examples are; Page 8, "Front Non Drive Axle", calls for a suspension to be a "TAK-4" with a registered trade mark. This is indicative of a product that only Pierce provides. True there are other independent suspensions out there, but it is specific. Page 19, eight paragraph, states for the cab access steps to be automatic, drop down when the door opens and to stow when the door is closed. An option only available by Pierce with their "Quantum" cab version. Page 29, "Frontal Impact Protection", even though I cannot argue when it comes to safety, but as of the distribution, Pierce was the only one to offer this. Page 63, "Pump", the configuration calls for a mounting system to be located under the crew cab, a design that Pierce just recently introduced in April of ' 07 with their "Husky" foam system. 2/22/2008

Page 2 of 2 I tried to focus on the items that are truly proprietary, there are more, but I hope this gives you and idea. In summary, I could not meet the intent in seven days and turn around a bonafide proposal. I close with this. If your intent is to buy a Ford, then you surely do not go to the Chevy dealer and furnish him with a list of options that you know he cannot comply with. There are ethical and savvy ways to get what you want and prove the worthiness as to why more money should be spent vs. accepting the lowest bid. One of the problems that plagues us today is that the fire service, hero's that they are, have come to expect too much and do not want to place the effort in justifying their need. Respectfully, Rob Mortka President EPI ----- Original Message ----- From: Gregg, Peter To: rob@emergencyproductsinc.com Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 9:18 AM Subject: Dover Fire Department Bid Rob, I have been tasked with a review of the recent Dover Fire Department Bid for a Multipurpose Emergency Response Vehicle that was sent to Emergency Products Inc on December 11, 2008. Please respond to this email and let me know why your company, representing Seagrave, elected not to bid. Thanks you Peter K. Gregg Contract and Procurement Manager City of Dover (302) 736-7795 Fax (302) 736-7178 pgregg@dover.de.us www.cityofdover.com 2/22/2008

Page 1 of 2 Gomes, Linda To: Mitchell, Donna Subject: RE: Truck Purchase Mitchell, Donna From: Rick Strauss [mailto:rickstrauss@dpcemergency.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 3:48 PM To: Mitchell, Donna Subject: FW: Truck Purchase fyi..read below Rick Strauss Vice President DPC Emergency Equipment 302-492-1245 phone 302-492-1340 fax 302-242-1693 cell From: Rick Strauss [mailto:rickstrauss@dpcemergency.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 4:31 PM To: 'pgregg@dover.de.us' Cc: 'adamjarrell@dpcemergency.com' Subject: Truck Purchase Pete, Dover FD sent us a proprietary spec back in December asking us for a price. We were never given any chance at demo, meet with truck committee, etc. We were also only given a little over 2 weeks when 1 month is pretty much standard. We were simply given a spec and asked to bid. After looking at the spec and realizing that no exceptions were allowed, we determined it was not in our interest to bid. Given the amount of work involved with a truck bid, when a department will not even meet with you to discuss the bid, it is over 98% guaranteed to be a losing effort. Dover FD never once contacted us asking if we had plans to bid and honestly, we didn't make much effort given the bid environment. We were never asked why we didn't bid, nor did we offer. We would be more than willing to sit with you and go over the bid spec pointing out what is proprietary. I actually enjoy reviewing trucks specs for that purpose much more than for bid purposes. As an owner of DPC, I am more concerned about a fair process than I am about whether or not we are awarded the bid. Our business is solely based on integrity and I hope to never lose that focus. Customers should take the time to educate themselves as to what they are buying and how to bid fairly and effectively. Most simply do not appreciate the time and resources it takes to put a proper truck bid together. Most truck dealers attempt to get their spec as the only acceptable spec to guarantee themselves a 2/22/2008

Page 2 of 2 sale. We prefer open bids where the bidder who best meets the spec for the price is successful. Price is not always the deciding factor, but should play a major role in that decision. Service should also play a major role. We switched brands to Rosenbauer America on Jan 19, 2008. ALF had been having internal issues (not product issues) for over a year with no end in sight. We decided to explore other options and had actively been looking at several manufacturers since last Nov. We continued our operations as usual in all bid cases and left ALF 1 week before they filed. The ALF bankruptcy took us by surprise on Jan 28, 2008...long after the bid closing date There are many other variables which ultimately lead to us choosing to bid Dover or other accounts and I will gladly explain if interested. We have some pretty extensive exposure to municipal purchasing at several other departments - PG County MD, Baltimore County MD, Fairfax County VA, etc. Please feel free to call. FYI...We will have a Rosenbauer demo here this Friday, Fed 22 for about 1 month and would be more than willing to show the truck. Rick Strauss Vice President DPC Emergency Equipment 302-492-1245 phone 302-492-1340 fax 302-242-1693 cell 2/22/2008

ACTION FORM PROCEEDING: Legislative, Finance & Administration Committee AGENDA ITEM NO.: DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN: Planning & Inspections DATE SUBMITTED: February 6, 2008 PREPARED BY: Ann Marie Townshend, AICP SUBJECT: Status of Proposed Downtown Incentives REFERENCE: N/A RELATED PROJECT: N/A APPROVALS: N/A EXHIBITS: Status Sheet of Proposed Downtown Incentives EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: N/A AMOUNT BUDGETED: N/A FUNDING SOURCE (Dept./Page in CIP & Budget): N/A TIMETABLE: Dates Identified in attachment RECOMMENDED ACTION: Provide feedback on progress of proposed incentives BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS The attachment details the status of a number of proposed (and existing) incentives to encourage redevelopment of downtown Dover.

The following proposed incentives have been discussed by the Downtown Dover Development Corporation and presented to City Council during their special focus meeting on economic development on November 5, 2007. Some of these incentives can be handled administratively, while others require action by City Council or the State General Assembly. This is intended to serve as an update to the Legislative, Finance and Administration Committee on the status of the various proposed incentives as well as to gain guidance from Council, through the Committee on prioritization of the proposed incentives going forward. Items in red are items that staff is actively working on in some fashion. These items include milestone dates when they will be complete or additional information will be brought forward. Planning Office Needs Guidance from City Council Needs Action from State or Other Outside Entity Create a fast-track approval process for all Case manager for new business issues. A Historic preservation tax credits. The state development issues in the downtown target new economic development position should be should ear-mark a set amount of historic area. established in the city, with responsibilities for preservation tax credits for use in the coordinating the myriad approvals necessary downtown BID. Staff Update: One of the challenges with this for a new business start-up. is balancing fast-tracking approvals with the Staff Update: This would require action by added requirements of Historic District Staff Update: This is an issue that should be the General Assembly. The City Council may review. Whenever possible, staff conducts addressed through the merging of numerous want to approach the local delegation to bring administrative review of architectural review organizations into the Downtown Dover this idea forward. certificates to eliminate burden on the Partnership. Significant progress has been applicants; however some applications, made at the staff level in this regard and will particularly those which include demolition, be presented to City Council in March 2008. significant exterior renovation or new It is anticipated that the current Executive construction, must be reviewed by the Historic Director of Main Street Dover will fill the role District Commission. In some cases, we have as a case manager, and additional staffing allowed overlap with the applications between needs are being evaluated that would allow Historic District Commission and Planning this person to function more in this capacity. Commission. Staff will review whether or not a one-step application process could be utilized for projects that must go to the Historic District Commission and Planning Commission. Status of Proposed Downtown Incentives Legislative, Finance & Administration Committee – February 11, 2008 Page 1 of 4

Add surface parking immediately. The Eliminate the BID tax in downtown Dover. Renter’s deduction on personal income tax proposed surface parking lot on Governor’s The Business Improvement District (BID) should be explored for the downtown target Avenue should be constructed immediately should be retooled in order to attract new area. and made available. businesses, and retain existing businesses. Currently, property owners in the BID district Staff Update: This is an incentive that would Staff Update: This site plan has been pay an additional BID tax in addition to require State legislation. The Planning Office approved by the Planning Commission and the property taxes, in some cases as much as 25% is not in a position to move this forward. consultant is working to finalize the site plan additional tax on property. This is viewed by and secure all agency approvals. As soon as many as a disincentive to business. final plans are approved by all regulatory agencies, the project will be put out to bid and Staff Update: Currently, there has not been constructed. action on this proposed incentive. The following issues need to be discussed in reference to this proposal: How would the City make up the funds lost through elimination of the BID tax? Would the tax be phased out or eliminated all at once? This Committee should consider making a recommendation on this specific incentive, at which time staff would work on drafting an ordinance to bring forward. Create a downtown target area, align all Reduce property taxes in the target area. Façade grants. Main Street Dover should downtown jurisdictions, and create Property owners with mixed use (i.e., continue its Façade Improvement Grants, and incentives in the downtown target area. residential and commercial) in the target area should request additional funding from the Currently, there are numerous “districts” in the should receive a reduction in property taxes. General Assembly for the program. downtown area, including three parts of the Business Improvement District, the downtown Staff Update: This is an issue that would need Staff Update: This funding would need to be historic district, and the downtown incentives clear direction from City Council. It is beyond sought through the General Assembly, as the district. These jurisdictions are not aligned the expertise of the Planning Office to develop current pot of funds is very small. and cause confusion for existing property such an incentive and would need support owners and potential developers. from the Assessment Office to move forward. Staff Update: Staff will bring forward an ordinance to amend the description of the BID Status of Proposed Downtown Incentives Legislative, Finance & Administration Committee – February 11, 2008 Page 2 of 4

to align with the Target Area identified in Appendix C of Dover Code. It is not practical to align the Historic Overlay Zone boundary with this area, as it has a different function and a regulatory component to it. Completion date: September 2008. Real estate tax abatement in downtown. Provide incentives for existing employers to invest in the downtown. Large employers in City historic preservation tax the area may have a need for housing for their abatement/credit. work force. If the development of mixed-use mid-rises in the downtown proceeds, these Staff Update: This issue is a matter of better larger employers may want to provide a promotion of these and other incentives. The limited investment in securing housing. In 10-year tax abatement is currently available return for an investment in such a mid-rise in throughout the “Target Area” identified in the downtown, the City may want to consider Appendix C of Dover Code. The City’s tax a reduction in property taxes on other credit program is open to historic properties holdings. within the City’s historic district or listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Staff Update: This is another issue that could Planning staff is working with the City’s be better addressed under the Downtown Public Affairs Coordinator to develop a Dover Partnership if the City hires an strategy to better market the incentives economic development professional to assist currently offered in the downtown area. with this effort and city-wide economic Completion date: September 2008. development. Impact Fee waiver in the downtown. The Create “ambassadors” in the downtown impact fee waiver should be expanded to the target area, similar to the Seattle entire downtown BID. Metropolitan Improvement District ambassadors. Staff Update: This is complete. Council adopted this ordinance on January 28, 2008. Status of Proposed Downtown Incentives Legislative, Finance & Administration Committee – February 11, 2008 Page 3 of 4

Tax Increment Financing should be explored for the downtown Business Improvement District. Staff Update: The Planning Office has gathered information on Tax Increment Financing and is continuing to look for application of the concept on a scale comparable to downtown Dover. This will also need to be reviewed light of the tax abatement offered in downtown Dover. Staff is concerned that the effectiveness of such a program may be negated by the size of the Dover downtown as well as the tax abatement incentive offered in the downtown area. Staff would like to give a presentation or workshop on the concept of tax increment financing to City Council and the Downtown Dover Development Corporation during fall 2008 to better explain the concept. Status of Proposed Downtown Incentives Legislative, Finance & Administration Committee – February 11, 2008 Page 4 of 4

ACTION FORM PROCEEDING: Legislative, Finance & Administration Committee AGENDA ITEM NO.: 02/25/2008 DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN: City Manager DATE SUBMITTED: 02/19/2008 PREPARED BY: City Manager SUBJECT: Contract with IAAO for Technical Assistance – Review, Analysis, and Evaluation of City Assessor’s Office REFERENCE: RELATED PROJECT: N/A APPROVALS: City Manager EXHIBITS: Proposal Attached EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $30,500 AMOUNT BUDGETED: See Below FUNDING SOURCE (Dept./Page in CIP & Budget): See Below TIMETABLE: Start March 2008, Completion in June 2008 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion that the City Manager contract with IAAO to perform a Review, Analysis, and Evaluation of City Assessor’s Office in the amount of $30,500, waiving the purchasing policy requiring a Request for Proposals. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS The International Association of Assessing Officers (IAAO) is the leading professional organization for tax assessors. The IAAO has a technical assistance program where retired or employed professional assessors who are available provide technical assistance and evaluation services for local governments in need. The City Manager feels that there is a strong need for a complete review of the City Assessor’s Office. This is based on management observations, the fact that the office has had three different assessors over the past eight years, and a lack of standards for a number of its routine procedures. It is hoped this evaluation will produce a number of recommendations that when implemented will allow us to become an IAAO certified city. Attached is a detailed Scope of Work which includes information on the IAAO and its services. The IAAO is proposing to assign Frederick Chmura and Wayne Trout. Their qualifications are also included. The contract amount is $30,500. The funding for this will come from the money budgeted for the City Assessor’s salary. In addition to these funds, a “commercial appraiser” position was budgeted for this year. This position will not be filled until the Assessor position is filled. The expense is being included in the mid-year budget review. Due to the immediate need for these services and the IAAO’s unique position as a non-profit professional organization, a Request for Proposals as called for in the purchasing policy is not recommended at this time.

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROJECT CITY OF DOVER, DELAWARE Proposal Review of the City Assessor’s Office Prepared by the International Association of Assessing Officers February 11, 2008 International Association of Assessing Officers 314 W 10th Street • Kansas City, Missouri 64105-1616 Tel: 816.701.8100 • Fax: 816.701.8149 www.iaao.org

CITY OF DOVER, DELAWARE REVIEW, ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION OF THE CITY ASSESSOR’S OFFICE PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS Cover Letter ................................................................................................................................. 3 Statement of the Proposal ........................................................................................................... 4 Project Overview.......................................................................................................................... 4 Statement of Qualifications of IAAO ......................................................................................... 5 Performance Standards (IAAO)................................................................................................. 7 Qualifications of IAAO................................................................................................................ 8 Technical Assistance Personnel .................................................................................................. 8 Affirmative Action ....................................................................................................................... 8 American With Disabilities Act .................................................................................................. 8 Anti-Discrimination ..................................................................................................................... 9 Immigration Reform and Control Act....................................................................................... 9 Drug-Free Work Place ................................................................................................................ 9 Review of Reassessment and Review of the Assessment Office Project Work Plan.............. 9 Proposed Deliverables ............................................................................................................... 10 Proposed Costs ........................................................................................................................... 10 Addendum A – Proposed Work Plan....................................................................................... 11 Addendum B – Qualifications of Personnel............................................................................. 14 2

International Association of Assessing Officers 314 W 10th Street · Kansas City, Missouri 64105-1616 · U.S.A Phone: 816.701-8100 · Fax: 816.701-8149 CAE · AAS · CMS · RES · PPS Professional Designations February 11, 2008 Anthony DePrima, City Manager P.O. Box 475 15 East Loockerman Street Dover, DE 19903-0475 RE: Review of Assessor’s Office Dear Mr. DePrima: The International Association of Assessing Officers, Inc. (IAAO) is pleased to submit the attached proposal to provide a review of the administration and processes of the City Assessor’s Office. Our flat fee bid on the proposed undertaking is THIRTY THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($30,500.00). That sum will cover the review and analysis of adequacy of the personnel staffing and current staff workloads; job descriptions and qualifications; employee compensation; resource allocation and funding; the CAMA system and use of technology; the office space allocation; the management practices relative to internal controls, internal communications and public relations; relevant City Code and City Charter provisions; and the existing appeals system and documents related thereto via accepted standard performance recommendations related to sound assessment practice, as requested by the City of Dover. The IAAO project principals will be Frederick Chmura, AAS, CCMA from Woodstock, Connecticut, Project Manager. Assisting him will be Wayne N. Trout, ASA from Norfolk, Virginia. Other professionals in the property assessment and tax administration fields may be used as needed to complete the project. IAAO staff will perform all general administrative and clerical tasks for this project. Our standard payment terms are 25% of the engagement fee due at the time the project is accepted by both parties and the balance payable with the completion and submission of the final project report, with no discount for early payment. These terms are negotiable in the event the jurisdiction has a different payment schedule for professional services. The details of our proposal are attached, along with a summary of our qualifications. Please feel free to contact me for any clarification or elaboration you may desire at 816.701.8100 or e-mail at daniels@iaao.org. Sincerely, Lisa Daniels IAAO Executive Director 3

REVIEW, ANALYSIS, AND EVALUATION OF THE CITY ASSESSOR’S OFFICE PROJECT CITY OF DOVER, DELAWARE Statement of the Proposal The City Assessor’s Office, City of Dover, Delaware (“City Assessor’s Office”), has requested a review and analysis of the administration, processes, staffing and facilities of the City Assessor’s Office and review of the assessment appeals process. The proposed study is being undertaken to provide an independent evaluation of these activities as performed by the City. The City desires to examine the processes, procedures, methods, and techniques employed by the City Assessor’s Office and others in assessment administration, management practices, appeals and the procedures for transfer tax collection, auditing process and reporting in order to receive recommendations as appropriate for the improvement of processes and operations to insure compliance with the Standards of the International Association of Assessing Officers (IAAO), and the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) The International Association of Assessing Officers, Inc. (IAAO) after conducting its review, study, and evaluation will report objective conclusions about the assessment administration practices and methodologies of the City Assessor’s Office and the appeals process. In so doing, the IAAO will make appropriate recommendations and advise the City on their compliance with commonly accepted appraisal practices and standards within the industry. To conduct an objective study, IAAO employs individuals who have achieved the highest levels of education, training, and experience in the assessment field. All are familiar with policy and procedural issues, as well as the technical measurements required of this study. Members of the study team will conduct an on-site visit and an inspection of appropriate length to ensure comprehensive coverage of all issues and problems. IAAO’s leadership in the assessment profession covers education, certification, consultation, and the creation of standards for assessment performance quality. Its members must subscribe to IAAO’s Code of Ethics and Standards of Professional Conduct and the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP). Due to the importance of the review and study to City of Dover, Delaware, and to the assessment profession, IAAO will combine its thorough and professional understanding of the details of the project with an intense high level of effort and conscientiousness. Project Overview IAAO is pleased to receive your request to review the City of Dover Assessor’s Office Project. Specifically, the IAAO will examine the operations of the assessment process, including performing the review, analysis, and evaluation of the following tasks: 4

• Real property valuation practices, methods, and techniques used in determining assessed values for the jurisdiction. Management and administrative practices utilized by the City Assessor’s Office • Organization structure, communication, and planning; • Appeals program in its relationship with the assessment process; • Effectiveness of the public relations and customer services programs; • Current mass appraisal processes and systems, to determine if they are adequate to meet the needs of the City of Dover and are being utilized effectively and efficiently; • Review the collection, auditing process and reporting of the transfer tax • Other applicable or pertinent issues that result from the review project for the City of Dover and; • Provide recommendations as appropriate for the improvement of the assessment process and operations. At the conclusion of the project we will provide a final written report and a verbal report before the City Manager, with recommendations based upon Delaware State Law and the standards for the mass appraisal industry. Other professional appraisers, consultants, and specialists may be used as needed throughout the project. IAAO staff will complete all general administrative and clerical tasks for this project. IAAO would like to reserve the right to use additional experts as needed. Any and all additional experts’ names and qualifications will be submitted for prior approval before any involvement in the project. No subcontractors are proposed to be used in the project. Statement of Qualifications of IAAO The International Association of Assessing Officers (IAAO) is a nonprofit professional membership organization of government officials and others interested in the administration of property tax. It was founded in 1934 and currently has a membership base in excess of 7,500 with an annual budget of about $4 million. In addition to the usual conference, publication, and membership activities of professional associations, IAAO engages in a full program of research, library services, and technical assistance projects (consultation). The education program and our professional designation program were developed to fill gaps in both university-level and vocational-level training in the United States for individuals interested in pursuing a career in property tax and assessment administration. Our education program comprises more than thirty-two (32) courses and workshops in a defined curriculum with validated examinations at the end of each, and a choice of subject areas in which students may choose to specialize as they progress through the curriculum. In addition there are sixteen (16) One Day Forums covering various topical subjects in the areas of appraisal and 5

assessment administration and five (5) self-study or programmed instruction courses. The education programs are regularly presented in many states and are incorporated into the state assessor-certification programs administered by a number of state property tax oversight agencies. Each year more than 7,500 course completions are recorded in our student records; approximately 90,000 students have taken at least one of our courses in the past fifteen years. Recognizing that assessment administration is a specialty within public service, and that assessment personnel are relatively mobile, we offer our own professional designation program. Our designation program certifies the competence of individuals and attests to their professionalism across state, county, municipal, provincial, and international boundaries. Several routes are available to designations, all of which involve some independent projects, such as a demonstration appraisal or a mass appraisal case study, in addition to the successful completion of one of the prescribed curricula. A designation recognizing professionalism and competency in a wide range of matters covering property valuation for tax purposes, property tax administration, and property tax policy: Certified Assessment Evaluator (CAE) and four specialist designations: Residential Evaluation Specialist (RES), Cadastral Mapping Specialist (CMS), Personal Property Specialist (PPS), and Assessment Administration Specialist (AAS) are available. For more than seventy years, the association has been active both in establishing voluntary objective standards for the advancement of professional assessment officials and in conducting a research and technical services program to help define such standards and to help jurisdictions attain them. Most germane to the proposed engagement are: Standard on Facilities, Computers, Equipment, and Supplies for Assessment Agencies (2002); Guide to Assessment Administration Standards (1990); Standard on Assessment Appeal (2001) and the IAAO publication Assessment Practices Self- Evaluation Guide (2003). In addition, all members of the Association subscribe to The Appraisal Foundations’ Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP). IAAO offers technical assistance services to taxing jurisdictions and regular members to assist in interpreting and implementing our standards, evaluating current procedures and practices against best practices in the industry and assisting with process improvements Technical assistance services or consulting services are offered in a number of areas and by means of a variety of arrangements. Our most common engagement is to perform an evaluation of assessment practices within a specific jurisdiction and suggest process and practice improvements. These services are often used by jurisdictions with very high levels of practices, to further refine their processes, as well jurisdictions that either feel there are systemic problems in their practices and/or have a public perception that there may be systemic problems. Our services are provided on either a time-and-materials or fixed-price basis, as the client may prefer, and are rendered by team experts assembled for the purpose. Typically the team is comprised of a member project manager, as well as one or more individuals known to be expert practitioners, often persons in governmental employment, who without the association’s infrastructure and team synergy, would neither be able to share their expertise with other agencies nor have the opportunity to engage in consulting activities of the magnitude 6

typically required by our engagements. Given the ad hoc nature of the requests for assistance and the needs being addressed, no two teams are ever exactly the same, but the general pattern of providing assistance in this way has enjoyed a remarkable success for more than three decades. IAAO is an independent association not affiliated with any vendor or firm in the private sector or any other association not in the assessment field. IAAO is a founding and sponsoring member of The Appraisal Foundation. IAAO does not undertake technical assistance projects or perform appraisals for individual properties or for taxpayers or any other individual or group in the private sector. IAAO does not set values for ad valorem purposes. IAAO contracts with government agencies and represents their interests. Performance Standards (IAAO) The IAAO publishes standards for the mass appraisal industry and specifically for governmental assessment jurisdictions around the world. These standards are utilized as guidelines for industry valuation and assessment practices. As a leader in developing best practices, the IAAO will utilize many of the standards below in the appraisal and assessment administration study project. The performance standards that will be used as guidelines in making suggestions and recommendations are noted below. Standard on Mass Appraisal of Real Property (2002) Standard on Assessment Appeal (2001) Standard on Public Relations (2001) Standard on Professional Development (2000) Standard on Ratio Studies (2007) Standard on Property Tax Policy (2004) Standard on Facilities, Computers, Equipment, and Supplies (2003) Standard on Valuation of Personal Property (2005) Standard on Administration of Monitoring and Compliance Responsibilities (2003) Standard on Manual Cadastral Maps and Parcel Identifiers (2004) Standard on Digital Cadastral Maps and Parcel Identifiers (2003) Standard on Automated Valuation Models (AVMs) (2003) 7

Qualifications of IAAO IAAO has performed many technical assistance projects for local assessor's offices. Listed are some jurisdictions where IAAO has completed projects: ¾ City of Suffolk, Virginia ¾ City of Anchorage, Alaska ¾ City of Auburn, Maine ¾ Mecklenburg County, North Carolina ¾ City of Hampton, Virginia (Personal Property Only) ¾ York County, Virginia ¾ Johnson County, Kansas ¾ City of Newport News, Virginia ¾ City of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania ¾ City of Suffolk, Virginia ¾ City of Ludington, Michigan ¾ Luzerne County, Pennsylvania ¾ Cascade Township, Michigan ¾ Providence, Rhode Island ¾ Brevard County, Florida ¾ Kennebunk, Maine ¾ Orange County, Florida ¾ Bexar County, Texas ¾ Sedgwick County, Kansas ¾ City of Richmond, Virginia ¾ Nassau County, New York ¾ Jackson County, Missouri ¾ Wyandotte County, Kansas ¾ Jasper County, Texas ¾ City of Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada ¾ Jefferson County, Texas ¾ Cook County, Illinois ¾ Orange County, Texas ¾ Dona Ana County, New Mexico ¾ City of Midland, Michigan Similar reviews and projects for state agencies or national governments include: ¾ State of Missouri ¾ Poland ¾ Iceland ¾ State of Oklahoma ¾ State of Illinois ¾ State of Wyoming ¾ State of Indiana ¾ State of Kansas ¾ State of Delaware ¾ United Kingdom (Northern Ireland) ¾ Czech Republic ¾ United Kingdom (England) ¾ Indonesia ¾ State of Nebraska Technical Assistance Personnel IAAO technical assistance teams are drawn exclusively from its membership. See Addendum B for the proposed Project Team. Affirmative Action IAAO is a membership organization open to everyone with an interest in property tax and property tax administration. IAAO welcomes members of any sex, race, color, nationality, ethnic origin, and religious preference. It does not discriminate on the basis of sex, race, color, nationality, ethnic origin, or religious preference in the administration of any of its policies or programs, nor does it enter any information of this kind in its membership records. Americans With Disabilities Act IAAO complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act. 8

Anti-Discrimination IAAO complies with the Federal Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended and agrees to comply with the Virginia Fair Employment Act of 1975, as amended and Section 2.2-4311 of the Virginia Procurement Act. Immigration Reform and Control Act IAAO complies with the Federal Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, as amended. Drug-Free Work Place IAAO provides a drug-free work place for all its employees. Review of Reassessment and Review of the Assessment Office Project Work Plan After the initial meeting with City of Dover officials to discuss the planning and to determine the final scope of the project a more definitive work plan will be agreed upon at that time. However, under normal circumstances, the first phase will be on-site data collection by Messrs. Chmura, and Trout. Interviews and a review of procedures used by the appraiser’s staff will also be conducted. Interviews with other City of Dover officials such as the City Assessor, Tax Appeal Committee and others who have a direct working relationship with the City of Dover Assessor’s Office and Tax Appeal Committee will be conducted. The IAAO will utilize the Assessment Practices Self-Evaluation Guide, Edition Two, an IAAO publication, as one of the primary tools for evaluating best practices used in assessment administration and providing guidelines and standards. This IAAO publication has been utilized by assessment jurisdictions around the world in establishing typical guidelines and practices in assessment administration. The IAAO has published a comprehensive revision and update to this publication in 2004, and this new material will be used to ensure the latest changes in guidelines for the industry are followed in the City of Dover. See Addendum A for a proposed work plan. This proposal is designed to provide the City of Dover with a comprehensive report on the administration and activities of the City Assessor’s Office and the appeals process. The City of Dover will reserve all rights and ownership of the report. Should the City desire additional presentations or oral reports, the City and the IAAO will negotiate those services for an additional fee. City’s Responsibilities The main focus of this project will be to review the administration, processes and resources of the City of Dover Assessor’s Office. To ensure accurate, consistent, and sufficient data for IAAO to review and monitor the status of the Assessor’s Office, it is essential that all appropriate data and information from the Assessor’s Office be accessible for review by the IAAO team. It is also required that the City Assessor’s Office make available to IAAO, as much information as 9

possible in electronic format. City shall forward to IAAO Project Team members, in a timely manner, all the documents listed in sections #2, #3 and #4 of the Proposed Work Plan and any other relevant documents and/or information. Also, the City shall be responsible for making available the pertinent personnel and taxpayers for interviews by the IAAO team during the first on-site visit. Proposed Deliverables The IAAO proposes to provide the following deliverables regarding the proposed review, monitoring, and performance evaluation. Those deliverables include: Work Plan Although a description of the approach to the project has been discussed and included in Addendum A, the final details of the work plan will be agreed upon and submitted following the initial meeting for planning and discussion of the project with the City. Preliminary Report A preliminary report will be presented for review prior to the submission of the final report. This report will detail, in draft form, the areas of review and findings of the team. Determination will be made at this time if all areas of the project have been covered. Final Report This report will summarize in completed form the activities conducted by the IAAO while reviewing, and evaluating the project. It will also include specific findings that were noted as a result of conducting the analysis and review. The final report will be done using the reverent USPAP and IAAO Standards. Proposed Costs The IAAO proposes a fixed price contract of Thirty Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($30,500.00) to the City of Dover for the Review, Analysis, and Consulting Evaluation of the Assessor’s Office. The IAAO’s cost includes all professional fees, travel and twelve (12) copies of the final report. The proposal provided is a flat fixed fee for the entire project as outlined in this document. However, the IAAO proposal is subject to change and modifications dependent upon the specific needs of the City of Dover. If necessary, certain deliverables and/or processes are negotiable in this proposal as long as the overall independence and integrity of the project is not compromised. 10

Addendum A Proposed Work Plan for City of Dover, Delaware 11

City of Dover Proposed Work Plan A detailed work plan cannot be constructed until the entire scope of work is known. What are presented below are steps and processes that IAAO will use in conducting the Organization and Procedure Review using the relevant USPAP and IAAO Standards. Tasks to be Reviewed This is the preliminary list, not in order of importance or priority, and will be modified in the final proposal after further discussion with the City. March 2008 1. Completion and execution of a signed agreement for the project 2. Receive from the Assessor’s Office completed forms supplied by IAAO outlining Business Processes conducted in the Assessor’s Office 3. Receive from the City and review Delaware Statutes, Administrative Code, relevant City Code and City Charter provisions 4. Review Documents received from the City. a. City Assessor’s Office Organization Chart b. City Organization Chart c. Assessor’s Office Budget (Prior three years) d. Valuation work plan e. Website f. Public relations documents g. Appraisal manuals h. Employee handbooks, job descriptions, salary ladder i. Software manuals, work plans, flow charts and benchmarks j. Tax Appeal Policy Statements and related forms k. Transfer Tax collection, auditing process and reporting forms March 2008 5. First on-site visit a. Affirm scope of project b. Interview Assessor i. Leadership ii. Planning iii. Communication iv. Management philosophy v. Efficiency practices vi. Customer service vii. Management reports c. Interview staff, same list as above d. Review personnel education and training records 12

e. Interview members of Tax Appeal Committee i. Evaluate processes using relevant IAAO standards ii. Review a sample of appeal cases and analyze the number of appeals iii. Sample actual appeals f. Interview not more than five (5) taxpayers that have appealed their valuations before the Tax Appeals Committee g. Software-identify software and version, analyze data storage and retrieval and test operating system for functionality h. Facilities, compare to IAAO Standards i. Valuation System i. Approaches ii. Administrative system iii. Data collected iv. Data collection system j. Analyze results of first visit and draft a rough findings report May 2008 6. Complete first draft a. Review the draft with the City Assessor, City Manager and Tax Appeals Committee May 2008 7. Finalize report Date to be Determined 8. Third visit a. Present findings and final report to the City Council 13

Addendum B Qualifications of Project Personnel 14

FREDERICK M. CHMURA 25 Crooked Trail Woodstock, CT 06281-2601 Phone – (860) 974-1354 E-mail – Fred.Chmura@charter.net www.teamconsulting.cc SUMMARY OF QUALIFICATIONS Thirty-two years of real estate, property appraisal, personal property appraisal, mass appraisal, geographic information systems, and property tax administration experience in consulting, managerial, supervision, and administrative positions. Twenty-eight years record of analyzing problems, developing, and implementing solutions for assessment policy and administration with the State of Connecticut in its assessment policy and oversight agency. PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE 2004 to Present TEAM Consulting Principal Consultant Providing a wide range of assessment administration and related technical consultation services to state and local governments. Those services include, Development of reassessment project RFP for the Board of Assessors, Town of Somers, Connecticut (2004); Performance audit and office procedural review and recommendations for the City of Hampton, Virginia (2005 - 2006); Performance audit of residential properties for the City of Auburn, Maine (2006); Business Process review and development of Procedural Manuals for the Real Property Tax Administration for the District of Columbia, Washington DC (2006), Performance audit and office procedural review and recommendations for the City of Suffolk, Virginia (2007 - 2008). 1994 – 2003 State of Connecticut Office of Policy and Management, Intergovernmental Policy Division Director of Data Collection and Equalization Management and supervision of the Tax Relief Unit, the Sales/Assessment Ratio Unit, and various grant programs to municipalities and individuals. Responsible for property tax exemption reimbursement to municipalities for the tax relief programs for the elderly, disabled, veterans, and renters. Responsible for grants to municipalities for the College and Hospital Payment-in-Lieu-of-Taxes (PILOT), State-Owned Property PILOT, and the Local Capitol Improvement Program (LoCIP). Oversaw a program budget of approximately one hundred million dollars annually. Plan and direct meetings, seminars and workshops with public officials and the general public on a regular and special basis. Responsible for finalizing the annual sales/assessment ratio and Equalized Net Grand List for the 169 Connecticut municipalities. Present testimony in court for the State of Connecticut and as an expert witness in assessment and sales/assessment ratio issues. Serve as the hearing officer for the Secretary in appeals to the Office of Policy and Management brought by municipalities and taxpayers. Responsible for the supervision of twelve professional and ten clerical employees. 1981 – 1994 State of Connecticut Office of Policy and Management, Intergovernmental Policy Division Manager of Equalization and Tax Relief Management and supervision of the Tax Relief Unit and the Sales/Assessment Ratio Unit. Responsible for reimbursement to municipalities for the tax relief programs for the elderly, 15

disabled, veterans, and renters. Oversee a program budget of fifty million dollars annually. Plan and direct meetings, seminars and workshops with public officials and the general public on a regular and special basis. Responsible for finalizing the annual sales/assessment ratio and Equalized Net Grand List for the 169 Connecticut municipalities. Present testimony in court for the State of Connecticut and as an expert witness in assessment and sales/assessment ratio issues. Distinguished Employee Service Award 1985 1975 – 1981 State of Connecticut, Department of Revenue Services, Assessment Advisor Advised and provided technical assistance to municipal assessors in valuation, appraisal and assessment practices, procedures and administration. Co-author of the State of Connecticut Land Use Values for Farm and Forest Land and the Recommended Revaluation Contract. Developed and implemented all phases of the Connecticut Sales/Assessment Ratio Program. The Sales/Assessment Ratio Program analyzes all real estate property transfers in the State and determines the relationship between market value and assessment values in each of the 169 municipalities. 1973 – 1975 Town of Putnam, Connecticut, Assessor Duties and Responsibilities: Assessor for the municipality performing all duties related to the assessment of real and personal property. 1971 – 1973 United Appraisal Company, Real Estate Appraiser Duties and Responsibilities: Field appraising for mass appraisal purposes in Connecticut, New York, and Massachusetts. Supervised the assessment data conversion program in the Town of Orangetown, New York. EDUCATION 1966 – 1970 University of Connecticut, Bachelor of Art Major: Psychology 1972 - Present American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers: Course 1-A & 1-B Introduction to Appraisal and Income Appraisal; Various Workshops 1972 – Present International Association of Assessing Officers Course 1 - Fundamentals of Real Property Appraisal Course 2 - Income Approach to Valuation Various Workshops 1971 - 1973 Connecticut Certified Assessor Courses Course I - Introduction to Assessment Administration Course II - Real Estate Appraisal Course III - Introduction to the Income Approach 1982- 1984 Connecticut Certified Tax Collector Courses Course I - Introduction to Tax Collection Administration and Law Course II - Municipal Finance Administration and Management Course III - Connecticut Governmental, Supervision and Public Relations 16

PROFESSIONAL DESIGNATIONS State of Connecticut - Certified Connecticut Municipal Assessor – Level II (CCMA) IAAO - Assessment Administration Specialist (AAS) PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS 1973 – Present International Association of Assessing Officers President, 2003-2004, Executive Committee, 2002-2005, Executive Board, 1990-1991, Clifford B. Allen Most Valuable Member Award, Chair of Professional Development Committee, Chair of the Planning and Operations Committee National Instructor, Infrastructure Review Committee member, Chair of Ad Hoc Designation Review Committee, Chair of Budget Committee, Technical Editor and Chairman of Assessment Administration sub-committee for new IAAO Textbook "Property Appraisal and Assessment Administration", Course Development Consultant for Course 4 "Assessment Administration" 1972 - Present Connecticut Association of Assessing Officers Distinguished Service Award 2004 1992 - Present Connecticut Chapter International Association of Assessing Officers 2002 – Present Massachusetts Chapter International Association of Assessing Officers 2000 – 2005 Member of the Board of Regents of the Centre for Advanced Property Economics, 1993 – 2003 Certified Connecticut Municipal Assessor Committee CIVIC INTERESTS 1974 to 1982 Zoning Commission of the City of Willimantic, Connecticut 1979 to 1985 Willimantic Community Redevelopment Commission Chairman 1982 to 1984. 1989 – 1995 Northeast Connecticut Community Development Corp. Vice-President 1989 – 1996 Rural Homes Limited, Inc. (Non-Profit Housing Development Corporations) 2000 – Present Day Kimball Hospital – Incorporator 1991 – Present Witches Woods Tax District Assistant Treasurer 17

Wayne N. Trout, ASA 342 Dorwin Drive Norfolk, VA 23502 Phone – (W) 757-459-2775 E-mail – trout51@verizon.net SUMMARY OF QUALIFICATIONS Over thirty-two years in the property assessment field with the City of Norfolk, Office of the Real Estate Assessor, hired April 1, 1974 as a Field Appraiser and subsequently promoted to increasing levels of responsibility, ultimately to the position of Real Estate Assessor. As Real Estate Assessor, successfully equalized assessed values citywide that had been widely disproportionate while raising the overall assessment levels from the 82% to 95% of market value without creating high levels of appeals to the board of equalization. Refined and improved an existing “open door” customer service policy to include multiple mailing of reassessment notices and site visits for valuation appeals thereby allowing for greater taxpayer greater taxpayer understanding of the assessment process. Initiated and implemented the first full computerization of the City’s real estate assessment function in 1989. Oversaw the purchase and implementation of the ProVal automated appraisal software in 1999. Involved in the on-going development of a citywide geographic information system (GIS). Served in a consulting capacity to the City of Richmond, on behalf of the City of Norfolk, assisting them with the reassessment process and in the search for a new Real Estate Assessor. Participated as speaker at state, national and international conferences as well as authoring columns and articles for various assessment publications. PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE 1989-2006 Real Estate Assessor Held this position from February 1989 until retirement in April 2006. Appointed by the City Council, the Assessor is responsible for maintaining the real estate assessments for approximately 75,000 real estate parcels with a taxable value of $15 billion. In this position, exercised oversight of 21 person staff with an annual budget of $1.3 million. Meet with property owners to discuss valuation questions and issues. EDUCATION 1969 – 1973 Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Blacksburg, Virginia Bachelor of Science Professional Since 1974, over 500 hours of intensive course study in classes offered by major appraisal/assessment organizations dealing with assessment theory and property valuation, computer assisted mass appraisal, assessment management, and administration. Including IAAO Courses 1, 2, 3, 4, 101, 202, 301, 302, 303, 312, 402, and workshops on Narrative Report Writing and Contemporary Capitalization Techniques. 18

Senior Executive Institute 1991 graduate of the management/leadership program sponsored by the University of Virginia. PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIPS 1981 – Present International Association of Assessing Officers President 2005-2006 President Elect 2004-2005 Vice President 2003-2004 Executive Board 2001-2003 Chair for various committees 1997-2001 Performed IAAO headquarters staffing study (2001) 1986- Present American Society of Appraisers (A.S.A) Past president of the Hampton Roads Chapter, 1987-1989. 1974 – Present Virginia Association of Assessing Officers (VAAO) President 2000-2001 Board of Directors Chaired numerous committees CERTIFICATIONS Accredited Senior Appraiser (ASA) – American Society of Appraisers Certified General Real Estate Appraiser Licensed by the Commonwealth of Virginia #4001001367. CIVIC INTERESTS Member and Past-President of the Norfolk Sports Club, a 500 plus member organization that provides scholarship aid for deserving high school athletes and recognizes their athletic achievements. Member and Elder of the Virginia Beach Community Chapel RECOGNITIONS IAAO Certificate of Service Recognition (1998) IAAO Presidential Citations (2000, 2001) Special Presidential Recognition for Service to IAAO (2004) VAAO Distinguished Service Award (1995) VAAO Outstanding Member Award (2003). 19

ACTION FORM PROCEEDING: Legislation, Finance & Administration Committee AGENDA DATE: 02/25/2008 DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN: City Manager DATE SUBMITTED: 02/19/2008 PREPARED BY: City Manager SUBJECT: Disposition of City Owned Land – Property Located at 101 Jefferson Court REFERENCE: N/A RELATED PROJECT: N/A APPROVALS: N/A EXHIBITS: EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: N/A AMOUNT BUDGETED: N/A FUNDING SOURCE (Dept./Page in CIP & Budget): N/A TIMETABLE: NA RECOMMENDED ACTION: (1) Determine property is excess real estate; (2) authorize City Manager to sell the property by sealed bid at a minimum acceptable price of $75,000 after advertising in a local paper once a week for two weeks. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS The property being considered for disposal (Tax ID# ED-05-076.07-01-140.000-000) is an end unit townhouse located the Presidential Courts Town Home Development in West Dover. In accordance with the City of Dover Procedure for Sale and Disposition of Real Property, I have evaluated the property and determined that no City departments have a need for the parcel. I have also determined that the current zoning is RG-3 (Townhouse), and that changing the zoning would not enhance the value of the lot. The property was acquired by the City through a condemnation. The interior of the property was completed demolished and cleaned as a part of the condemnation effort. In accordance with the Real Property Disposal procedure I am recommending that we sell the property through a sealed bid with a minimum value equal to the cost of the demolition and clean up of the property.