minutes

REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING The Regular Council Meeting was held on February 23, 2015 at 7:30 p.m. with Council President Bonar presiding. Council members present were Mr. Anderson, Mr. Dixon, Mr. Perza, Mr. Slavin, Mrs. Williams, Mr. Hare, and Mr. Hutchison. Council staff members present were Police Chief Bernat, Mrs. Mitchell, Mrs. Townshend, Fire Chief Hall, Mr. Koenig, City Solicitor Rodriguez, and Mrs. McDowell. Mayor Christiansen was absent. OPEN FORUM The Open Forum was held at 7:15 p.m., prior to commencement of the Official Council Meeting. Council President Bonar declared the Open Forum in session and reminded those present that Council was not in official session and could not take formal action. Mr. George Gaudioso, 167 Maple Glen Drive, thanked City Council for adding a fourth option to the options being considered for the restructuring of the City government. He felt that Option D, which was presented during the Special Council meeting of February 19, 2015, was closer to what he views as the optimum form of government that the City could operate under. Mr. Gaudioso stated that it was important to consider all forms of government in order to have a wider spectrum on which to base their final decision. The invocation was given by Bishop Thomas L. Holsey, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS Mr. Hutchison moved for approval of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Hare and unanimously carried. Mr. Hare moved for approval of the Consent Agenda, seconded by Mr. Dixon and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. ADOPTION OF MINUTES - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 2015 The Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of February 9, 2015 were unanimously approved by motion of Mr. Hare, seconded by Mr. Dixon and bore the written approval of Mayor Christiansen. RESCHEDULING OF PUBLIC HEARING/PROPOSED ORDINANCES #2015-01 AND #2015-02 Council President Bonar reminded members that the First Reading and Referral of the following proposed Ordinances was accomplished during the Council Meeting of February 9, 2015. Due to the cancellation of the February 17, 2015 Planning Commission meeting, these Public Hearings must be rescheduled. It is recommended that the Planning Commission Public Hearing be rescheduled for Monday, March 16, 2015 at 7:00 p.m. and the City Council Public Hearing be rescheduled for Monday, April 13, 2015 at 7:30 p.m. at which time the Second Reading and Final Action by Council will take place.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 2 • #2015-01 AMENDING THE 2008 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AS AMENDED, BY REPLACING MAP 12-1: LAND DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AND AMENDING CHAPTER 13: GROWTH AND ANNEXATION PLAN • #2015-02 - REZONING REQUEST FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 801 NORTH STATE STREET, OWNED BY 801 GOLD COAST, LLC (LUTHER D. SHANK III). THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED RG-3 (GROUP HOUSING) AND THE PROPOSED ZONING IS C-2A (LIMITED CENTRAL COMMERCIAL) (TAX PARCEL: ED-05-068.09-01-13.00-000; PLANNING REFERENCE Z-15-01; 3RD COUNCIL DISTRICT) Mr. Hare moved to reschedule the Planning Commission Public Hearing for Monday, March 16, 2015 at 7:00 p.m. and the City Council Public Hearing for Monday, April 13, 2015 at 7:30 p.m. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Williams and unanimously carried. PRESENTATION - TYLER TECHNOLOGIES - 2015 REVALUATION (MELISSA BAER) Ms. Melissa Baer, Tyler Technologies Regional Manager for the Northeast, reviewed the City of Dover Revaluation 2015 Project Results, summarized as follows: Results for Dover Sales Single Family 474 sales (1/1/2013 to 12/31/2014) Median 95.11 COD 6.78 PRD 1.00 Commercial 28 sales (1/1/2013 to 12/31/2014) Median 100.20 COD 7.98 PRD 1.00 Assessment Changes by Class Real Estate Overall -2% Dwellings -10% Commercial +6.0% Overall Impact (Not including exempts, real estate overall is down 1.5%) Category Old Value New Value Difference Commercial $1,624,939,100 $1,720,597,800 6% Residential $1,467,824,800 $1,331,519,800 -9% Condo $ 33,724,160 $ 27,566,260 -18% Exempt $1,059,923,300 $ 896,449,400 -15% TOTAL $3,126,488,060 $3,079,683,860 -1.5% Ms. Baer stated that notice of new assessments were mailed in February of 2015 and they would be scheduling informal appeal meetings, followed by the formal appeal process. She also noted that the new assessments would be available online and on lists concurrent with the mailing of the notices. The new assessments will be reflected in the July 2015 tax bills.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 3 Responding to Mr. Anderson, Ms. Baer stated that they would meet with as many people as possible within the four (4) week time frame. She noted that if the property owners cannot get in to see them, they also have the formal appeal hearings. Ms. Baer advised that property owners should bring any documentation that proves their opinion of value, such as an appraisal done within the past two (2) years, differences in appraisal of their neighbors’ properties, a market analysis done by a realtor, or pictures of the property. She noted that if there has been a glut of foreclosures in the area, they will drive the values down. Ms. Baer advised that their ultimate goal is to make the value right. Ms. Baer stated that, with the assistance of Mrs. Cheryl Bundek, City Assessor, and her staff, the project was completed with a cost savings to the City. SPECIAL DOVER HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION REPORT - JANUARY 9, 2015 The Special Dover Human Relations Commission (DHRC) met on January 9, 2015 with Chairman Wilson presiding. Mr. Wilson requested a moment of silence for the men and women serving in the City of Dover Police Department as they start off the year 2015. Discussion - City Meetings with Interdenominational Ministerial Alliance (IMA) of Dover and Vicinity, Inc. and IMA Committees (Mayor Christiansen) Chairman Wilson stated that, during a meeting held earlier in the morning with the DHRC Government Policy, Programs, and Practices (GPPP) Committee, Mayor Christiansen had provided information regarding the Interdenominational Ministerial Alliance (IMA). The Mayor had advised members that he was meeting with the IMA and desired to ensure that community concerns regarding jobs, housing, education, police issues and other matters were heard. Mr. Wilson stated that the DHRC was invited to attend IMA meetings and encouraged representatives to participate. He stated there would be more discussion regarding the differences between the roles of the DHRC and the IMA and its committees. Discussion - Implementation of the DHRC 2015-2018 Strategic Plan Committee Objectives Mr. Ruane stated his understanding that the goal was to coordinate between the various DHRC committees and determine if there was some overlap in terms of what is being proposed for them. Mr. Wilson stated his desire to make sure that the committees were making plans for the entire year and that everyone was on the same page in terms of getting things done. He requested each committee chair to provide an overview of the things they could initially begin or accomplish in regard to the DHRC 2015-2018 Strategic Plan. Mr. Ruane explained that, during the Government Practices, Policies, and Procedures (GPPP) Committee meeting held earlier in the day, the GPPP Committee, City Manager, Mayor, and Council President discussed the GPPP memorandum dated October 16, 2014, regarding the Preliminary Draft Work Plan for Completing Long-term Objective A-1 of the Strategic Plan 2015-2018. [Clerk’s Office Note: This memorandum was discussed during the DHRC meeting of October 28, 2014, as part of the GPPP Committee meeting report.]

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 4 Mr. Ruane stated that the City Manager, Mayor, and Council President were advised that the DHRC hoped to perform an assessment, or organizational survey, to find out about the current state and climate of diversity and inclusion in the City of Dover so that they could make recommendations to management and Council regarding improvements for City programs. Mr. Ruane indicated that the City Manager, Mayor, and Council President had indicated that they looked forward to working with the DHRC to set up a senior leadership team within the City to conduct this survey and assessment. Noting that the Communications Committee had proposed to look at the City’s diversity training, Mr. Ruane stated that this would be included in the assessment and there would be an opportunity for feedback from the DHRC’s participants of those diversity training mini-sessions. He assured the Communications Committee that the GPPP Committee would include this in their first steps. He stated that the GPPP Committee was hoping to engage with employees as the assessment process moves along. Mr. Ruane stated that, although the GPPP Committee had only three (3) members, any other member of the DHRC could work with them and they would regularly report back to the Commission on the status of this project. Mr. McGiffin stated that the GPPP Committee also intended to reach out to local higher education institutions to try to generate interest in working with the Committee on this project. Ideally, this project would fit in with the discipline of a graduate student looking for a thesis subject. This student could then provide expert assistance in putting together the survey instrument used to address the staff in the City and collect and analyze data. Mr. McGiffin indicated that the City had authorized the GPPP Committee to do this. Responding to Ms. Smith, Mr. McGiffin stated that it was hoped that the instrument developed would be broad based to address diversity in many different areas, including how the City relates internally and externally to stakeholders, vendors, and others. Mr. Wilson stated that Mayor Christiansen indicated that he was initially going to develop an instrument to be used to examine the history of the City from the perspective of the older population, in terms of determining what worked well in the past and what is working now. He would also be looking at the police accreditation report and how that will change the way things are done. Mr. Ruane felt it important for all commissioners to look at the proposed survey questions included in Reinventing Diversity, Transforming Organizational Community to Strengthen People, Purpose, and Performance by Howard J. Ross, Chapter 12, “Creating Cultures that Work,” as discussed during the DHRC meeting of October 28, 2014. He suggested that members consider ways of reframing those questions or provide their ideas for additional questions to the GPPP Committee. Mr. Ruane stated that, in terms of avoiding overlap with the Communications Committee when reaching out to the City employees, the first contact employees would have with the DHRC would be through this organizational survey. He advised

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 5 members that part of the methodology would be to have a focus group and get smaller groups of employees to speak to the GPPP. He suggested that every member of the DHRC engage in this process with the City organization. Responding to Ms. Smith regarding the timing of working with the focus group, their function and the kind of data that would be gathered from them, Mr. McGiffin stated that the schedule had not been worked out yet and he was unsure if the focus group would be used before the survey. The purpose of the focus group and survey would be the same: to determine how the City is responding to various issues of diversity so that the DHRC can report on “where the City is at” and make suggestions on where it should go. Mr. McGiffin stated that it had not yet been decided who would participate in the survey and in the focus group. He reiterated that it was hoped to get input from one (1) of the local educational institutions which might have definite ideas; however, he felt that it made sense to use a couple of different modalities. Mr. Henderson stated that, based on the discussion at the GPPP Committee meeting held earlier in the morning, the Mayor and City Manager were on board to provide their assistance, background, staff leadership, and legitimacy, and the Mayor assured transparency of all agencies and access. Mr. Wilson stated that the assurances that he heard from the Mayor, Council President, and City Manager indicated they were open, wanted to listen, and were sensitive and ready to move forward. They were looking for outside agencies as funding sources, to include local resources like Delaware State University and governmental resources such as the Department of Justice. Mr. Wilson stated his opinion that a summation and a timeline of things to be done was needed, noting that clarity comes from summarizing and making sure that each committee has a responsibility for what is being discussed within this group, and clarity on a possible meeting within each committee to come up with some outcomes in relation to the strategic plan. Ms. Smith noted that a lot of work had been done; however, she was unsure if a communications infrastructure both online and offline was in place to support this great effort, noting that an effort may not be successful if infrastructure is not in place. She questioned where in the City people would go to understand these efforts. Mr. Ruane questioned what the Communications Committee could put in place to make this happen and the timeline when the website could provide an outreach to the larger community to gain an understanding about how they perceive the City’s organization in terms of outreach, diversity and inclusion. He indicated that he was not aware of any mechanism currently in place to do this. Responding, Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, stated that at this point the City did not have an active website manager. In order for the DHRC to understand how to modify the DHRC section of the City’s website, Mr. Koenig stated that members would sit down with the City Clerk’s Office, IT staff, and himself and decide what access is needed

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 6 and how information would be reviewed before it goes online. He indicated that some type of review would be needed, but expressed the desire to make sure that the issues that are coming up through the community were being addressed. Mr. Koenig stated the need to get the leadership team set up, have a few meetings with the Commission, introduce the leadership team to the committee chairmen so that a personal relationship could be developed and it could be determined how to get this information where it needs to go. He acknowledged that there is an internal communication problem within the City, stating that a lot of the issues that affect the City come down to communication. Mr. Koenig felt that this process would be a challenge since it had not been done before but concurred with Ms. Smith regarding the importance of communication. Mr. Ruane stated this was an example of how the tasks of the GPPP Committee would be integrated with those of another committee, noting that the Community Engagement Committee would hopefully identify what external organizations or individuals in the community should be included in the discovery process of how the City is engaged in diversity and inclusion. He questioned if the Community Engagement Committee knew who should be included as external stakeholders. Mr. Ruane hoped that the Community Engagement Committee would be able to identify individuals and organizations that should be brought in to do a separate survey or be a focus group to tell the City what the citizens think. He felt that there was an opportunity for each of the DHRC committees to participate in the overall goal to complete the survey. Mr. Ruane explained that the methodology proposed on Page 3 of the GPPP memorandum dated October 16, 2014, was to include not only survey questionnaires but observations, interviews, focus groups, and desk reviews. Mr. Wilson questioned when the leadership team could be established, as well as a meeting date and time. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that he could provide a recommendation for a leadership team in 30 days, and agreed to establish a time and date for that meeting and to collaborate on an agenda. Mr. Wilson stated that the committee chairs and DHRC members could be part of this meeting and requested that Mr. Ruane prepare a one (1) page action outline for that meeting. For clarification, Mr. McGiffin stated his understanding that this would be a one (1) page document listing the things the leadership team is going to do. Mr. Ruane suggested that the team’s first assignment would be to read Reinventing Diversity, Transforming Organizational Community to Strengthen People, Purpose, and Performance by Howard J. Ross, noting that he had been presenting the concepts in the book in outline form. Mr. Ruane questioned if the other committees had additional activities that they would like to engage in during the next six (6) months, in tandem with the efforts already discussed, stating that these efforts were not meant to be the total work of the Commission.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 7 Ms. Smith stated her opinion that the assessment was a major undertaking and may be a year-long project, working collaboratively, in terms of marketing it, engaging the community, creating “the buzz,” and performing the research. She stated that the task of looking at a massive organization to determine if it is functioning well in terms of diversity would entail looking at the internal individuals, external customers, and leadership, which would involve three (3) different components and three (3) totally different surveys. In addition, Ms. Smith noted that the DHRC would be attempting to engage a community that may not really be engaged. She questioned how the community could be engaged, what events would be offered to engage them in the process, and how the media could be brought on board to partner with the DHRC to run ads or articles. In her opinion, this was a “huge” endeavor and the DHRC could not work on anything else but this. Mr. Henderson stated that the community’s historical perspective must also be considered. Ms. Smith concurred, stating that this was an additional area to research. Mr. Henderson indicated that during the DHRC meeting of October 28, 2014, he had suggested having observances that are culturally sensitive throughout the year which are related to history; however, he felt that the DHRC must “go a lot deeper than that.” Mr. Wilson stated that he would take the initiative to work on an outline of things for consideration, pass it through Mr. Ruane, and proceed from there. With the City Manager getting the leadership team together, Mr. Wilson felt it important to focus on the agenda for that meeting. Noting that some members had arrived late to the meeting, Mr. Wilson reiterated that, during a GPPP meeting held earlier in the day with the City Manager, Mayor, and Council President, Mayor Christiansen had provided a briefing on the operation of the Interdenominational Ministerial Alliance (IMA), its committees, and how it was working with the City. There had been discussion about the DHRC and the IMA in terms of the objectives of their committees and whether or not the DHRC would be an integral part of what the IMA was planning or suggesting. Mr. Wilson stated that the Mayor and the City believed that voices need to be heard, that the City should not get into a liability issue, and that matters should be brought up that the groups can work on collaboratively. Mr. Wilson reiterated that Commissioners were invited to attend IMA meetings and be a part of what is going on. He indicated his desire to ensure that there is no duplication. Mr. Wilson also advised members of the recent development of the new Department of Justice Office of Civil Rights and Public Trust and questioned how that might play into the DHRC. Mr. Ruane explained that he attended the first meeting of the IMA, which consists of a group of ministers and others who are social action committee chairs of their churches, some in the City and some not. He stated that some of the topics discussed at the meeting were the same topics discussed by the DHRC. Mr. Ruane noted that the IMA had discussed issues with the police, and he had provided the IMA Chair with information regarding the City of Dover Police Department accreditation review; however, no members of the IMA attended the review. Mr. Ruane requested

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 8 clarification regarding the DHRC role in regard to the City’s Police Department, noting his understanding that the DHRC would engage with the Police Department during their survey, particularly to discuss community relations. Noting that Mr. Wilson had indicated that members were welcome to come to IMA meetings, Mr. Ruane questioned what role the DHRC would play and what Mr. Wilson wanted the DHRC to do. Responding, Mr. Wilson stated that he was not suggesting that members do anything. He stated that the IMA’s meetings are open and he would like to know about them for informational purposes. For example, the IMA’s agenda for their December 15, 2014 meeting reflected that they have a committee on jobs, on which Senator Brian Bushweller was serving, and other committees dealing with housing, education, and with police issues. Mr. Wilson felt it was interesting that these were some of the same things the DHRC may discuss as far as committees. He also questioned if there would be a conflict in looking at liability issues. Mr. Wilson stated that the DHRC would function according to the City Code; however, there would be people in the community, particularly in the African American community, questioning what the DHRC does versus what the IMA does. He indicated that he was speaking on behalf of those voices he had heard in the community who were concerned about the IMA versus the DHRC; however, he stated that it should not be “us against them.” Mr. Wilson stressed the need to work jointly and questioned how this should be expressed to a group that is working with the Mayor and not coming to the DHRC. He stated that he wanted to see everyone working together. Ms. Smith stated that the DHRC would require all “hands on deck” to execute their plan, noting that members of the DHRC and a graduate student, if offered by a university, could not execute this plan alone; a team was needed. She questioned how the DHRC and IMA could work collaboratively. Ms. Smith felt that the issue of diversity was a piece of what the IMA was trying to accomplish, and it was her belief that everyone was trying to accomplish the same thing in the end. She stated that the DHRC would need to invite the IMA to work together. She noted that there may be other groups with serious concerns and the DHRC would have to do outreach, which would require systems in place for communication and community engagement. Ms. Smith explained that when the leadership team is brought together, one (1) of the first tasks would be to determine the strategic plan for implementation, including determining the groups that the DHRC can engage that would see this as a common goal. Ms. Smith stated that sometimes people need a personal phone call in order to become involved. She expressed her hope that the DHRC could engage the Mayor to bring everyone together. This is what she saw as a community working towards a common goal, such as the Mayor’s motto: “I believe in Dover,” and questioned why, if everyone wants the same thing, there were separate pockets. Mr. Ruane questioned if it was the desire of members to invite the IMA to a DHRC meeting. Responding, Ms. Smith expressed her opinion that this should be done by leadership, possibly Commissioner Wilson.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 9 Mr. Wilson stated that this was not a “one (1) man invitation situation” and preferred the City leadership and the committee chairs to have this discussion. He felt that it should not be the DHRC against or for the IMA, that “it has to come under one tent” in order to get it done. Mr. Wilson believed that the IMA and the DHRC each had an agenda, and felt it important to make sure there was no duplication. He noted this could enhance community engagement in terms of plans or initiatives, noting that he did not want to see isolation on either part. In addition, he stated that he was looking for information from the Attorney General’s Office in terms of how the new Office of Civil Rights and Public Trust would relate to the DHRC and the State Human Relations Commission, as well as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). Noting that Mr. Henderson is part of the IMA, Ms. Smith asked his opinion of the best strategic way to approach the organization so that there is maximum opportunity for success. Responding, Mr. Henderson stated his belief that the incident that took place in Ferguson, Missouri was the “driver” for the IMA. He stated that governments tend to be reactionary as opposed to being visionary; however, there were three (3) City leaders and others who want to be visionary and he felt that everyone should be patient because it is a long process without simple answers. Mr. Henderson stated that Rev. Rita Paige was in charge of the IMA Social Action Committee that was interested in working with the Mayor to ensure that a potential Ferguson does not occur in Dover, because there were some incidents that took place in the community that were potentially explosive. The desire was to be proactive. Ms. Smith stated that she knows Rev. Paige, and since Rev. Paige is in a leadership position, Ms. Smith suggested having a conversation with her over dinner and asking key questions. In this way, an understanding could be gained of Rev. Paige’s vision for the IMA and how the DHRC can work synergistically with the IMA. Ms. Smith stated that this would also help to learn how other organizations in the community could work with the DHRC. Ms. Smith noted that this would not be an easy road; she suggested having the right people at the table from the beginning, allowing Rev. Paige to take the matter back to IMA to get their buy-in, and then working together. She also felt that the Mayor had a major role to play in this because he ultimately has a relationship with everyone. Mr. Henderson stated that he was very impressed with the meeting just concluded between the GPPP Committee, Mayor, City Manager, and Council President. He indicated that they expressed willingness to do what they can. He felt that the parts and people were in place, including the City, clergy, DHRC, and Mr. Ruane’s excellent outline, and that everyone was headed in the right direction. Mr. Henderson stated that Ms. Smith was an eloquent spokesperson who brings clarity to issues in very few words, asks the right questions, has a probing mind, and is able to put things together; therefore, he felt that Ms. Smith would do well as a leader. He cautioned members that he did not want to pretend to be the representative for the IMA; however, he was trying to do the best he could to explain since he sits on both groups.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 10 Mr. Wilson stated that there were other factions in addition to the IMA, noting that Mr. Roy Sudler, Jr., Social Action Committee Chair from the Mt. Zion A.M.E. Church, also serves as a State Human Relations Commissioner. Mr. Wilson felt that others should be brought to the table, including leaders and non-leaders who have a strong influence on others within the community, noting that leaders come with and without titles. He felt all those with some type of contribution should be part of the decision-making process and the “buy-ins” referenced by Ms. Smith. Mr. Wilson indicated that leaders, such as Rev. Davis from the Whatcoat United Methodist Church, and others from the Union Baptist Church or any other church or synagogue in Dover should be heard from, noting that currently the agenda and voices being heard were very few. He suggested that a summit or some type of important meeting be held to bring all of the people together, which he felt would go along with community engagement. Mr. Henderson felt that, before the summit, there should be communication, noting that the City Manager had asked for 30 days to provide a leadership team. Mr. Roach reminded members that the DHRC was charged with the idea of diversity and could not be too focused on one (1) entity, such as the IMA, because the one (1) thing the Commission does not want to do is leave people out. This would result in the DHRC doing the exact opposite of what it was charged to do. Mr. Roach stated that if someone has a voice, no matter how small or big, it needs to be heard. He advised members that the IMA is a very big organization; however, it is not the only one, noting that he had been in contact with some individuals in regard to issues in the Capital School District. By consent agenda, Mr. Hare moved for acceptance of the Dover Human Relations Commission Report, seconded by Mr. Dixon and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. PRESIDENT'S COUNSEL ON PUBLIC/PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS AND THE FUTURE OF CITY HALL, WEYANDT HALL, FORMER DOVER LIBRARY, AND OTHER CITY PROPERTIES REPORT - FEBRUARY 4, 2015 The President’s Counsel on Public/Private Partnerships and the Future of City Hall, Weyandt Hall, Former Dover Library, and Other City Properties met on February 4, 2015 with Chairwoman Williams presiding. Self-Introduction of Members Members introduced themselves, as follows: Kenneth Clendaniel, City of Dover Facilities Management retiree; Beverly Williams, First District City Council representative; Joe McDaniel, Merrill Lynch retiree; Kevin Mitten, Mitten & Winters CPA; and James Hutchison, First District City Council representative. Welcome by Councilwoman Williams and Explanation of the Counsel's Purpose Chairwoman Williams stated that the purpose of the Counsel was to look at the City properties that are currently not performing to determine whether it will be feasible to keep or sell those properties and, ultimately, what to do about City Hall. She stated that the City Hall building is overcrowded and that is why the Finance and Customer Service Departments are currently at 5 E. Reed Street (Weyandt Hall).

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 11 Responding to Mrs. Williams, Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, indicated that there are approximately 50 people in Weyandt Hall, including State of Delaware employees, and approximately 40 employees in City Hall. Mr. Koenig stated that if the offices at 5 E. Reed Street and City Hall were to be combined into one (1) building, there would be a need for some type of office connection for approximately 110 employees. Overview of City Properties Members were provided a map of City Owned Properties, dated February 3, 2015, as well as a list of City of Dover Properties, as of January 30, 2015). Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, informed members that the City completed an internal space study in 2007/2008, as a precursor to constructing the new Dover Public Library. He stated that the new Dover Public Library is 46,000 S.F. and the former Dover Public Library is approximately 17,000 S.F. Mr. Koenig explained that the front part of the former library was built in the 1960s and then an addition was constructed in the early 1980s, for a total of approximately 17,000 S.F. Mr. Koenig stated that, in the early 1990s, the Downtown Dover Development Corporation bought the old WSFS building at 5 E. Reed Street, which was later purchased by the City’s electric utility and the downstairs portion of the building was remodeled. He stated that the Customer Service Department, Tax Assessor’s Office, and the Information Technology Department were moved to this building and, in 2008, the Finance Department was relocated from City Hall to the third floor at 5 E. Reed Street. Mr. Koenig stated that after the former library was vacated, Council discussed the potential of replacing City Hall. He explained that City Hall is required to be sprinklered as a condition of the final approval for the new Dover Public Library, and staff reviewed the design scenario with EDiS and found that there are multiple ceilings in City Hall as a result of multiple building modifications. Mr. Koenig stated that instead of simply installing one (1) sprinkler system over the entire building, two and one-half to three (3) sprinkler systems would have to be installed in each “confined airspace” in order to meet code requirements, which drove the cost up significantly. He explained that, as an alternative, the ceilings could be removed; however, that would require demolition with employees in the building. Additionally, Mr. Koenig stated that the air systems in City Hall are old and there has been trouble with the duct work over the years because the building is very close to the end of it its originally planned service life. Mr. Koenig informed members that, two (2) years ago, City Council discussed the potential of hiring an architecture firm to do a design of a new City Hall in the current location. He stated that discussions included various scenarios, including demolishing one (1) wing of City Hall, or demolishing the entire building and constructing a new City Hall on the site.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 12 Referring to the “2007 plan,” Mr. Koenig stated that an architect completed conceptual design drawings for the expansion of the current City Hall building. However, he explained that, the original concept could not be constructed now, as a result of the location of the new library. Although the design could be modified, Mr. Koenig stated that there is a problem with confinement on this property, noting the need for a drive-through for the Customer Service Department. Designing a building or remodeling the current City Hall to include a drive-through would be complicated because of the interconnected parking lots and the adjacent PNC Bank drive-through. Mr. Koenig explained that staff has discussed the potential of vacating the State agencies from Weyandt Hall and remodeling and connecting Weyandt Hall and the former library to create a government complex, to include a second parking deck. He stated that there are examples in the region where parking decks have been constructed on a relatively small parking area at a reasonable cost for one (1) additional level, noting that stacking three (3) or four (4) floors of parking is more complicated and costly because there are more turning movements to account for. Mr. Koenig stated that when the idea of demolishing the current City Hall building and constructing a new building was previously discussed, EDiS provided a rough estimate of approximately $10M - $15M for a 40,000 S.F. building. Additionally, EDiS estimated that it would cost $1.6M to renovate the building systems at 5 E. Reed Street, including replacement of the HVAC system and roof, which also has asbestos issues. Mr. Koenig stated that the total cost to renovate 5 E. Reed Street would be a little more than $2M, including contingencies. He explained that it appeared as though it would cost less to renovate both the former library and 5 E. Reed Street, connect the buildings, and construct an elevated parking lot then it would to build a new City Hall. Mr. Koenig stated that public/private partnerships had been discussed as a possible financing option; however, he noted that this should not determine whether or not to move forward. In addition to City Hall, Weyandt Hall, and the former library, Mr. Koenig explained that the City’s warehouse was constructed in the 1960s and is also reaching the end of its original service life. Mr. Koenig stated that there may be other property available downtown that could be explored, depending on the goal for the location of City Hall. Mr. Koenig informed members that the Council Chamber in City Hall does not meet the current standards for ADA accessibility. Although staff has removed seats and installed microphones, etc., mobility challenged individuals are unable to get to the Council floor to address members. Mr. Koenig stated that staff had previously discussed building a new, elevated flooring system similar to that constructed at the new library; however, questioned how much should be spent on improvements to the current building if other options are being considered.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 13 Mr. Koenig explained that this issue is complicated because replacing only City Hall would technically be a General Fund expense because it would be a general government obligation. However, if the plan were for a combined administrative complex, the total investment could be diffused through the electric utility and the water and sewer utility because it would include general government and utility revenue obligations. He stated that the option selected would determine the City’s ability to pay back the note or finance the project. Mr. Koenig informed members that discussions regarding building renovations should include consideration of future growth projections and expectations for the 50-year life of the building. He noted that having a combined complex would enable staff to combine some resources and streamline operations. Scope of Work Members reviewed the proposed scope of work, as outlined by Mrs. Williams. Responding to Mrs. Williams, Mr. Koenig confirmed that the Counsel’s task would be to gather information and determine the best course for the future. In response to Mr. McDaniel, Mr. Koenig clarified that the entire City Hall building is at the end of its service life, including the Council Chambers. Responding to Mr. Hutchison, Mr. Koenig stated that City Council discussed the potential concept of building a new office complex for the entire operation of the City during the Council Retreat in January 2013, and the estimate provided by EDiS was based on a 40,000 S.F. building. Mr. Hutchison requested Mr. Koenig to provide members with information regarding the size of the Kent County Levy Court complex. Mr. Hutchison stated that members should consider: 1) what it would require and cost for a new administrative building, to include determining the location; 2) the total cost to get each building up to the current code and take care of future needs; and 3) to explore the option of a public/private partnership. Responding to Mrs. Williams, Mr. Koenig stated that the previous City Hall discussion did not include the electric administrative building or the administrative offices at the City’s warehouse because adding those offices to a City Hall complex would include a significant amount of employees and equipment. He explained that staff had separate discussions regarding the potential replacement of the electric administration building or the creation of a utilities/public works administration and warehouse at a separate location. Mr. Koenig expressed his preference to keep these items separated. He stated that although it would be possible to build one (1) building to accommodate all of the employees, it would not be possible to accommodate parking for employees and City vehicles and equipment.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 14 Mr. Hutchison stated that he liked the idea of getting rid of the current buildings and constructing a new building to meet the City’s needs for the next 30 - 40 years. Additionally, he would like to obtain information regarding the cost to bring all of the City’s buildings up to code and to expand those buildings to meet the current needs, noting that it would be a significant cost. Mr. Hutchison reiterated that members also need to examine the public/private partnership options. He stated that members should consider constructing a new building, getting rid of the three (3) current buildings, and the option of buying new property. Mr. Perza expressed his opinion that the same level of detail and attention should be spent on each of the three (3) areas. He stated that he does not want to give 90% to the partnership concept and only perform a cursory review of the other two (2) options. To make an educated decision, he suggested that members obtain the same information on each of the three (3) categories and then pick the option that would be the most beneficial to the City for the next 50 - 100 years. Mr. Perza agreed with Mr. Hutchison, stating that they should examine new construction, the potential acquisition of land, and retrofitting and rehabilitating the existing buildings without having to buy new places. He stated that retro filling and rehabilitating the current building would include the development of a plan for temporary relocation of everything in these buildings. Mr. Perza also agreed that it would be important to explore the public/private partnership financing arrangement and determine how much each option would cost the City. He noted that he did not want to spend “a fortune” exploring each option and “price ourselves out of the project.” As a follow up to Mr. Hutchison’s prior question, Mr. Koenig stated that Kent County owns 11.62 acres on Bay Road and the administrative complex is 74,350 S.F. Responding to Mrs. Williams, Mr. Koenig stated that he would request a breakdown of the building space. He explained that the usable building space was probably closer to 40,000 S.F., noting that it was built with a 40-year outlook on staffing and there are still vacant offices. Mr. Hutchison noted that the City has more employees than the County and Mrs. Williams stated that the City also has a greater vehicular burden. Appraisal Methodology Mrs. Williams suggested that the Counsel begin the process by obtaining appraisals for the City’s properties, and questioned whether members preferred to hire an appraiser from Dover or outside of Dover. If members preferred an appraiser from outside of Dover, Mrs. Williams recommended Tidewater Properties or Appraisal Associates. Mr. Hutchison stated his preference for utilizing a Dover appraiser because they would have a good knowledge of the value of the properties.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 15 Mr. Perza questioned if the purpose of the appraisal was to determine the post-renovation value or the present value of the properties. Responding, Mrs. Williams stated that the appraisal would determine the present value of the properties. Mr. Perza questioned whether the present value of the properties mattered as much, since the buildings are falling apart. He stated his understanding that the intent is to retrofit the buildings or sell the buildings and questioned the objective of the appraisal. Mrs. Williams explained that an appraisal would determine the financial methodology. She stated that, before the buildings are torn down, she wants to know what they are worth and what the City may be giving up. In response to Mrs. Williams, Mr. Koenig explained that the EDiS estimate was provided when EDiS was under contract for the new library. The EDiS engineers and buildings systems employees walked through 5 E. Reed Street and provided a cursory “back of the envelope” estimate of the amount the City could expect to pay for the types of renovations required at that time. Mr. Koenig stated that he would provide the EDiS documents to members. Responding to Mrs. Williams, Mr. Koenig confirmed that an appraisal of the former library was completed when the State of Delaware was interested in the property for the Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC) executive offices. He stated that staff was working directly with the Dennis Groom, Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and the property was appraised at approximately $1.8M. Mr. Koenig explained that this appraisal was complicated because it included three (3) distinct properties: 1) the library, 2) the parking lot to the north of the library and the grass area to the back of the library, and 3) the entire row of parking that abuts the library. If the City were to sell the property as it was appraised, it would leave the City with approximately 30 parking spaces, which would create a parking deficit for 5 E. Reed Street. Mr. Koenig expressed his opinion that the $1.8M appraisal was a “pretty decent” price at the time; however, DNREC wanted to have the building renovated to the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) gold standard, which increased the total project cost to $6M. Since the State did not have the funding, they never followed through with the purchase of the property. Mr. Koenig stated that the City did not receive a copy of the $6M construction estimate. Responding to Mr. Mitten, Mr. Koenig stated that the green design was necessary for DNREC; however, may not be necessary for the City. He stated that, if Council decides to renovate buildings, the decision will also need to be made as to whether green or conventional building designs are utilized. Mr. Koenig suggested utilizing conventional building designs because the LEED gold standard would increase the costs substantially. He stated that there are conventional designs available that are less expensive and highly efficient.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 16 Mr. Koenig stated that staff examined the utility costs for City Hall versus the new library two (2) years ago, and the monthly costs for heating, air conditioning, water, and sewer were practically the same because the library was constructed to be a much more efficient building. Mr. Hutchison stated that there are many options, and it will be a matter of reviewing all of the facts and figures and making a recommendation that is in the best interest for the future of City of Dover. He expressed his opinion that 5 E. Reed Street is an absolutely wonderful location and it would behoove the City to take a strong look at whether it can be improved and upgraded to the standards the City will need for the next 25 - 30 years and how much it would cost, noting that the City Hall property would make a great parking lot. Mr. Hudson questioned whether the Police Department would be considered during these discussions. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that the Police Department would not be directly included in this discussion. He reiterated that there had been some preliminary discussions regarding other properties that may be available in the downtown area. Mr. Koenig informed members that one (1) of the reasons that this discussion had been on the “back burner” was because it would require a large expense that has not been included in the five (5) year forecast. He informed members that it would either require bonding or a public/private partnership. Mrs. Williams stated that, like the unfunded liability, this issue must be addressed because City Hall is “going down around us.” Mr. Koenig informed members that one (1) of the only ways of controlling the baseline budget is to control the number of City employees, noting that having these employees in one (1) building with a more modern building design would allow staff to integrate different departments, share resources, and modify business operations. Noting that this was not the only reason to build a new City Hall or do a major building renovation, Mr. Koenig stated that it was a good reason to do it now. Responding to Mrs. Williams, Mr. Hutchison stated that the first step would be to get the appraised values for each building, and asked for Mr. Clendaniel’s thoughts and concerns. Mr. Clendaniel stated that the City’s current buildings were built in the early 1970s and they all need major renovations, including the HVAC systems. He recollected that the only building with a new roof was the former library, noting that it was 20 years old. Mr. Clendaniel stated that the prices a few years ago were between $60,000 and $100,000 to upgrade the HVAC systems in each of the buildings. He

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 17 informed members that it would be very costly to renovate the buildings to bring them up to construction standards. As far as usage, Mr. Clendaniel stated that City Hall had been outgrown for at least the past 10 years, noting that staff had remodeled the building six (6) times in the past 20 years without adding any additional space. Mrs. Williams questioned whether Mr. Clendaniel thought renovation or construction would be more viable and if the appraisers determined that the building value was low but the property value was high. Responding, Mr. Clendaniel expressed his opinion that current construction costs are very high and it would be less costly to utilize the former library and 5 E. Reed Street. He stated that there was no longer adequate space on the City Hall property to construct the building that was proposed 10 years ago. Mr. McDaniel requested that staff provide members with accurate figures for square footage needs; the square footage of the former library and Weyandt Hall; and a list of the agencies located on the second and third floors of Weyandt Hall and their lease information. He stated that he was a big advocate of downtown Dover and expressed his opinion that the City has the ability to create a complex that would be good for downtown Dover. Mr. McDaniel also requested information regarding the parking lot on the “other side” of the former library. He noted that parking would always be a problem and understood that one (1) parking deck would be feasible, while more than one (1) would cost $20,000 - $30,000 per parking space. Referring to the map of City Owned Properties, Mr. Perza questioned whether properties owned by the City and leased by third parties were included, specifically referring to the U.S. Post Office located at 55 Loockerman Plaza. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that the City does own 55 Loockerman Plaza and the building is leased. Mr. Perza questioned when the lease expired for that property, and whether it would be possible to incorporate it into a complex in the future. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that the Post Office lease would expire in 2020, and there has been no indication that the government has any construction money. Mr. Koenig noted that conceptual drawings were previously completed in regard to converting that property to a parking lot. He stated that the building was in terrible shape, and the value would probably be $0 by 2020. Mr. Koenig stated that the community feeling regarding the Post Office, as conveyed during discussions about the new library, was that people want a customer counter facility in the downtown area and they did not want it to be relocated. However, he explained that there was some “back-operation” performed at this location and he did not think anyone would mind if this function leaves the downtown area.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 18 Responding to Mr. Perza, Mr. Koenig stated that he was uncertain who controlled the lease renewal option for 55 Loockerman Plaza; however, it was his impression that it would have to be mutually extended. He indicated that he would provide this information to members. Mr. Perza stated that he generally agrees with keeping the Post Office downtown; however, he noted that it could be relocated to another property on Loockerman Street. Mr. Koenig informed members that many possible options had been previously discussed. He stated that the PNC Bank building, located at 3 Loockerman Plaza, was an attractive building; however, PNC Bank had indicated that they want to keep their presence downtown and want to maintain ownership of that building. While there are vacancies in the building, combining a bank with government operations would create challenges. Mr. Koenig noted that there were multiple good options; however, parking will become a topic of discussion because there are current complaints that there is not enough free parking. He stated that if the City were to build a combined campus, parking would need to be a major consideration. Referring to the map of City Owned Properties, Mr. Perza questioned whether any of the land at Schutte Park would be viable for a new building or complex, noting that there would be plenty of space for parking. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that there may have been caveats regarding the donation of that land to the City and that he would provide members with additional information regarding the land. Mr. Hutchison stated that City Hall should be located in the downtown area, and informed members that the current timing of these discussions provided a wonderful opportunity, since the State government and City of Dover were entering a partnership regarding the downtown. Hutchison moved to recommend obtaining appraisal values on each of the sites, seconded by Mr. McDaniel. Mr. McDaniel questioned which properties would be included in the appraisal. Responding, Mr. Hutchison clarified that appraisals would be obtained for Weyandt Hall, the former library, and City Hall. The Committee recommended obtaining appraisal values for Weyandt Hall, the former Dover Public Library, and City Hall. By consent agenda, Mr. Hare moved for approval of the Counsel’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Dixon and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 19 Mrs. Williams asked if members had any thoughts regarding the selection of the appraiser. Mr. McDaniel agreed with Mr. Hutchison that the appraiser did not necessarily need to be from Wilmington and could be local, and questioned whether bids would need to be solicited. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that the City would need to obtain three (3) quotes. Mrs. Williams stated that she would like to obtain quotes from one (1) appraiser outside of Dover and two (2) from Dover. She stated that the appraisers should not have any connection to any of the properties. Mr. Mitten agreed with hiring an appraiser from Dover, noting that they would have a better knowledge of the property values than an appraiser from Wilmington. Mr. Perza cautioned members about retaining an appraiser who may have an interest in future development with the City, or may have a connection to someone with an interest. Mrs. Williams suggested that staff obtain three (3) bids, one (1) of those being from outside of the City of Dover. Mr. McDaniel moved to recommend obtaining three (3) quotes for an appraiser, to include one (1) from outside of Dover, and two (2) from Dover, seconded by Mr. Hutchison. Mr. Perza expressed his concern regarding having the buildings appraised at this time, explaining that he was weary of spending money on an appraisal that would not be useful in one (1) year. He stated that the City will need to obtain estimates for the costs to renovate and rehabilitate the buildings and that it may be more worthwhile to wait until that process is complete to have the buildings appraised. Responding to Mr. Perza, Mr. Koenig explained that an appraiser would not be able to provide information on what the building would be worth in the future, because he will not be able to provide specific renovation plans. He stated that the appraisal would be based on the current condition of the properties. Responding to Mr. Perza, Mr. Koenig confirmed that the City may consider selling these buildings in the current condition, which would make the appraisal valuable. Mr. Hutchison expressed his opinion that obtaining the current value is a necessary first step and the next step would be to have a team of experts look at the buildings and provide an estimate of the cost to bring them up to code.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 20 The Committee recommended obtaining three (3) quotes for an appraiser, to include one (1) from outside of Dover, and two (2) from Dover. By consent agenda, Mr. Hare moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Dixon and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. Mr. Koenig informed members that the commercial property records for 5 E. Reed Street indicate that the building has an approximate total square footage of 40,000 S.F.; however, he noted that not all of this is usable space. He stated that the tax assessment value for this property is $3.1M and a final building value is $2.1M. Mr. Koenig stated that City Hall is 16,700 S.F., and the former library is 12,444 S.F. Responding to Mr. McDaniel, Mr. Koenig confirmed that there is a second floor in part of the former library building and stated his belief that the total square footage was approximately 17,000 S.F.; however, he would provide this information for the next meeting. Discussion of Meeting Dates and Times Responding to Mr. Hutchison, Mr. Koenig stated that it would take some time to obtain the quotes, select an appraiser, and complete the appraisals, and members may want to schedule another meeting in the interim. Mr. Koenig requested a few weeks to compile the requested information. Mr. Koenig clarified that the Counsel’s recommendations must be authorized by City Council. He stated that he could obtain the quotes; however, he cannot act on them until after City Council considers the recommendation during the Regular Council meeting of February 23, 2015. The Committee scheduled the next meeting for Wednesday, February 25, 2015 at 9:00 a.m. By consent agenda, Mr. Hare moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Dixon and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. Mrs. Williams informed members that the proceedings of this Counsel are governed by the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA); therefore, members are not able to discuss the matters considered by this Counsel with one another outside of official meetings, including email correspondence. She advised members that the City Clerk’s Office is available to answer any questions they may have. By consent agenda, Mr. Hare moved for acceptance of the President’s Counsel on Public/Private Partnerships and the Future of City Hal, Weyandt Hall, Former Dover Library, and Other City Properties Report, seconded by Mr. Dixon and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 21 PARKS, RECREATION, AND COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT COMMITTEE REPORT - FEBRUARY 9, 2015 The Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee met on February 9, 2015 with Chairman Dixon presiding. Semi-Annual Review - Statistics Regarding Jobs and Businesses Gained and Lost in the City of Dover Since July 2014 Mr. Bill Neaton, Economic Development Manager, reviewed statistics regarding the City of Dover top employers, noting there had not been a big difference in the number of employees since July 2014; however, he pointed out other positive events that recently took place. He noted that Bayhealth Medical Center had opened a third floor, which added 100 employees and 32 beds to the facility. In addition, Mr. Neaton stated that Bayhealth continues to expand by adding a fourth “shelf floor” upon completion of the third floor. He advised members that Bayhealth also had plans for expansion in Milford, Delaware, which will include an entirely new facility. Mr. Neaton stated that Energizer will be remodeling their facility on Clara Street, as well as adding a new building, which will bring approximately 250-275 positions to Dover. They will be closing their facility in Canada and producing all of their feminine care products at the Dover location. Additionally, Mr. Neaton noted that Kraft Foods and Proctor & Gamble are potentially adding 30 positions. Mr. Neaton stated that, while the number of employees at ILC had decreased, they are working on negotiating another contract for aerostat production. He provided members information pertaining to some of the vacant buildings in the City, including the old OfficeMax location, where Produce Junction would be located, and the former Metro building, where Urban Furniture and Airbase Carpet would be located, bringing an additional 35-50 jobs. Mr. Neaton also advised that Uzin Utz was scheduled to open in May, which would equate to another 25-30 employees. Responding to Mr. Hutchison, Mr. Neaton advised members that E-Z Pass was very pleased with their location in downtown Dover. He was unsure of their hours of operation but offered to find out. In response to Mrs. Horsey, Mr. Neaton clarified that the 471 positions listed for ILC included the loss of jobs resulting from the lost aerostat contract. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Neaton said he was unsure if the ILC plant in Sussex County would have any impact on its Kent County operation. Mr. Anderson said he had observed that there were fewer vacancies in downtown Dover and more minority owned-businesses. He questioned if Mr. Neaton’s observations were similar and if anyone was keeping track of this information. Responding, Mr. Neaton agreed with Mr. Anderson’s observation and indicated that Mr. Ed Perez, Downtown Coordinator, tracks this information. In addition, Mr. Neaton referenced potential projects that would not have gone through before the designation of the Downtown Development District in Dover. He stated that this designation would continue to aid in the efforts to bring more business and money to the downtown area and the City overall.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 22 Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Neaton said he did not have the unemployment rate for the City of Dover with him; however, he would find out and email this information to him. Responding to Mr. Dixon regarding Bayhealth’s expansion design plans, Mayor Christiansen advised that Bayhealth can build up to 10 stories high. He indicated that, in addition to growth in that direction, Bayhealth was utilizing space at their campus across the street from the main facility. Mr. Neaton added that Bayhealth was currently being evaluated for Magnet status for excellence in nursing and delivery of care. In response to Mr. Dixon regarding the rising cost of health care, Mr. Neaton advised that there is a demand for the best health care and equipment, and it costs money to achieve that level of care. Investigating AmeriCorps and Retired Senior Volunteer Program (RSVP) to Supplement Staffing During their Regular meeting of August 11, 2014, the Committee recommended that staff be authorized to investigate volunteers to supplement staffing for the City and that a report be submitted within 90 days (if study is not completed, staff would provide report on its status). For clarification, Mr. Anderson stated that this motion would allow for staff to first study the feasibility of utilizing volunteer services such as the AmeriCorps and the RSVP, with a report back to the committee in 90 days. Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, referred to the memorandum dated January 9, 2015 from Ms. Margie Cyr, Library Director, Re: Volunteer Programs at the Dover Public Library. He indicated that the programs utilized are more along the lines of the Retired Senior Volunteer Program (RSVP) than AmeriCorps. Mr. Koenig stated that opportunities to utilize these programs and their degree of success varies, depending on the area in which they are used. He advised that some of the volunteers being utilized at the library are individuals who are challenged in some ways, and the program allows them to get out into the community and contribute. Mr. Koenig explained that these volunteer programs had not been pursued in other areas of government due the need for oversight, as well as concerns related to taking work from existing bargaining employees. He noted that quality of work was also an issue in areas such as customer service and cash handling, as well as access to information such as customer credit and utility service information. Mr. Koenig explained that, in the past, the City had occasionally utilized community service hours at the Public Works level and some court-mandated community service in sanitation, but this had been very limited in the last two (2) decades. Mr. Koenig mentioned that interest had been expressed in using college students looking for experience as interns, but reiterated that a great deal of oversight would be required to guide interns and/or volunteers.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 23 Mr. Anderson expressed his feeling that City government could utilize internships to supplement programs in Finance, Planning, Economic Development (particularly organizing events with the Downtown Dover Partnership), Recreation, and areas of that nature. Responding, Mr. Koenig said that staff members may be interested in interns; however, he noted that interns typically seek paid opportunities. He indicated that this could be considered; however, contact hours would have to be limited to less than 30 per week. Mr. Koenig also noted that there is a difference in the structure of paid internships versus volunteer programs, such as AmeriCorps and RSVP. He indicated that the success rate would vary depending on the quality of the individual and the amount of oversight needed. Mr. Koenig thought that if the City were to pursue programs involving volunteers or interns, staff should work together to develop a structured program versus intermittent, short-term interns. He noted that it would take staff time to get up and running, which would also cost money, and this would need to be considered when evaluating and reviewing the budget. Responding to Mr. Anderson regarding the potential for some programs or universities to provide funding or at least supplement the costs, Mr. Koenig stated that although staff time was currently limited, if it were the pleasure of Council, this could be researched and considered as a way to potentially solve some problems. Revival of Youth Advisory Committee Mr. Anderson reminded members that when Mrs. Sophia Russell served on City Council, she was heavily involved in the Youth Advisory Committee. Since Mrs. Russell’s passing, this Committee was no longer assembled. Mr. Anderson felt this was an important committee that involved the youth, raised awareness, helped build leadership skills, engaged young people, and helped keep youth on the right path. He advised members that Mrs. Russell had asked him to keep the Committee going; however, shortly after her passing, he was deployed for one (1) year. Mr. Anderson expressed his desire to revive the Youth Advisory Committee, as it was needed now more than ever. He indicated that there were a lot of interested youth who wished to apply and he, as a councilman, would like to run the Committee. Mr. Anderson noted activities in other municipalities, such as Harrington’s New Year’s Eve celebration, that are put on by youth committees, and stated that he would like to see similar opportunities for the youth of the City of Dover. He felt that the support of the community was present and that the Committee would be a success. In response to Mr. Hutchison, Mr. Anderson indicated that the members of the Committee who would take the lead would likely be high school aged; however, anyone could be involved. He referenced Council Resolution 2010-03, Youth Advisory Committee (YAC) Council Resolution No. 2008-11, with Amendment No. 1, that created the Committee and defined its charge and purpose. Mr. Anderson could not recall all of the components of the purpose of the Committee; however, he indicated that, to the best of his recollection, they included advising Council on matters related to youth in the community, planning and executing drug-free events for the youth, and coordinating additional parks and recreation activities.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 24 Mrs. Horsey said that she was serving on the Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee when Councilwoman Russell initially introduced it and conveyed how passionate Mrs. Russell was about it. Mrs. Horsey expressed concurrence and appreciation for the idea of reviving the Committee in Mrs. Russell’s memory, and for the benefit of the youth in the community. Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, offered some insight on behalf of herself and the City Manager as to the requirements of staff to support the Committee. She reminded members of the involvement of the Clerk’s Office preparing the agendas and minutes, Parks and Recreation staff, and Ms. Kay Sass, Emergency Management Coordinator in the City Manager’s Office, as well as the potential costs. Mrs. Townshend stated that these staff members and departments were currently stretched very thin, noting that the addition of this Committee could result in additional hours, leading to overtime or comp time for some of those staff members. Mr. Dixon said that he too would love to see the Committee revived, noting that youth in the community had always been important to him and had been a focal point of his participation on Council. Mr. Hutchison also conveyed his support; however, he felt that the budget needed to be considered to ensure that the City could afford to support the program in terms of costs associated with staffing. Mr. Anderson noted that the previous budget for the Committee was only approximately $1,000 and that the founding resolution allowed for the Committee to raise money as well. Mayor Christiansen noted that the first Youth Advisory Committee was activated in 1990 and at that time, a budget was not considered in creating the Committee and getting the youth involved. The Committee at that time had members from Dover High School, Caesar Rodney High School, two (2) City residents who attended Polytech High School, and one (1) attending private school. Mayor Christiansen noted that the Youth in Government Day that was created had continued, in spite of the dissolution of the Committee and not having a budget to work with. Mr. Caldwell expressed his feeling that money should not interfere with the opportunity to involve the youth and have their voice be heard. The Committee recommended reviving the Youth Advisory Committee and reviewing applications at the March 9, 2015 Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement meeting. By consent agenda, Mr. Hare moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Dixon and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 25 Updates Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program Quarterly Update Mrs. Tracey Harvey, Planner I, advised members that Planning Department staff was currently working on the five (5) year Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Consolidated Plan that would be due to the Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Department by May 15, 2015. As part of the process, the first public hearing was held November 12, 2014 at the Dover Public Library. Mrs. Harvey indicated that multi-year grants were currently being accepted for the FY15-19 program years for eligible projects in the City and stated that the deadline was today, February 9, 2015 at 5:00 p.m. She noted that, as of the time of the meeting, approximately eight (8) applications had been submitted. Mrs. Harvey stated that the Mayor and Community Development staff attended the Mayor’s Challenge to End Veterans’ Homelessness Roundtable Summit at the HUD Philadelphia field office in December 2014. The summit featured panel discussions and brainstorming discussions ranging from building coalitions to available resources and supportive services to end veteran homelessness. The Mayor’s working group also held their own Summit to End Veterans’ Homelessness by December 2015 on January 22, 2015 at Delaware Technical and Community College, which was well attended. In addition, Mrs. Harvey advised that a “Boot Camp” had been scheduled for March 2, 2015 at the Dover Public Library for housing providers to kick off the initiative to develop a process to house homeless veterans. Responding to Mr. Anderson regarding strategies planned as a result of the homeless summit for veterans, Mrs. Harvey stated that those strategies will be rolled out during the Boot Camp and advised that there is not a large population of homeless veterans in the City of Dover. In response to Mr. Anderson, Mrs. Harvey stated that she did not have the exact count at this time; however, a Point in Time Survey was completed on January 30, 2015, so she should have that information soon and would advise members once it was available. Mrs. Harvey mentioned that results from last year indicated that there were only four (4) homeless veterans in Dover; however, that number was not accurate. As a result, the process for obtaining this information was changed to take a count several times throughout the year to obtain more accurate figures. She advised that the Code Purple program is now in effect in Dover, which should help with obtaining that information. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mrs. Harvey advised that some of the strategies planned in the effort to end veteran homelessness included transitional housing and permanent support of housing, and the Delaware State Housing Authority (DSHA) would be giving veterans first preference as vacancies become available. Mr. Anderson inquired about the process involved in seeking assistance from the Veterans Affairs (VA), stating that it can be difficult and that many veterans are not informed or able to complete the necessary paperwork. In response, Mrs. Harvey stated that this type of assistance is being provided, as well as ensuring all avenues can be pursued to get the veterans the help they need.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 26 In response to Mr. Anderson, Mrs. Harvey explained that the City’s CDBG program began in year three (3) of a five (5) year cycle, and that this year would begin the first full five (5) year cycle for the program. Recreation Needs Assessment Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, advised members that for the past month she had been primarily consumed with the process of obtaining the City’s Downtown Development District designation; therefore, updated information was limited. She stated that a Request for Proposal (RFP) had gone out with funds from the FY15 budget to begin the planning process, starting with Dover Park, to incorporate feedback from the survey, and begin outreach into a design for the park, including lighting, vegetation, a potential spray pad, indoor restrooms, and reservation of a building pad for future use, should it be determined that it is necessary. Mrs. Townshend explained that the same process would then be followed for Schutte Park and then Silver Lake Park. Responding to Mr. Hutchison regarding how the funding from the Governor and the support coming from Kent County Levy Court would affect the Downtown Development District target area, Mrs. Townshend indicated that money would not come through the City, it would go directly to individual private applicants and property owners. She briefly explained the process, stating that after an initial $25,000 investment is made on a business or property, the party will be eligible for a rebate for up to 20% from the State, and Kent County will match that rebate up to $10,000. For example, Mrs. Townshend stated that if an investor purchased a building that needed $150,000 in improvements, the first $25,000 of that $150,000 would be funded by the property owner, and the remaining $125,000 would be eligible for reimbursement, up to 20% from the State and $10,000 from Kent County. She explained that, after the work is complete, the property owner would submit receipts, if the project is under $250,000, to request reimbursement. If the project is in excess of $250,000, the property owner would need to go through a reservation process, for which the State is currently accepting applications. Mrs. Townshend said she was aware of at least two (2) or three (3) property owners already going through the reservation process. She advised of additional incentives, such as permit fees, building permits, impact fees, and property transfer fee waivers (after March 1, 2015), stating that once a Certificate of Occupancy (CO) is issued, the buyer’s portion of the transfer tax will also be rebated. Additionally, Mrs. Townshend said participants could qualify for business license fee waivers, along with home ownership incentives. Responding to Mr. Hutchison, Mrs. Townshend advised members that the City’s contribution would be in-kind, noting that all City revenue benefits for new businesses in the downtown area will be waived for a period of time. While there would be additional businesses and activities, the City would not see the revenue from that increase initially. Mrs. Townshend advised Mr. Hutchison that the target area included Mary Street down to Water Street and the area east of Cherry Street and Lincoln Park, ending at State Street.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 27 Mr. Hutchison stated that the Presidents Counsel on Public/Private Partnerships and the Future of City Hall, Weyandt Hall, Former Dover Library and Other City Properties met to address the needs of the City and the best way to address those issues and concerns within the City of Dover was part of the total movement to improve the City. Mr. Hutchison recognized the efforts and support of everyone in the City, particularly the Planning Department, Fire Marshal’s Office, and Law Enforcement. Mr. Neaton indicated that, in addition to the incentives recognized by Mrs. Townshend, the Downtown Dover Partnership would be providing up to $5,000 reimbursement for architectural assistance, in addition to facade grants for upgrading the front of buildings or for signage. Responding to Mr. Hutchison, Mrs. Townshend stated that the incentives do not include funding for demolition. Mr. Dixon shared his concern that the community did not understand the Downtown Development District designation, what it means, the benefits of the designation, etc. Mrs. Townshend advised that the City will be holding three (3) workshops on February 26, 2015 at Dover Public Library and people from the various entities involved would be there to explain their portion of the program and to educate the community. Mrs. Townshend also said that an interactive GIS map was in the process of being made available for the City’s website, so that people can click on a property and be able to determine which incentives are available. The GIS mapping tool would allow the applicant to print a map to include in the application, as it is a State requirement to document conformance with the City’s District plan. She stated that City staff and the Delaware State Housing Authority (DSHA) were making themselves available to review and explain the process to anyone needing assistance and were willing to review applications before submission to the State. Mrs. Townshend stated that the City has five (5) different brochures to distribute and educate the community and the State has brochures as well. Mayor Christiansen expressed his sincere appreciation and acknowledged the depth of the time, work, and effort of Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager; Mrs. Townshend and her staff; Mr. Bill Neaton, Economic Development Manager; and Mr. Kirby Hudson, Assistant City Manager, referencing the specific benchmarks that had been set during weekly meetings to keep the momentum to promote and improve Dover. Regarding Mr. Dixon’s concerns about individuals without computers having access to all of the tools and information, Mrs. Townshend assured him that she, her staff, and others involved would be available to assist anyone who needs help in any way necessary to be sure they get all of the information they require. By consent agenda, Mr. Hare moved for acceptance of the Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee Report, seconded by Mr. Dixon and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 28 UTILITY COMMITTEE REPORT - FEBRUARY 9, 2015 The Utility Committee met on February 9, 2015 with Councilman Slavin presiding in the absence of Chairwoman Williams. Reimbursement Agreement with Pioneer Materials - Abandonment of Shallow Well #7A Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, informed members that Shallow Well #7A is one (1) of the City’s raw water wells located east of the City, and the City supplies the Long Point Road Water Treatment Plant with water from the Columbia Aquifer. This is one (1) of three (3) aquifers that the City draws from, and is the shallowest aquifer. Mr. Koenig explained that there is a sand and gravel mining operation scattered throughout this well field. In December of 2007, Pioneer Materials (formerly known as Tilcon) was excavating very close to the easements associated with this well and damaged the raw water and electrical supply lines to the wellhead. Since that time, the well supply had not been operable. Mr. Koenig advised members that, because of the long-term well and mining operations at this location, the City and Pioneer Materials believed it would be in the best interest to abandon this well, based on its current condition. The City had been negotiating with Pioneer Materials to develop an acceptable solution and, currently, it is felt that the well should be abandoned in accordance with State standards and all of the equipment should be removed. Mr. Koenig indicated that a price of $13,126 was stated in the agreement for Funding for Shallow Well 7A Abandonment, including all of the associated closure items. Pioneer Materials would agree that if the City were to re-drill this well in the future, Pioneer Materials would contribute up to $50,000 for the siting and construction of a new well. Given the current restrictions in the Columbia Aquifer, Mr. Koenig was unsure if the City would drill another well at this location because of the way the State is managing this water supply permit. He indicated that the State had restricted the City in the Columbia Aquifer because of concerns with the pumping levels associated with farming operations around the Long Point Road Water Treatment Plant. In regard to the $13,126 cost of abandonment, Mr. Koenig stated his expectation that the City would front the money and then bill Pioneer Materials for reimbursement at the same time that the City is billed by the contractor. This would be reflected as an expense on the City’s budget, but there would be miscellaneous income coming from Pioneer Materials to pay the bill. Staff recommended acceptance of the reimbursement agreement and authorization for the City Manager to execute it. Mr. Perza questioned if the 10-year time frame related to the $50,000 contribution toward construction cost would start at the time the equipment is removed or would be retroactive to 2007. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated his feeling that it would be 10 years from the time the reimbursement agreement is executed, ending in approximately 2025. Mr. Perza noted that the language in Paragraph C of the agreement left this matter open to interpretation as being retroactive to 2007, and Mr. Koenig agreed to clarify this before the matter is considered by Council.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 29 In response to Mr. Perza in regard to the risk of harm to anyone in the community from the well, Mr. Koenig indicated there was no risk, stating that the well pipe was approximately six (6) to eight (8) inches in diameter and is closed. Referencing the amount of up $50,000 that would be paid by Pioneer Materials toward a future well, Mr. Blakeman questioned if there were any restrictions related to where a new well could be placed. Mr. Koenig stated that the location would be limited to the Columbia well field, since this well was feeding the water treatment plant in the area. He felt that drilling a well on the west side of town would not be within the intent of the agreement. The Committee recommended authorizing the City Manager to execute the reimbursement agreement, as recommended by staff. During the Council meeting, Mr. Koenig advised members that the ten-year time frame for reimbursement began in December of 2007 and they have until December of 2017 to construct the new well. He noted that staff had been working with the State of Delaware on the permitting of all City wells and, because of concerns related to the pumping of the aquifer and saltwater intrusion, there will be a contraction of the permit associated with the Columbia aquifer. Mrs. Williams moved to authorize the City Manager to execute the reimbursement agreement, as recommended by the Committee. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hutchison and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. Quarterly Review of Utility Related Capital Investment Plan (CIP) (Electric and Water/Wastewater) (October, November, and December) Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, reviewed the General Fund - Major CIP Projects - Quarterly Report as of December 31, 2014. Mr. Koenig stated that Project Code ST1304 - Garrison Farm Improvements included improvements including stormwater, roads, and ditching associated with the Garrison Farm. He explained that those projects were underway and slightly behind, but progressing through completion. He noted that this project goes back to FY13 funding. Mr. Koenig indicated that staff was working through the FY14 projects. The air conditioning system had been installed at the John W. Pitts Center and final testing would be done in the summer when the temperatures rise. Demolition at White Oak Park was complete. The Concrete Program and the FY14 Bonded Street Programs were coming to an end. Mr. Koenig explained that the Village of Westover project related to money that was called on a letter of credit, and the balance of those funds was transferred to Cannon Mill. Work was currently underway at that Cannon Mills. Mr. Koenig stated that a number of FY15 projects were underway associated with the General Fund. Mr. Koenig reviewed the Community Transportation - Major CIP Projects, noting that they included older projects, such as South Street Paving, as well as newer agreements for Loockerman Plaza, Townsend Boulevard, and Village of Cannon Mill.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 30 In regard to the Water/Wastewater Improvement & Extension Fund - Major CIP Projects, Mr. Koenig indicated that staff had been working to find a second site for the Elevated Water Storage Tank in the Denneys Road area and was moving toward a favorable relocation of that project to another property. Construction of the Piney Point Well was complete and staff was in the process of getting permits approved by the State to turn the well into production. It was planned to time production with the acceptance of wastewater flow and the beginning of testing of the Calpine project in the next few weeks. Mr. Koenig stated that the Garrison Farm Water Tank was underway, as well as wastewater improvements at that location. A number of additional wastewater projects were underway, specifically Inflow and Infiltration (I&I) projects at Buck Drive, White Oak Farms, and Towne Point, and pump station projects throughout the City. In regard to Electric Improvement & Extension Fund (I&E) - Major CIP Projects, Mr. Koenig stated that a number of projects were underway at the McKee Run plant in the current year, as well as projects related to new developments and system upgrades that were being “cleaned up” from FY14 and FY13 in Capital Park and Richardson Circle. In addition, there were new projects that would be system upgrades, including Family Dollar and Chandelle Airport. Some were related to new customers and some to replacement of infrastructure. Mr. Koenig noted that two (2) large projects were the Horsepond Road Substation and the General Scott Switchgear Replacement. He advised members that the Horsepond Road Substation project was complete and in service, and staff had prepared an overview that would be sent to Council to highlight the improvements associated with this project. The General Scott Switchgear Replacement project was moving forward. There were a number of projects related to lighting new developments underway in FY15, and staff was working through those projects. Mr. Koenig advised members that there had been a very large backlog of projects being addressed and moving through the queue. He expressed his hope that by the end of 2015 there would be very little backlog moving forward and indicated that staff had worked very hard to get those projects out of the way. TEA/NAES Report (December) The TEA/NAES Monthly Report for December 2014 was provided to members to enable them to monitor electric sales and revenues received, which will provide a better understanding of any fluctuations that occur and allow the opportunity to make improvements if deemed necessary. Referring to Page 12 of The Energy Authority, Inc. Monthly Management Committee Update - December 2014, Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, reviewed the budget year-to-date expenses for the City’s energy purchases. He explained that the budget year-to-date expectation was to spend approximately$25,900,125, and so far $23,928,123 had been expended; therefore, the City was approximately $2M favorable on energy expenses through the end of December. Mr. Koenig stated that the budget had been tracking “pretty much like that” in the first six (6) months of the fiscal year and staff was hopeful that this would continue through the balance of the

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 31 year. He advised members that “things had tightened up a lot” in the energy markets and reminded members that in January 2014, the City spent $5M more than planned, which threw off the entire year. This was not seen in January 2015, which was relatively routine to Mr. Koenig’s knowledge. Mr. Koenig advised members that the Source and Formula columns in the spreadsheet included notations reflecting how the related figures are arrived at. The Committee recommended acceptance of the TEA/NAES Monthly Report for December 2014. By consent agenda, Mr. Hare moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Dixon and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. Updates - Garrison Oak Technical Park Project Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, provided the following updates on the Garrison Oak Technical Park (GOTP): City Infrastructure/Calpine Energy Center Mr. Koenig explained that three (3) different contracts were underway at the GOTP: 1) George & Lynch, Inc. was working on the wastewater pumping station, force main, and upgrades to the White Oak Farms Pump Station and entering the final phases of the project. The force main was in, tested, and was ready to receive flow. George & Lynch, Inc. were still working on upgrades at White Oak Farms, but this was not preventing flow from going into the new station. Mr. Koenig stated that the final hook-up of the power supply was preventing this flow. The City of Dover had run power feeds to a pedestal box adjacent to the pump station site, and George & Lynch and their subcontractor were in the process of hooking this up from the City’s ending pedestal, through their cabinetry, into the station, so that the pump station could be energized and go through the final testing. As of the current date, the intent was that the station would be energized and tested on or before February 17, 2015 and that the City would be receiving flow on or about that date. Once the station is energized and ready to receive flow, Mr. Koenig stated that the City would be receiving discharge from the Calpine site. Shortly thereafter, the City would progress toward abandonment of the White Oak Road Pump Station, a small pump station on the south side of White Oak Road that was part of a planned sewer system upgrade. 2) The City had been working with A-Del Construction Company for a number of months. Their contract includes the gravity sewer and water systems, as well as the roads, sidewalks, and entrances onto White Oak Road. Mr. Koenig stated that a number of things had progressed on the eastern side of the project and both entrances were being worked on, including the new entrance off White Oak Road. Once the east entrance was base coated and paved, all construction traffic would flip over to the east side and they would

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 32 begin forming up curb work on the west side. Prior to this, they would be working on stormwater infrastructure on the west side. Mr. Koenig advised members that the contract was running behind; it was hoped that the road would be paved by this point and this was beginning to cause scheduling problems, but A-Del was doing what they could to come back into compliance with the specifications and timelines. The contractor had not requested the weather days at this point, so they had not been factored into the completion date. The original completion date was December 31, 2014. Mr. Koenig noted the importance, moving forward, of making progress on good days and ensuring on bad weather days that arrangements are made to afford for rain, ponding, and puddling. 3) In regard to the water tower project, Mr. Koenig stated that Chicago Bridge and Iron Company had done some work in the fall. They had demobilized and were supposed to return in early February; however, returned in mid-January to begin the base of the tower and work was progressing. Mr. Koenig stated that progress was being made every day, all projects were moving forward, and the entire project was coming to an end. Noting that power lines were run to the Cartanza substation, Mr. Blakeman inquired if the switchgear and breakers were in place on the Delmarva Power and Light side of the substation. Mr. Koenig stated that, to his knowledge, everything was ready. He stated that when the City can begin accepting wastewater flow, Matrix, the Garrison Energy Center’s construction manager, will begin the testing sequence of the plant and will be dumping “test power” to the grid. The only impediment that had been indicated to Mr. Koenig was the wastewater pump station. Dover Sun Park Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, reviewed the Electric Revenue Fund FY15 - White Oak Solar Park Incremental Cost. He advised members that the YTD column reflected an incremental energy cost of approximately $515,000 through December 2014. He explained that this was the added cost of the power associated with the Dover Sun Park. Mr. Koenig felt that these figures were tracking as expected and the Dover Sun Park was functioning and performing as anticipated in the budget. Mrs. Williams moved for acceptance of the Utility Committee Report, seconded by Mr. Dixon and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE REPORT - FEBRUARY 9, 2015 The Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee met on February 9, 2015, with Chairman Slavin presiding. Proposed Ordinance #2015-05 Fiscal Year 2015 Second Budget Amendment Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, advised members that the proposed budget amendment included adjustments to the Beginning Budget Balances for all funds

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 33 now that the City’s audit had been completed. It also included any adjustments related to Council Actions in the budget year to date on changes in project budgets or operating items that were not included in the original budget. Mr. Koenig indicated that Council’s policy on transferring savings from prior year personnel expenses to the Pension or Other Post-Employment Benefit (OPEB) Trust Funds had also been included. The General Fund included a transfer to the Police Pension Fund of $100,000 and a transfer to the Civilian Pension Fund of $543,000, for a total transfer of $643,000. This $643,000 was the savings that was realized in personnel-related expenses in FY14 and was in accordance with Council’s prior policies. The Water/Sewer and Electric Funds did not have any personnel savings due to the change in pension accounting standards, so there were no additional contributions from any of the utility funds proposed. Additional adjustments were as follows: •Increases to Division budgets for vacation sell-back, retirement payout, and education assistance with a corresponding decrease to Other Employment Expenses across all applicable funds. Mr. Koenig advised members that this technique was used previously to keep individual department budgets from being inflated, rebated to vacation sellback, or even potentially retirement. •Transfer In from the Contingency Reserve for the final payment of the outstanding police grievance that had to be paid in FY15 with a corresponding adjustment to the Police budget. Mr. Koenig stated his belief that this amount was $50,000. •Increases in the following revenue items based on greater than planned receipts in Kent County Reciprocal Borrowing and Municipal Street Aid. •A transfer of $80,000 in capital project funds to the Parks and Recreation Reserve to set aside the budgeted funds for the White Oak Park improvements while awaiting the final needs of the recreation assessment. This was also in accordance with Council’s requests and actions related to the budget hearings held in 2014. Mr. Koenig explained that after the above adjustments, the General Fund Budget Balance would be $385,000 over the budgeted amount. It was staff’s recommendation to replenish the Contingency Reserve for the $300,000 used to settle the police grievances and to transfer the $85,000 to the Capital Asset Reserve in light of potential funding needs of the President's Counsel on Public/Private Partnerships and the Future of City Hall, Weyandt Hall, Former Dover Library and Other City Properties. He stated that these two (2) items had not been incorporated into the Budget Ordinance to allow for discussion. Mr. Koenig stated that if the recommendation were acted on favorably or modified, those modifications would be placed in the final version of Ordinance #2015-05.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 34 In regard to the payback of the Contingency Reserve Fund, Mr. Anderson asked if this would normally be accomplished over a couple of years and if it were proposed all at once because the money was available. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that staff recommended replenishing the Contingency Reserve Fund because the money was available and the Fund was depleted by $250,000 in FY14 and by an additional $50,000 in FY15, for a total of $300,000. He explained that the $385,000 being discussed was actually FY14 money. Mr. Anderson inquired as to the reason for staff’s recommendation regarding the President's Counsel on Public/Private Partnerships and the Future of City Hall, Weyandt Hall, Former Dover Library and Other City Properties. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that there was discussion at the President’s Counsel meeting held on February 4, 2015 regarding potentially hiring appraisers to appraise City buildings. He noted that at some point the assistance of architects would likely be needed to plan the space and evaluate which proposed alternative is the best to pursue. Mr. Koenig indicated that it was felt it would be best to place this money in a reserve until there is a clearer idea of the expenses. At that point, a request would come before Council to apply reserve funds to architectural or other related services. He noted that Council could also decide to apply these funds to a different project. Referring to total savings in personnel expenses in FY14 of $643,000, Mr. Slavin applauded those efforts and questioned how this occurred. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that the savings was related to the timing of employees leaving and the hiring of new employees. He indicated that the personnel budget is approximately $30M in all funds and estimated that approximately $18M - $20M of this amount was in the General Fund. Mr. Slavin stated that some might say that the City overbudgets by more than $0.5M in personnel, which drives the tax rate. He indicated that he was not one (1) of these individuals but suggested that Mr. Koenig “prepare his defense” for this. Mr. Koenig stated that preparing the budget is not an exact science and agreed with Mr. Slavin that he would much rather be “in the black” in this area. Mr. Koenig explained that this figure includes salary and benefit savings, and in some cases staff may have budgeted for a retirement payout that did not happen. In response to Mr. Slavin regarding the policy level for the Contingency Reserve Fund, Mr. Koenig stated his belief that the whole fund was funded at $300,000; however, he did not have this number with him. At Mr. Slavin’s request, he agreed to check on this figure. Mr. Slavin requested clarification regarding the President's Counsel on Public/Private Partnerships and the Future of City Hall, Weyandt Hall, Former Dover Library and Other City Properties, since this committee had been called by this title and was also being referred to as a building committee. He questioned whether or not the committee was meeting in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act. Responding, Mrs. Traci McDowell, City Clerk, stated that this committee has Council and civilian members and adheres to all the requirements for public meeting

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 35 notices and minutes. (City Clerk’s Office Note: City Council established an ad hoc Committee to study the future of City Hall, Weyandt Hall, and the Former Dover Public Library during their Regular meeting of November 12, 2013, as recommended by the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee. During the Regular Council meeting of August 25, 2014 the Committee members were appointed and, at the request of Council President Bonar, the Committee was called the President's Counsel on Public/Private Partnerships and the Future of City Hall, Weyandt Hall, Former Dover Library and Other City Properties.) Mr. Anderson moved to amend Ordinance #2015-05 to include the transfer of $300,000 from surplus funds into the Contingency Reserve Fund. The motion was seconded by Mr. Sudler. Mr. Hare asked if the $300,000 that could have been used to help offset a tax increase in FY16. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that Council had the discretion on how they would like to use this $300,000, which amounted to just under $0.01 on the tax rate. Mr. Hare noted that these funds could have been used to hire additional police officers. Mr. Koenig stated that if there were no need to replenish the contingency fund with $300,000, these funds could have been used for any General Fund expense related to City of Dover operations, as requested by Council. Mr. Sudler inquired if the City had insurance to cover the $300,000 related to the grievances or if these funds had to come out of the City’s “pocket.” Mr. Koenig explained that the City has an insurance company; however, ultimately the feeling was that it was in the City’s best interest to settle the grievances immediately rather than allow its insurance company to defend any potential lawsuit that might come out of the disagreement. He stated that if the City had not acted and a suit had been filed against the City, the insurance company would have defended the City through that suit and the City would have had to pay its deductibles. Because the suit was settled, the insurance company’s answer was that they would have allowed the matter to go to a lawsuit and defended it that way. The Committee recommended amending Ordinance #2015-05 to include the transfer of $300,000 from surplus funds into the Contingency Reserve Fund. In regard to the remaining amount, Mr. Anderson expressed his belief that there was merit to putting studies in the works. He reminded members of previous discussion indicating that the City should remember the Parks and Recreation budget, which had been “squeezed”, when the City did have money that was over budget. He indicated that several items that had come up in regard to the Recreation Needs Assessment, including budget items related to design that would be beneficial over the next year. Mr. Anderson proposed that part of the funds go to the Parks and Recreation budget and part to the President's Counsel on Public/Private Partnerships and the Future of City Hall, Weyandt Hall, Former Dover Library and Other City Properties.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 36 Mr. Anderson moved to recommend amending Ordinance #2015-05 to allocate $60,000 of the remaining $85,000 to Capital Asset Reserve for the President's Counsel on Public/Private Partnerships and the Future of City Hall, Weyandt Hall, Former Dover Library and Other City Properties and $25,000 to the Parkland Reserve Fund, to be taken out of the Parkland Reserve Fund at a later date if approved by Council. The motion was seconded by Mr. Sudler. Mr. Sudler questioned how close the City was to the Dover Park plan of action and budget. Responding, Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, stated her hope that, within the next month, staff would have a solid draft of the Recreation Needs Assessment document; however, highlights were provided to the Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee during their meeting of January 12, 2015. She noted that staff was getting ready to prepare a Request for Proposals (RFP) for landscape architecture services for a plan for Dover Park based on the results of the Needs Assessment. Mr. Shevock noted that staff’s recommendation was to put funds to the Contingency Reserve Fund and then transfer $85,000 to the Capital Asset Reserve Fund. He questioned the reason for putting the $85,000 in the Capital Reserve Asset Fund. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that Mrs. Mitchell and he agreed that after funding the Contingency Reserve, the initial recommendation from staff would be for capital needs versus operating budget needs. Staff had been trying very hard to have departments manage their operating budgets to levels authorized by Council, with minor departmental changes, because it was believed that extra money should go to capital needs. Mr. Shevock questioned where money would be drawn from for capital assets if the funds proposed were moved to these areas and an emergency arose. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated, for example, if there were a catastrophic failure of a building, the capital asset reserve would be used. If it were utility-related, it would come from the utility asset reserve. If there were a high operating expense that came “out of the blue”, staff would typically try to contain it in the operating budget, and if this were not possible, staff would ask Council for a transfer from the reserve into the operating budget. Mr. Koenig explained that the safeguard was to keep these funds out of general operating expenses and put them into the capital asset or other reserve so that staff would have to come to Council for specific authorization on how to use those funds. Assuming these funds were transferred and a catastrophic event occurred, Mr. Shevock questioned if the money could be pulled back or if they would become “free money” that would be spent once allocated. In response, Mr. Koenig explained that authorization would have to be obtained for funds to come back out of these accounts. He reassured members that if there were an emergency, staff would come before Council to request special authorization, even if it required a special meeting.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 37 Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Koenig confirmed that the proposal was to put money into the reserve accounts where it would not be spent without Council authorization; therefore, funds would be reserved and not spent through Mr. Anderson’s proposed amendment. The Committee recommended amending Ordinance #2015-05 to allocate $60,000 of the remaining $85,000 to the Capital Asset Reserve for the President's Counsel on Public/Private Partnerships and the Future of City Hall, Weyandt Hall, Former Dover Library and Other City Properties and $25,000 to the Parkland Reserve Fund, to be taken out of the Parkland Reserve Fund at a later date if approved by Council. The Committee recommended adoption of Ordinance #2015-05, as amended. Mr. Slavin moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendations to amend Ordinance #2015-05 to include the transfer of $300,000 from surplus funds into the Contingency Reserve Fund and to allocate $60,000 of the remaining $85,000 to the Capital Asset Reserve for the President's Counsel on Public/Private Partnerships and the Future of City Hall, Weyandt Hall, Former Dover Library and Other City Properties and $25,000 to the Parkland Reserve Fund, to be taken out of the Parkland Reserve Fund at a later date if approved by Council. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Williams and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. (The First Reading of the Ordinance will take place during the latter part of the meeting.) Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2014 Chairman Slavin advised members that Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, would be presenting this item in the absence of Mrs. Donna Mitchell, Controller/Treasurer. Referring to the presentation entitled City of Dover Comprehensive Annual Financial Report - Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2014, Page 14 - General Fund Budget Highlights - Fiscal Year 2014, Mr. Koenig read the following information into the record: The Final General Fund Budget incorporated the following changes to the Original Budget: • The Budget Balance carried forward from the prior fiscal year was higher by $0.8 million than was projected. Receipts had a net increase of approximately $0.8 million. The most significant increases were related to intrafund service receipts related to the accounting change for pensions, transfer taxes, court of chancery fees, and building permits. The most significant reductions were police extra duty fees and civil traffic penalties. •Expenditures were revised to reflect an aggregate increase of $1.1 million. Increased employer contributions to the Police and Employee Pension funds accounted for most of the increased budget expense with a slight increased in the transfer to the capital project fund. The increases were offset by decreases in street lights, insurance, police

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 38 pension grants and fire services. The net result of these changes was a $0.5 million increase in the revised budget balance over the Original Budget Balance (on a non-GAAP basis). General Fund actual revenues and other financing sources matched the final total revenues with a $23,000 positive variance. Mr. Koenig advised members that, in his opinion, the numbers were tracking very tightly. He indicated that financial controls are very tight on the City and the numbers in the CAFR reflect that. He requested that Mrs. Mitchell be given the opportunity at the Council level to do an appropriate presentation of the CAFR during the City Council meeting scheduled for February 23, 2015, because this is something that she and her staff had worked very diligently on over the last few months. Mr. Koenig requested that everyone read three (3) specific pages in the CAFR presentation before that time: Page 12 - Changes in Net Assets - Governmental Activities; Page 13 - Changes in Net Assets - Business Type Activities; and Page 14 - General Fund Budget Highlights - Fiscal Year 2014, since he felt this information summed up where the CAFR stands. In regard to the electric utility, Mr. Anderson stated that there were additional expenses in that account which came out of the Electric Stabilization Fund and asked Mr. Koenig to elaborate on the effect and how much was left in that fund. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that he did not know the exact amount that was left in the fund; however, he noted that during the FY15 budget hearings, a gap of approximately $2.2M was anticipated in the General Fund. Staff recommended that this gap be filled through a tax increase. Through budget deliberation, Council altered that number slightly downward, and ultimately the gap was filled by a revised transfer from the Electric Fund to the General Fund. The proposed transfer was $8M; the revised transfer was $10M, and Mrs. Mitchell used that $10M as a baseline transfer in the five (5) year financial forecast, which accelerated the depletion of the Rate Stabilization Fund. Mr. Koenig indicated that staff was currently re-running those numbers as part of fiscal forecasting for the electric utility. The concern was that the $10M transfer will deplete the Rate Stabilization Fund rather quickly, and a rate increase may be discussed sooner than would have occurred had the transfer remained at $8M. He indicated that the net effect of that increased transfer is that it will likely cause the City to have to increase electric rates sooner than would have been necessary if the transfer had stayed at $8M, noting that there were a number of variables involved. Review of Training, Conference, and Travel Policy Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, reviewed the draft revised City of Dover Training, Conference, and Travel Policy. He advised members that this policy is reviewed by Mrs. Donna Mitchell, Controller/Treasurer on a regular basis. He noted that revisions to the policy were included in red font and were relatively minor changes.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 39 Staff recommended approval of the revised City of Dover Training, Conference, and Travel Policy. The Committee recommended approval of staff’s recommendation. By consent agenda, Mr. Hare moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation for approval of the revised City of Dover Training, Conference, and Travel Policy (Exhibit #1 ), seconded by Mr. Dixon and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. Review of Effectiveness of the Safe Communities Ordinance (Request of Councilman Anderson) Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, advised members that the City’s Safe Communities Ordinance: 1) requires the City to provide landlord training whereby landlords would learn a number of things, such as better screening of tenants, the proper eviction process, fair housing, and drug identification, as taught by the Police Department. The idea is that when landlords go to the class, they would obtain a better sense of how to manage properties in a way that is a benefit and not a detriment to the community. Mrs. Townshend stated that the ordinance also requires that landlords and tenants enter into a lease addendum that must be presented to the City when utility services are established. In this addendum, tenants would acknowledge that if they, members of their family, guests, or others associated with them commit certain criminal acts within 500 feet of the property, they could go down the path for eviction. The ordinance states that if the problem continues, the City can force the landlord to initiate the eviction process. Mrs. Townshend stated that the ordinance had been in effect for approximately 1½ years and four (4) training sessions had been held. Each had been well attended and feedback had been positive. The City had not had to force any evictions. There had been a number of cases relating to problem properties where information had been received from the Police Department. She indicated that there had been a couple of times when letters had been sent notifying landlords they were reaching a point where they would have to evict. She explained that some landlords do not know that their tenant is a problem; therefore, that communication is helpful. Mrs. Townshend explained that she had discussed with Police Chief the need to ensure that officers file a report when responding to calls at properties that have had repeated problems, since this would provide something to go on if an eviction must be forced. She indicated a few areas could be “fine tuned”, noting a few cases where the lease addenda did not get to where they needed to be, so staff was improving the method of tracking. Mrs. Townshend indicated that some landlords had requested staff to send them a letter so that they now could tell their tenant that they were causing the landlord trouble with the City, reiterating the importance of having data from the Police Department. As time moves on and some of the “kinks” are worked out, she felt the City would continue to see benefit. Responding to Mr. Anderson in regard to whether there was a need to revise the ordinance, Mrs. Townshend expressed the need to give the ordinance a chance to work. She indicated the desire not to be so prohibitive that people would be evicted

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 40 from their property for things that were not serious but also make sure that it gives “the hammer” to deal with problem cases. She noted that the ordinance may need to be re-examined in the future. Mr. Anderson questioned the outcome regarding a notable case in The Hamlet. Responding, Mrs. Townshend stated that the last tenant at this property left on their own accord. At this point, there had been so much interaction with this particular landlord, that she felt he was being more vigilant in dealing with his properties because the complaint volume had decreased. In response to Mr. Sudler regarding the relationship of the Safe Communities Ordinance and the State of Delaware landlord tenant code, Mrs. Townshend stated that the Safe Communities Ordinance does not affect the State Code because it does not supersede or attempt to supersede the eviction process. The Safe Communities Ordinance indicates that if certain infractions happen, the landlord has to initiate the process. If the landlord does not initiate the process, the rental permit would be suspended. The property would then be shut down and utilities terminated. Mrs. Townshend explained that unless there is a serious life safety issue, tenants are given 30 days to vacate. At one point, staff was concerned that landlords would try to use that in their favor to get around the process; however, if it comes to the point of suspending the rental permit, every Code violation in the property would need to be fixed and there is a $100 reinstatement fee. Mrs. Townshend felt that the few landlords who tried to “use” the City in that regard had figured out that it is not to their benefit. Automatic Escalator for Building-Related Permit Fees (Request of Councilman Anderson) During the meeting of August 11, 2014, members of the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee considered this matter and recommended that an automatic escalator for building-related permit fees be referred to staff with their full ability to revise in its entirety to develop recommendations based upon its intent. The Committee’s recommendation was approved by City Council during their meeting of August 25, 2014. Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, advised members that building permit fees are based on the building construction valuation, and the City uses construction valuation tables that are issued through the International Code Council (ICC). The ICC updates these tables every six (6) months. Staff had been using the tables that were in place at the time of the ICC Code adoption, but had now determined that the August version for each year should be used. Mrs. Townshend stated that by virtue of using current construction values, there is an automatic escalator in building permit fees only, since there is a cost per square foot for these permits, depending on the type of construction. This negates the need to increase the building permit fee over time because, by virtue of the construction value going up, the fees should increase on their own.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 41 Mr. Anderson explained that by making an administrative change in the valuation, the City would be updating by using current valuation instead of the valuation being “stuck” in a particular year. Mrs. Townshend stated this is a more realistic approach and would allow consistency. If the construction value that an applicant puts on a building permit is assumed to be correct, the person who is more honest would pay a higher fee. This automatic escalator would add consistency and allow the City to adjust to changes in the construction cost. The HVAC, plumbing, and other building-related permits would not change because they are based on either BTU’s, number of fixtures, or similar things. Mr. Anderson indicated that he was satisfied with this approach. He was unsure if other changes were needed, but if so, they could go into the next resolution and the Committee could discuss this. Mr. Koenig stated that he had incorrectly told Mr. Slavin that the City was applying the escalator previously on an annualized basis. This had been discussed, but when checking the record, it was determined that the City adopted the 2009 building codes and put this schedule into place. Going forward, the building valuation published each year would be administratively put into place the August of each year building valuations that are published through the ICC valuations. Proposed Resolution No. 2015-01 - Dover Prospers Initiative (Economic Greening) (Request of Councilman Anderson) Mr. Anderson explained the purpose of Proposed Resolution No. 2015-01, noting that there is a lot of competition in the current environment for businesses, and a lot of opportunity that goes to places that are the most flexible, prepared, and have an efficient, streamlined approach. He felt that the City had done a tremendous amount to move in this direction and that staff is business friendly; however, out-of-state and micro business people can tend to get lost. Mr. Anderson advised members that a “one-stop shop” approach, where all needed information could be obtained in one (1) place, had worked successfully in other areas around the country but would take some work. He indicated that he had worked with staff and it was his belief that the City could get “80% of the way there,” and thanked Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development; Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager; and Mr. Bill Neaton, Economic Development Manager, for their help. Mr. Anderson felt that the proposed resolution would allow access to all the information needed to open a business in the City of Dover in one (1) place, including a packet on the City’s website with contact information for people who will help. Mr. Anderson indicated this would show the City to be business friendly, which would: 1) help generate small and micro-business, and 2) help attract an occasional “home run” business when it is seen how efficient the City is. He noted this proposal would have no cost to the City, many aspects were already being developed, and staff was well on the way to implementing it.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 42 Mrs. Townshend indicated that staff had been working with the business community for a number of years in trying to address certain regulatory changes; however, it had been approximately five (5) or six (6) years since a series of forums, workshops, or focus groups had been held to meet with a broader cross-section of the regulated community to determine what the problems are. Referring to Section 2 of the proposed resolution, Mrs. Townshend explained that the Planning Department, City Manager’s Office, and Economic Development Office would work together to hold a series of focus groups with the business community, development community, and real estate community. Out of this, a “road map” would be developed for the next year whereby the City would look at re-evaluating regulations. For example, Mrs. Townshend explained that the City’s sign regulations had been a top priority and were rewritten, as were the commercial zone regulations. Once the industrial zones are reviewed, she indicated that staff would be finished with those pieces that had been identified, noting that other issues were emerging as the market changes. She felt that a fresh list could be developed of current issues and how they can be better addressed. Mr. Anderson expressed his desire to have a “sunset review” of regulations, based on the citizens’ input, to make sure that the City stays current. He felt that the provisions in the resolution regarding focus groups may provide a larger cross-section, as well as flexibility, since people involved would not have to commit to a particular time period. Mrs. Townshend stated that she suggested this approach because, depending on which set of regulations was being tackled, the people at the table may change. She stated that one (1) of the issues being discussed currently is parking requirements for restaurants, which were not working well. This would be a conversation with the real estate, development, and restaurant communities to make sure that it reflects what they are seeing. Mrs. Townshend advised members that working on different regulatory issues may involve a different “cast of characters” and the proposed approach would allow the City to be flexible to the needs of the community. Mr. Anderson noted that Mrs. Townshend had agreed a co-sponsor the resolution. The Committee recommended adoption of Proposed Resolution No. 2015-01. By consent agenda, by motion of Mr. Hare, seconded by Mr. Dixon and carried by a unanimous roll call vote, Council adopted Resolution No. 2015-01, as follows: A RESOLUTION PROPOSING THE DOVER PROSPERS INITIATIVE WHEREAS, the City of Dover has a tradition of being friendly to business, having a diverse economy; and WHEREAS, we are in a globally competitive environment, which necessitates that we adopt cutting-edge, best practices; and

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 43 WHEREAS, the Dover has a myriad of incentives which vary throughout the city; and WHEREAS, small businesses are often intimidated by a maze of government requirements; and WHEREAS, several small businesses have made costly errors because of the lack of information; and WHERAS, large employers are attracted by an efficient, cooperative government; and WHEREAS, the economic development office has positive, cooperative relationships with the other city departments and already has the framework necessary to implement this initiative; and WHEREAS, each city department has an ethic of customer service and excellence; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT: Section 1. Dover City Council directs the Economic Development Office, the City Manager, and the Director of Planning and Community Development to develop and make available at customer service locations, offices, and via the City of Dover website, a business packet designed to assist start-up businesses with obtaining services and regulatory requirements involved in doing business in Dover. The packet shall include a contact list for all City departments, a list of frequently asked questions, incentive information, and other services to assist prospective business owners. Section 2. Dover City Council directs the City Manager’s Office, Economic Development Office, and Planning and Inspections Department to schedule a series of business focus groups to prioritize improvements needed in Dover’s regulatory process and to work with stakeholders to streamline the regulatory process and update regulations where appropriate to eliminate unnecessary barriers to economic development. The City Manager, Economic Development Manager, and the Director of Planning and Community Development shall provide a quarterly report to the Legislative, Finance and Administration Committee regarding the progress of this effort. ADOPTED: FEBRUARY 23, 2015 Freedom to Worship Act (Request of Councilman Anderson) Mr. Anderson stated that originally in the City zoning, places of worship and places of meeting were allowed in almost every non-manufacturing zone. However, zoning had become more complicated over time with more commercial zones and a myriad of residential zones, and there were inconsistencies in the code in regard to places of meeting and places of worship. Mr. Anderson stated that he had heard a number of associated complaints, noting that one (1) related to the property at 870 Forest Street, formerly occupied by the Bennie Smith Funeral Home, which contains a chapel and was rented to a counselor. Meetings were held there when the counselor was the primary use and the church was the secondary use as it met all of the requirements; however, after meetings had been held there for two (2) years, they suddenly did not have the same success, which caused him concern. Mr. Anderson indicated that this particular sub-zone had left something out as fundamental as places of meeting and

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 44 places of worship, which are just as valid as any other activity in the CA-1 Corridor Zone. He stated that he wanted to investigate ways to keep the tradition the City used to have of making sure that places of meeting are allowed wherever they are appropriate for public safety and meet the normal requirements. The Committee recommended that the issue of making sure that places of meeting and places of worship are allowed wherever they are appropriate for public safety and meet the normal requirements be referred to staff. By consent agenda, Mr. Hare moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Dixon and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. Updates Certified Local Government Application Members were advised that in 1980, an amendment to the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 established the Certified Local Government (CLG) program to involve local governments in national preservation efforts. Most states, including Delaware, created programs extending CLG status to local communities with a local historic preservation district and a historic preservation commission. The CLG program provides technical assistance to support historic preservation efforts and eligibility for federal Historic Preservation Funds. In addition, localities participating in the CLG program participate in the National Register nomination process for historic properties and are strongly considered for training and technical assistance from the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). The City of Dover, Delaware 2008 Comprehensive Plan included a recommendation within the Implementation Chapter (Chapter 15, page 179) to “Obtain Certified Local Government (CLG) through the National Park Service.” In November 2013, City Council instructed the Planning Office to compile the CLG application. After a vacancy was filled on the HDC in Summer 2014, staff was able to compile the information needed to complete the application. Providing the qualifications of Commission members is one (1) of the application requirements. The draft application is attached for review by the Committee and will be presented to the HDC for their review on January 15, 2015. If recommended by City Council, staff will submit the application to the SHPO, along with a letter from the Mayor. This letter will be drafted once the Historic District Commission has taken action on the application. Following the review of the CLG application, the City will enter into a certification agreement prepared by SHPO which outlines the local government responsibilities under the certification. Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, explained that it had taken staff some time to put together the CLG application, which would open the City to being eligible for certain grants for historic preservation activities, noting that there were vacancies on the HDC which was now fully operational.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 45 Staff recommended that the application be approved and forwarded to the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), to be accompanied by a letter from the Mayor. The Committee recommended approval of staff’s recommendation. By consent agenda, Mr. Hare moved that the application be approved and forwarded to the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), to be accompanied by a letter from the Mayor. The motion was seconded by Mr. Dixon and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. “Safe Whistles” National Recreation and Park Association Recommended Guidelines for Credentialing Volunteers (Background Screening for Youth Coaches and Sports Officials for All City Recreation Offerings) During the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee meeting held on September 9, 2013, members discussed the issue of background checks for Parks and Recreation volunteers working with youth and members recommended that staff, specifically Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, and Mrs. Kim Hawkins, Human Resources Director, be directed to review the National Recreation and Park Association Recommended Guidelines to conduct an analysis and formulate a recommendation regarding the scope and depth of the background checks that should be required, the cost and how it would be addressed, the period of time the background check would remain valid, and some type of roll-out implementation strategy to be brought back to the Committee within one (1) month for their review and recommendation to City Council. City Council approved the Committee’s recommendation during their meeting held on September 23, 2013. During the Legislative Finance, and Administration Committee meeting held on November 12, 2013, the Committee recommended that background checks be performed for all Parks and Recreation volunteers and contractors, including officials, who will be working directly with youth, every three (3) years, and that staff implement a staggered approach that would require compliance by officials by a certain date in 2014. City Council approved the Committee’s recommendation during their meeting held on November 25, 2013. During the Legislative Finance, and Administration Committee meeting held on February 9, 2014, Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, advised members that staff had developed a procedure and volunteer application form and that all volunteers involved in youth programming, primarily sports coaches, are run through a background check process, after obtaining their permission. Those who do not come through with a clean record are disqualified. Mrs. Townshend explained that the guidelines were reviewed with the Human Resources Department (HR) to make sure that the process is not inconsistent with City hiring processes and the new process is not significantly different from HR’s process. She noted that some people had been turned away.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 46 Referring to the Criminal Background Check Automatic Disqualifiers for Youth Sports Volunteers, Mr. Slavin suggested some rewording related to “Felonies - All Felony offenses other than violence or sex within the past 10 (ten) years,” stating that he could discuss this with Mrs. Townshend after the meeting. Responding to Mr. Hare, Mrs. Townshend stated that the process in place was working. In response to Mr. Shevock regarding how the application form was being protected since it contained sensitive information, Mrs. Townshend stated that forms were being kept in a locked cabinet at the Parks and Recreation Office, in the same way any personnel files are kept. Audits had been conducted in the past on identity theft and those types of things. Mayor Christiansen questioned why applications were reviewed every three (3) years, noting that he would feel more comfortable if they were reviewed yearly. Mrs. Townshend stated that background screening is performed on City employees only when they join the workforce; however, she stated volunteers could be brought through the process every year, noting that Little League and Pop Warner Leagues do this. Mayor Christiansen felt this would be in the best interest of the City, and Mrs. Townshend agreed. Responding to Mr. Hare, Mrs. Townshend stated that there is an expense to conducting the background check, which the City pays since they have difficulty getting coaches and asking them to pay the $35 to do this would cause more difficulty. In response to Mr. Hare, Mrs. Townshend estimated that approximately 50 background checks are done each year, and Mr. Hare noted a cost of close to $2,000 per year. Mayor Christiansen stated that if there were a three (3) year lapse and an incident occurred with a child, the City would be in the line of fire and incur a liability. Mrs. Townshend stated that no one in the City wanted to be in a position where a decision that was made adversely affected the life of a child. Mayor Christiansen respected Mr. Hare’s concern regarding the cost but felt that review every year would be appropriate. Mr. Slavin moved for acceptance of the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee Report, seconded by Mr. Hare and unanimously carried. SELECTION OF POLLING PLACES FOR 2015 REGULAR MUNICIPAL ELECTION The City of Dover Election Board met on February 19, 2015 and recommended that the Elks Lodge at 200 Saulsbury Road be utilized as the polling place for the 2015 Regular Municipal Election being held on Tuesday, April 21, 2015. Mr. Anderson asked if the Elks Lodge would be the only polling place for the entire City. Council President Bonar stated that it would be and he reminded members that the usual polling place for the Third District, the Recreation Center at Dover Park, had been demolished. Mr. Anderson stated that he would not be in favor of only one (1) polling place.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 47 Responding to Mr. Slavin, Mrs. Traci McDowell, City Clerk, stated that the cost of multiple polling places would increase due to the need to man each location. Responding to Mrs. Williams, Mrs. McDowell stated that the average cost of an election with three (3) polling places is $10,000. Mr. Hare stated that the Elks Lodge is the usual polling place for the First and Fourth Districts so it would only be adding the Second and Third Districts to this polling place. Mr. Anderson questioned whether an attempt had been made to locate polling places in the east or south of the City, noting that there are schools and churches in those areas. Mrs. McDowell noted that the typical Second District polling place, the 7th Day Adventist Church on New Burton Road, was not available. She advised members that the Election Board considered using the former Dover Public Library on South State Street as the polling place for the Second and Third Districts, noting that it is located in the Second District and borders the Third District and could be used at no cost. Mrs. McDowell also advised members that the Election Board considered using St. Andrews Church on Route 13 as the polling place for the Second and Third Districts, at a cost of approximately $650. Mrs. Williams moved to set the Elks Lodge at 200 Saulsbury Road as the polling place for the 2015 Regular Municipal Election being held on Tuesday, April 21, 2015. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hutchison. Mr. Anderson moved to amend the motion to, in addition to approving the Elks Lodge, include looking for a second polling place for the other half of the City, feeling that it is egregious for the entire City to be at one (1) polling place, given the transportation issues that some people have. The motion was seconded by Mr. Slavin. Mr. Perza questioned, if the amendment were approved, if they would approve the Elks Lodge now or wait to determine what the results of the search would be. Mr. Anderson clarified that the amendment was specifically to approve the Elks Lodge and look for an additional location. Mr. Perza asked when that would have to be completed by. Mr. Anderson thought, given the required 20-day election notice, the new location would have to be proposed by the next meeting. Mr. Hare noted that it would be difficult to find a polling place that is really centrally located in the districts. Council President Bonar asked Mr. Anderson if St. Andrews would be acceptable, since it is available. Mr. Anderson stated that it would. Mrs. Williams stated that the church would be difficult to get to for people who have to get a ride or walk. Mr. Slavin withdrew his second to the amendment. Mr. Perza asked if they had the option to send this back to the Election Board to evaluate and develop a single proposal that is the same for everybody across the board rather than approving a poll site now and a second site in two (2) weeks, which would create confusion. He felt that it would be

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 48 better to approve everything once, maybe in two (2) weeks when members have a better idea of what they are doing. Mr. Perza stated that he realized the polling place has to be set ahead of time, but it is only February. Mrs. McDowell stated that the sooner the polling places are set the better, so that candidates can make the residents aware of the polling places as they are out campaigning. She suggested that, if it is sent back to the Election Board, they will need direction on how many polling places to look for and where. Mrs. McDowell explained that it was the feeling of the Election Board members that because it is a city-wide election for the Mayor, the Second District will only be voting for the Mayor, the Third District will be voting to fill two (2) seats, and both the Second and Third District voters would have to vote at totally new polling places, it would be better to use the Elks Lodge because all voters are familiar with it and it was the only polling place for the Special Mayoral election in June. Mr. Hare stated that, for years, the Elks Lodge was the place that all districts voted. All districts voted for the Mayor at the Elks Lodge in June. It is probably as centrally located as any one (1) location can be in the City and access is easy. There is no place that will be convenient for the Second District. The Elks Lodge is probably as convenient as anyplace else, other than the 7th Day Adventist Church, which is only convenient to the south side of the Second District. The rest of the Second District is off of White Oak Road or behind Dover Air Force Base. Mr. Hare thought the Elks Lodge was a good compromise option. Mr. Anderson moved to refer this item back to the Election Board with the instructions that they find a second location. The motion was seconded by Mr. Perza and failed by a roll call vote of six (6) no (Dixon, Slavin, Williams, Hare, Hutchison, and Bonar) and two (2) yes (Anderson and Perza). The motion to set the Elks Lodge at 200 Saulsbury Road as the polling place for the 2015 Regular Municipal Election being held on Tuesday, April 21, 2015 was carried by a roll call vote of six (6) yes (Dixon, Slavin, Williams, Hare, Hutchison, and Bonar) and two (2) no (Anderson and Perza). FIRST READING - PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2015-05 - FISCAL YEAR 2015 SECOND BUDGET AMENDMENT Council President Bonar reminded the public that copies of the proposed ordinance were available at the entrance of the Council Chambers or could be obtained from the City Clerk’s Office. The Final Reading of the ordinance and action by Council will take place on March 9, 2015. In accordance with Section 1-9 of the Dover Code, Council acknowledged the First Reading of the Ordinance Amendment as read by the City Clerk, by title only, as follows: FISCAL YEAR 2015 SECOND BUDGET AMENDMENT, AS AMENDED BY LF&A #1

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 49 FINAL READING - PROPOSED ORDINANCES The First Reading of the Proposed Ordinances was accomplished during the Council Meeting of February 9, 2015. Mr. Hutchison moved that the Final Readings of the Proposed Ordinances be acknowledged by title only, seconded by Mr. Slavin and unanimously carried. Proposed Ordinance #2015-03 Amending Chapter 102 - Taxation, Article III - Realty Transfer Tax, Section 102-71 - Definitions; Article IV - Abatement of Real Estate Taxes, Section 102-113 - Qualifications; and Article V - Tax Credits for Historic Properties, Section 102-152 - Application Requirements and Section 102-153 - Application Review and Approval, with Historic District Commission Amendment #1 (HDC#1) Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, advised members that the proposed amendments would change the boundary for the home ownership and transfer tax incentives to align with the Downtown Development District boundary. Additionally, it would change the process for the review of Historic Preservation tax credits at the City level to be administrative. Mrs. Townshend noted that there was an amendment offered by the Historic District Commission that would clarify that if Historic District Commission approval is required for an Architectural Review Certificate, it does not negate the applicant from seeking approval from the Historic District Commission, it simply refers back to the zoning ordinance as it relates to the Architectural Review Certificate. Responding to Mrs. Williams, Mrs. Townshend stated that, currently, any application for tax credits for historic properties has to go to the Historic District Commission. For instance, one (1) of the eligible activities would be painting an old Victorian house. That activity does not need to go to the Commission; however, by virtue of the ordinance, in order to get the tax credit, it would have to. The amendment would make the tax credit approval administrative, but the Historic District Commission would continue to review any necessary projects under the zoning ordinance. Mrs. Williams stated that the review would be conceptual rather than picking house paint, shingles, tiles, and roofing. Mrs. Townshend stated that the Planning Office could still refer any application for historic tax credit to the Historic District Commission for their expertise, which they do routinely for building permits. Mr. Hare moved for approval of Historic District Commission Amendment #1 (HDC#1). The motion was seconded by Mr. Hutchison and unanimously carried. By motion of Mr. Hare, seconded by Mr. Slavin, and carried by a unanimous roll call vote, Ordinance #2015-03, as amended by HDC#1, was adopted, as follows: BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: That Chapter 102 - Taxation, Article III - Realty Transfer Tax, Section 102-71 - Definitions, (a)(3) - First-time homebuyer of the Dover Code be amended to read as follows:

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 50 Sec. 102-71. - Definitions. (a) The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this article, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning: (3) First-time homebuyer means a natural person who has at no time held an interest in residential real estate, wherever located, and which has been occupied as their principal residence, and who intends to occupy the property being conveyed as his principal residence, within 90 days following recordation of the deed. The first-time homebuyer must file an affidavit certifying to his qualifications before the exemption can be granted. In order to alleviate claims for rebate of the transfer tax paid, no rebate shall be made once the deed for the transaction has been recorded. First-time homebuyers submitting a false affidavit in any respect, which would entitle them to the exemption, shall be subject to payment of the unpaid transfer tax, plus interest at the rate of one and one-half percent per month and, upon direction by the council, referral to the attorney general of the state for criminal prosecution. This subsection shall apply to all real estate settlements held on or after January 2, 2000. First-time homebuyers are exempt from the transfer tax as provided herein. The first-time homebuyer exemption shall apply to the seller of property that qualifies for the first-time buyer exemption but only for property located within the downtown redevelopment high priority target area defined in Appendix C. Council shall have the right to deny this exemption to any property owner where the sale and purchase appears to be done fraudulently to take advantage of the realty transfer tax exemption ordinance. BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED: That Chapter 102 - Taxation, Article IV - Abatement of Real Estate Taxes, Section 102-113 - Qualifications (d) of the Dover Code be amended to read as follows: Sec. 102-113. - Qualifications. (d) Any persons purchasing residential real property in which they will reside within the downtown redevelopment high priority target area defined in Appendix C shall be given tax relief from the payment of real estate taxes in the following manner: first year of ownership, total tax abatement; second year of ownership, 75 percent tax abatement; third year of ownership, 50 percent tax abatement; fourth year of ownership, 25 percent tax abatement; fifth year of ownership, no tax abatement. Provided however that the homeowner is required to occupy the home as their principal place of residence during the entire time that the taxes are abated and if the property ceases to be their principal place of residence at any time during the four-year period of abatement, then they shall lose their right of abatement and shall be required to pay immediately all taxes abated up to the time that the home ceases to be their principal residence. In order to obtain the tax abatement, the homeowner must make application by affidavit submitted to the city clerk showing qualification for the abatement and each year thereafter, submit a similar affidavit showing their continued right to the abatement. If qualification for the abatement ceases within the four-year period of abatement the homeowner is required to notify the city clerk of the lack of qualification for the abatement and within 90 days from the date the qualification ceases, pay all taxes abated in the past.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 51 First year of owner occupancy ..... 100 percent reduction of taxes Second year of owner occupancy ..... 75 percent reduction of taxes Third year of owner occupancy ..... 50 percent reduction of taxes Fourth year of owner occupancy ..... 25 percent reduction of taxes Fifth year of owner occupancy ..... 0 percent reduction of taxes BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED: That Chapter 102 - Taxation, Article V - Tax Credits for Historic Properties, Section 102-152 - Application Requirements and Section 102-153 - Application Review and Approval of the Dover Code be amended to read as follows: Sec. 102-152. - Application requirements. (a) Submissions to city planner. Property owners shall submit a historic tax credit application, and, when applicable, a building permit application and/or application for architectural review certificate as required by Appendix B - Zoning, Article 10 - Planning Commission, Section 3 - Historic District Commission and Architectural Review. (b) Plans. A tax credit request submittal shall include the type and number of plans and specifications required for a building permit and, in addition, elevation plans and specifications, showing the impact of the proposed work on the exterior architectural facade of the building. (c) Photographs. A tax credit application submittal shall include current color photographs of the property, showing the present condition of the property, and accurately representing the existing materials and texture. All photographs shall be labeled indicating the direction of view. (d) Other information. Other information may be required by the city planner to facilitate review of such tax credit submittal. (e) Cost estimate. An itemized cost estimate shall be submitted, which shall be the basis for the tax credit. Sec. 102-153. - Application review and approval. (a) Factors considered. The city planner shall first review the submitted applications, plans, photos, and related information to determine if the property is a qualifying historic property. In making this determination, the city planner shall consider the following: (1) The property's significant value as part of the historical, cultural, artistic, social, ethnic or other heritage of the nation, state or city; (2) The property's association with an important person or event in national, state, or local history;

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 52 (3) Whether the property is representative of the distinguishing characteristics of an architectural type inherently valuable for the study of a period, style, craftsmanship, method of construction or use of an indigenous material; (4) Whether the property is the notable work of a master builder, designer, architect, or artist whose individual genius has influenced an era. (b) Review. If the city planner determines that the property is a qualifying property, they shall review the submitted application plans, specifications, and related information for compliance with the following: (1) The proposed application constitutes an exterior preservation project seen readily from a street, sidewalk, or public way, where measures are applied to sustain the existing form, integrity, and material of the building or structure, including stabilization work, where necessary, as part of ordinary maintenance and repair; (2) The proposed application constitutes an exterior rehabilitation project readily seen from a street, sidewalk or public way, which would return the property to a state of utility through repair or alteration which makes possible an efficient use of the building, while preserving those portions or features of the property which are central to its historic, architectural, and cultural significance; (3) The proposed application constitutes an exterior restoration project readily seen from a street, sidewalk, or public way, which accurately recovers the form and detail of a property and its setting as it appeared at a particular period of time in the past by means of removal of later work or by the replacement of missing earlier work; or (4) The proposed application conforms with the recommended practices and treatments of the design standards and guidelines for the city historic district. Practices and treatments designated as not recommended or inappropriate in the guidelines, or determined by the historic district commission to be inappropriate shall not qualify for this tax credit. (c) Referral to historic district commission. The city planner may refer any application for tax credits under this article to the historic district commission for consultation with the commission. The applicant shall have the right to appeal a tax credit disapproval to city council. (d) Expense report. Upon the completion of the qualified work for which a tax credit has been approved, the property owner or his contractor shall submit to the city planner a written expense report, which verifies the costs associated with the project and shall request an inspection of the completed work by the city planner. (e) Tax credits. The tax assessor shall apply approved tax credits during the fiscal year subsequent to the submittal to the city planner by the applicant of the contractor's final invoice to verify the cost of the repairs to the building and following certification from the city planner that the work has been completed in accordance with the approval of the tax credit application, building permit, and/or architectural review certificate. Secs. 102-154—102-180. - Reserved. ADOPTED: FEBRUARY 23, 2015

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 53 Proposed Ordinance #2015-04 Amending Appendix C - Downtown Redevelopment Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, advised members that the proposed ordinance modifies the boundary of the Downtown Redevelopment Target Area to ensure that the Downtown Development District falls within the larger target area, and it creates a High Priority Target Area that comprises the Downtown Development District boundary. She noted that the amendment removes the 10% donation of the value of redevelopment incentives to the Downtown Dover Partnership, expands the impact fee waiver to remove the applicability to only multi-story mixed use buildings, and it adds two (2) new incentives for the High Priority Target Area: rebate of the buyer's portion of transfer taxes when a Certificate of Occupancy is granted for property improvements, and waiver of City business license fees for new businesses in the area for a period of three (3) years. Mrs. Townshend noted that the proposed ordinance implements the incentives agreed to in the City's Downtown Development District application. Responding to Mrs. Williams, Mrs. Townshend stated that, when the State and City incentives are combined, the incentives to some properties would be valued between $100,000 and $200,000. A large, mixed-use project similar to The Bayard Plaza would qualify for $800,000 to $900,000 in incentives. By motion of Mr. Slavin, seconded by Mr. Dixon, and carried by a unanimous roll call vote, Ordinance #2015-04 was adopted, as follows: BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: That Appendix C - Downtown Redevelopment of the Dover Code be amended to read as follows: ARTICLE I. - INTENT The city council has deemed it to be in the best interests of the residents of the city and in furtherance of their health, safety and welfare to promote the redevelopment of downtown Dover. In order to promote the redevelopment, [the] council has determined that incentives in the forms of tax abatements, impact fee waivers and building permit caps should be offered. ARTICLE II. - DEFINITIONS The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this ordinance, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this article, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning: Section 1. - Beneficiary of the incentives. The beneficiary of the incentives shall include the person or artificial entity that receives the incentive and the owner of one-half or greater interest in an artificial entity that receives the incentive.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 54 Section 2. - Downtown Dover Partnership. The Downtown Dover Partnership shall be established for the purpose of fostering redevelopment within the target area. Section 3. - Eligible project. Eligible project shall mean a new construction or renovation which: (a) Is located within the target area; and (b) The fair market value of the materials to be used in and the labor to be performed on the project exceeds the sum of $15,000.00; and (c) Is for commercial, office, or a residential use; and (d) Conforms to the intent of this ordinance. In order for a residential use to be an eligible project, the object of the construction or renovation must be a dwelling unit as defined in article 12 of the City of Dover zoning ordinance [appendix B]. Construction or renovation of accessory buildings as defined in article 12 of the City of Dover zoning ordinance [appendix B] shall not be eligible for development incentives. Construction or renovation which constitutes ordinary replacement or routine maintenance shall not qualify as an eligible project. Section 4. - Target area. Target area shall mean that part of the city more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point at the intersection of the centerlines of Cecil and North State Streets, then continuing on the centerline of North State Street in a southerly direction to the intersection of the centerline of State Street and an extension of the centerline of Delaware Avenue, then continuing on the centerline and an extension of the centerline of Delaware Avenue in an easterly direction to the point of intersection of an extension of the centerline of Delaware Avenue and the St. Jones River, then following the centerline of the St. Jones River in a southerly direction to the point of intersection of the centerline of the St. Jones River and the southerly property line of lands now or formerly of the Catholic Diocese of Wilmington, being the site of Holy Cross Roman Catholic Church, then proceeding in a westerly direction along said property line to the easterly right-of-way line of South State Street (U.S. Route 13-A), then crossing the right-of-way line of South State Street in a westerly direction and joining the centerline of Hope Street and proceeding in a westerly direction to the centerlines of Hope Street and South Governors Avenue, then proceeding in a southerly direction along the centerline of South Governors Avenue to the point of intersection of the centerlines of South Governors Avenue and Dover Street, then proceeding in a westerly direction along the centerline of Dover Street to the point of intersection of the centerlines of Dover Street and Westview Terrace, then continuing in a northerly direction on the centerline of Westview Terrace to the point of intersection of the centerline of Westview Terrace and New Burton Road, then proceeding in a northeasterly direction on the centerline of New Burton Road to the point of intersection of New Burton Road and West Street, then continuing in a northerly direction along the westerly right-of-way line of West Street to the point of intersection of the westerly side of the right-of-way of West Street and

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 55 the northerly property line of lands now or formerly of Dover Rent-All, Inc., then continuing in a westerly direction along said property line to the point of intersection of said property line and the lands of Conrail Railroad, then proceeding in a northerly direction along the easterly right-of-way line of Conrail Railroad in a northerly direction to the point of intersection of the centerline of West North Street and then westerly along the centerline of West North Street to Clarence Street and north along the center line of Clarence Street to Slaughter Street, and west along the center line of Slaughter Street to Cherry Street and north along the center line of Cherry Street to the intersection with the center line of Lincoln Street to a point of intersection with an extension of the westerly property line of lands now or of late of Michael Nash, being the site of the former Diamond Ice Company, then proceeding in a northerly direction along the westerly property line of the Nash property and in a line extending to the intersection of the southerly property line of lands now or of late Paul T. and Aiko Moore, and then northwesterly and then northerly along the southern and western property line of the Moore property and extending north to an intersection with the centerline of Lincoln Street, and then easterly along the centerline of Lincoln Street to a point of intersection of an extension of the westerly property line of lands now or formerly of Frank Moore et al., and then northerly along the western property of Frank Moore et al. and extending to a point of intersection with the centerline of Forest Street, then easterly along the centerline of Forest Street to a point of intersection with an extension of the westerly property of the lands now or formerly of the Salvation Army, and then northerly and easterly along the western and north property line of the Salvation Army property to the point of intersection with lands now or of late Conrail Railroad, then northerly along the westerly property line of Conrail Railroad and extending to a point of intersection with the centerline of West Division Street, and then easterly along the centerline of East Division Street to the intersection of the easterly right-of-way line of Conrail Railroad, and then northerly along the easterly right-of-way line of Conrail Railroad to the intersection of the right-of-way of Conrail Railroad and the northerly property line of lands now or of late of Southern States Cooperative, Inc., then proceeding in an easterly direction a distance of 52.76 feet to the northeasterly corner of the lands now or of late of Southern States Cooperative, Inc., then proceeding in a southerly direction along the easterly property line of lands now or of late of Southern States Cooperative, Inc., to the point of intersection of said property and the centerline of Mary Street, then proceeding in an easterly direction along the centerline of Mary Street to the point of beginning, being the point of intersection of the centerline of Mary Street and North Governors Avenue, south along the centerline of North Governors Avenue to the intersection of North Governors Avenue and Cecil Street, and west along the center line of Cecil Street through the Wesley College Campus to the point of intersection of Cecil Street and North State Street. High Priority Target Area shall mean that part of the city more particularly described as bounded by the street center lines as follows: From the intersection of the centerlines of North Governors Avenue and Mary Street south go the intersection of the centerlines of North Governors Avenue and Fulton Street, east to the intersections of the center lines of Fulton Street and North State Street, south to the northern intersection of the center lines of South State Street and The Green, and along the centerline of The Green east of South State Street to the south intersection of the center lines of South State Street and The Green, south to the intersection of the center lines of South State Street and West Water Street and west to the intersection of the center lines of West

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 56 Water Street and South Queen Street, south along the center line of South Queen Street 541.11 feet and then west to the center line of South West Street, and north to the intersection of the center lines of West North Street and South West Street, and west to the intersection of the center lines of West North Street and Clarence Street and north to the intersection of the center lines of Clarence Street and Slaughter Street, and west along the center line of Slaughter Street to Cherry Street and north along the center line of Cherry Street to the intersection with the center line of Lincoln Street, and east along the center line of Lincoln Street to the intersection of the center lines of Forest Street and South West Street, and north along the center line of South West Street to the intersection of the center lines of West Street and West Division Street, and west to the east property line of the Norfolk Southern railroad track, and north along this property line to the intersection with the center line of Mary Street, and west to the intersection of the center lines of Mary Street and North Governors Avenue. ARTICLE III. - ELIGIBILITY Section 1. - Development incentive ineligibility. An otherwise eligible project shall be ineligible for development incentives if: (a) An application for a building permit for the project was filed prior to the effective date of this ordinance; or (b) Construction or renovation commenced prior to the effective date of this ordinance; or (c) Issuance of the certificate of occupancy and/or the completion and finalization of the building permit occurs before the application for development incentives is received; or (d) The subject property is exempt from City of Dover real estate taxes; or (e) The beneficiary of the incentives is delinquent on any of the obligations listed in section 1-13(b). Section 2. - Revocation of eligibility. The beneficiary of the incentives provided by this Appendix must remain current on all obligations due the city. If, at any time after the incentives have been granted, the beneficiary of the incentives becomes delinquent on any of the obligations listed in section 1-13(b), the city manager shall revoke the eligibility for any portion of the incentives not yet received by the beneficiary. Notice shall be given to such beneficiary in writing. ARTICLE IV. - DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES Eligible projects within the Target Area shall be eligible for the following development incentives: Section 1. - Waiver of permit fees. Fees for building, plumbing, mechanical, and fire protection permits shall be waived for eligible projects.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 57 Section 2. - Waiver of impact fee. Eligible projects shall qualify for city impact fee waiver of the cost of such fees. Section 3. - Abatement of property taxes on the value of improvement. Eligible projects shall receive property tax waivers for a period not to exceed ten years so that improvements to the properties made in accordance with the intent of this ordinance will not be taxed for a period of time not to exceed ten years from the date of the making of the improvements. The said ten-year period will commence with the date of issuance of a building permit. Eligible projects within the High Priority Target Area shall also be eligible for the following incentives: • For properties which have transferred on or after March 1, 2015, the property owner shall be eligible for a rebate of the buyer’s portion of the real estate transfer tax upon issuance of a certificate of occupancy, provided that a certificate of occupancy is issued for improvements to the property within five years of the payment of the real estate transfer tax. • Businesses that open within or relocate to the high priority target area on or after March 1, 2015, shall be eligible for a waiver of all city business license fees associated with the business for a period of three years. Eligible businesses are still required to obtain the required city business licenses. ARTICLE V. - ADMINISTRATION The city manager and his staff shall develop the administrative procedures necessary to implement this ordinance. The city manager and his staff shall promulgate reasonable standards to be used in determining whether an eligible project shall receive development incentives and, if so, which incentives shall be granted. Administrative staff shall review applications for development incentives and grant incentives to eligible projects. Applicants shall be notified of the action taken on their applications by mail. ARTICLE VI. - APPEALS Applicants denied development incentives shall have the right to appeal the decision to the city council within 30 days from the date of mailing of the formal notification. Such appeal shall be in writing, signed by the owner of the property in question, and filed with the city clerk. ARTICLE VII. - SEVERABILITY AND EFFECTIVE DATE Section 1. - Severability. Should any section or provision of this ordinance be declared to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the ordinance as a whole or any part thereof other than the parts so declared to be unconstitutional or invalid.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 58 Section 2. - Effective date. This ordinance shall be effective as of January 1, 1991. ADOPTED: FEBRUARY 23, 2015 COUNCIL MEMBERS’ ANNOUNCEMENTS Council President Bonar read the following statement into the record: I would like to thank everyone that works for the City for their efforts surrounding the bitter winter weather we have been experiencing. As a reminder that we aren't done yet, we still have 25 days left until the official start of Spring and I think most of us can barely wait! But I would like to hand out a big thank you to the Public Works Department of the City of Dover. Most people are not quite aware for the last few years the Public Works department has been down 13 staff members in that department. While it’s helped the budget, it certainly makes a lot more work for the ladies and gentlemen that serve us in that department. I want to put into perspective what resources we have as city during a snowfall like this - the last several ones we’ve had to experience. We have six (6) sanders with plows; we have five (5) trucks that are plows only; a few backhoes and loaders, and four (4) skid steer tractors. When snow hits greater than three (3) inches, the people in the Public Works Department shift to 12-hour shifts and crews have to continually maintain 17.3 miles of emergency and critical routes. After they have maintained those routes, and after the snow stops, they can then move on to clearing residential areas. They total 184.4 miles of roadway to clear. A lot of people don’t recognize that, but that’s a lot of roadway. As the cleanup is underway, a partial crew is working on the 184.4 miles of residential roadways. We then bring in another crew clearing 53 areas of sidewalks in order to provide for safe foot traffic. While not every snow storm deems all these efforts as being necessary, this winter has been particularly brutal with our record-breaking temperatures, wind chills, and the amount of ice that has been on the streets and sidewalks. I will certainly go along with the rest of you and hopefully we have seen the worst of the winter but in case we do get more snow, we need to remember to remove vehicles that are parked on emergency routes within one (1) hour of steady snowfall to prevent them from being towed. And also, when possible, making sure that roadways in developments are clear enough for plows to get through. I drove through some developments in my district after the snowstorm and we had cars parked on both sides of the road. It made it impossible for a plow to get down that street to clear it out and, yet, these are the same people that were complaining to me

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PAGE 59 about snow not being able to be removed. And lastly, use a little bit of common sense. Just because the snow stops falling, it doesn’t mean you need to get out and go sightseeing. Stay home. Let the road crews do their work. Get our streets clear as quickly as possible. Again I’d like to say thanks for all of the people in the Public Works Department. Thank you for what you do - the time and commitment and coming out and making it safe while the rest of us stay warm inside! Mr. Bonar requested Mrs. Sharon Duca, Director of Public Works, to relay his message to her crews. Mr. Slavin moved for adjournment, seconded by Mrs. Williams and unanimously carried. Meeting adjourned at 8:35 p.m. TRACI A. McDOWELL CITY CLERK All orders, ordinances, and resolutions adopted by City Council during their Regular Meeting of February 23, 2015, are hereby approved. ROBIN R. CHRISTIANSEN MAYOR /TM S:\AGENDAS-MINUTES-PACKETS-PRESENTATIONS-ATT&EXH\Council-Minutes\2015\02-23-2015.wpd Exhibits Exhibit #1 - Revised City of Dover Training, Conference, and Travel Policy

EXHIBIT #1 Regular Council Meeting of 02-23-2015 CITY OF DOVER TRAINING, CONFERENCE & TRAVEL POLICY A. INTRODUCTION 1. Purpose The purpose of this policy is to provide guidelines under which City of Dover employees, public officials, and appointees will be reimbursed for authorized travel expenses incurred in the conduct of business for the City of Dover, hereinafter referred to as “City.” In addition to the guidelines, specific procedures with regard to incurring and reporting related expenses are provided. 2. Scope This policy shall apply to employees of the City of Dover, elected officials, boards, commissions and others, who are engaged in authorized travel and who expend City funds for travel purposes. The Mayor and Members of City Council are not required to submit a Travel Authorization and Completion Form, but are required to follow the financial and budget requirements of this policy. While this policy does not cover every possible situation, it establishes adequate guidelines for employees and officials to make appropriate and consistent judgments regarding the expenditure of City funds for reimbursable expenses. The City of Dover will provide flexibility to meet the special needs and requirements of their employees during travel. It remains the responsibility of city management to control and approve travel-related expenditures. The City Manager and Controller/Treasurer may impose more stringent rules when deemed appropriate or necessary. The City Manager and Controller/Treasurer will review every three years the implementation of this Policy and will provide policy interpretations and assistance to ensure effective and efficient implementation. Any exceptions will be subject to approval by the City Manager and Controller/Treasurer. The City Manager and Controller/Treasurer may also, on a case-by case basis, approve reimbursements exceeding the guideline amounts referenced in this policy. In any such instance, a detailed explanation and substantiation (a receipt) is required. Enforcement of this policy will be the responsibility of the Controller/Treasurer. 3. Responsibility a. Employee, Public Official, or Appointee · Comply with all provisions of this policy. · Obtain the necessary approvals in advance for overnight travel and out-of-state use of City vehicles. Provide a copy of the approval with the travel prepayment made by direct voucher. · All expenses incurred in the course of City business are to be in accordance with the City’s Administrative Policies and Rules of Ethics and must be paid solely from appropriated funds. · Comply with the ten (10) working-day rule. b. Department Director/City Manager/Council Designee · Ensure compliance with this policy.

Training, Conference & Travel Policy Page 2 of 14 · Review and approve each of their employees/official’s travel approval requests and reimbursable expenses. · Ensure sufficient funds are available for all anticipated expenses. c. Signatures on the Travel Expense Report (City of Dover Form 030 Exhibit B) certify that the expenses were incurred by the employee/official requesting reimbursement for official City business, are reimbursable in accordance with this policy, and have not been reimbursed except as indicated on this form. Required signatures for expenses are: · Employee · Supervisor · Department Director or Council Designee B. TRAINING AND CONFERENCE REGISTRATION FEES 1. Request for payment of registration fees shall be accompanied by the registration form. 2. City Council, Planning Commission and the Mayor are offered opportunities to attend courses designed for governmental officials. Any member of Council wanting to take advantage of these courses offered by the following organizations will submit to the City Clerk’s office their request for registration. - Delaware League of Local Governments - National League of Cities - US Conference of Mayors - International City Managers Association - Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) - American Public Power Association (APPA) - American Public Works Association (APWA) - American Planning Association - Organizations that provide Continuing Education credits for professional license renewals of applicable staff. Any courses not offered by these organizations will be submitted to the City Manager and Controller/Treasurer for concurrence. C. TRAVEL AUTHORIZATION All out-of-state travel that extends beyond one day shall be approved by the City Manager. All requests shall be made on the "Travel Authorization Form” (City of Dover - Form 047 Exhibit A). A copy of the conference or meeting program must be attached to the form. The authorization form must be submitted to the City Manager in a reasonable amount of time prior to the traveling day. The Department Director or City Manager may impose specific requirements as to the time the authorization form must be submitted prior to travel. Employees and Officials traveling on official City business should be aware that the approval is for travel only, and is not a blanket approval of the expenses incurred.

Training, Conference & Travel Policy Page 3 of 14 A travel packet including the authorization form, the meeting program/itinerary, and the purchase orders for advanced costs must be submitted to the Accounts Payable Department. The Purchase Orders for the advanced costs should include the necessary supporting documentation. It does not require the submission of duplicate information. Please note Purchase Orders for registration costs must include the Registration form unless previously submitted; submission for hotel and airfare costs must include documentation of the individual costs unless previously submitted. D. TRANSPORTATION: COMMON CARRIER 1. General All trips requiring the use of common carrier must be pre-approved by the appropriate approval authority. The mode of travel must be justified on the basis of the most economical use of time of the personnel involved, the cost of optional travel modes, and the requirements of the trip. All common carrier reservations must be consistent with reasonable business travel planning, common carrier will be booked at the lowest available fare. If the lowest available fare is turned down by the traveler, the traveler's explanation for the denial is to be provided with the travel authorization request. Travelers should be advised to make travel reservations as far in advance as possible to attain the lowest fares, including non-refundable tickets. Travelers may not specify particular airlines or other carriers to accumulate mileage on promotional plans such as frequent flyer programs. In order to take advantage of special discount rates (supersaver fares, etc.), reimbursement to an employee may be made prior to a trip being taken under the following conditions: a. Documentation of the substantial savings that will accrue to the City (e.g., supersaver discounts). b. Employee's proof of payment on a statement from the airline, other than credit card receipts. Most airlines will not give refunds or partial refunds for supersaver airfares. It is encouraged to examine the advantage of fares requiring early trip departure or delayed return. However, it is important to consider the additional cost of meals and lodging for the required extra day(s) stay when comparing cost. 2. Air Travel a. Accommodations - When commercial airlines are used as a mode of travel, accommodations shall be coach/economy class unless some other class accommodations are more economical. b. Routing of Travel - All travel will be by the most economical and direct routes. In the event that a person travels by an indirect route for personal convenience, the extra expense shall be the responsibility of the individual. Reimbursement for expenses shall be based only on the cost of the most economical and direct route.

Training, Conference & Travel Policy Page 4 of 14 c. Conference Airfare Arrangements When attending a conference, always check conference materials to see if special airline discounts are offered. When a special airline discount rate is offered and conferees are instructed to go directly to an airline to obtain the discount fare, the employee should compare the conference rates through the internet with all other airline rates available before scheduling airline reservations. The employee should always book the lowest fare possible. (See Section F.3. for Conference Lodging Arrangements). 3. Rail Travel 1. Accommodations When it has been determined that rail travel is the most appropriate mode of transportation, the most economical class accommodations shall be utilized. E. TRANSPORTATION: PASSENGER VEHICLES 1. City-Owned Vehicles City-owned vehicles should be utilized for both in-state and out-of-state travel when such use is the most practical and economical mode of transportation, including the cost of tolls, fuel and parking. 2. Use of Privately-Owned Vehicles a. The use of privately owned vehicles for any City travel (both in state and out-of-state) should only be used when a City Vehicle is not available. The use of a privately owned vehicle for City travel shall require the prior approval of the City Manager and Department Director. Reimbursement of private vehicle expenses shall be at the Council approved rate as indicated on Exhibit B for actual and necessary miles traveled. Beginning and ending odometer readings are required for the reimbursement for mileage. b. In considering approval for use of personal vehicles, the approval authority shall take into consideration the cost of alternative modes of travel and the cost of meals and lodging for the additional travel/transit days. Mileage reimbursements shall not exceed the cost of airfare plus travel to/from the airport. c. When two or more employees travel in a privately owned vehicle, only one mileage reimbursement will be allowed at times when one vehicle is sufficient to carry all passengers. 3. Rental Cars a. General The use of a rental car when traveling out of state must be justified as an economical need and not as a matter of personal convenience. Prior approval by the Department Director and City Manager is required before arranging for car rental. All rentals should be at the most economical

Training, Conference & Travel Policy Page 5 of 14 rate per day including government rates or special rate agreements. When traveling in groups, sharing of cars, when practical, must be done to minimize costs. The city will not pay for the use of a rental car to accommodate family members or non-business associates traveling with the employee, public official, or appointee. b. Vehicle Size Whenever possible, compact cars shall be rented or reserved. However, if a larger size vehicle is more economical or more than two city travelers are traveling together the larger vehicle may be appropriate. Any representative of the City requesting an upgrade of the size of a rented vehicle shall provide a written explanation of their reasons to the City Manager. A receipt is always required. c. Insurance (1) The optional insurance coverage offered by the car rental agency must be declined when the traveler charges the rental car. The traveler will automatically receive primary coverage under the City blanket insurance policy for travel. When insurance is declined, the policy covers collision damage, theft, fire and vandalism. Reimbursements for additional or optional insurance coverage will not be allowed. (2) Other. Travelers not covered under the blanket insurance policy may be covered by their personal automobile insurance policy or other personal credit cards. Travelers should check their automobile policy and credit card policy for business travel coverage and accept or decline additional coverage accordingly. Reimbursement for additional or optional insurance coverage will not be allowed. d. Refueling Before Return To avoid a refueling surcharge, all rental cars shall be refueled before returning the vehicle to the rental company. Any surcharges billed to the employee, public official, appointee, or City shall be explained in the reimbursement request. e. Reservations Approved car rental reservations shall be made in advance whenever possible. The employee should compare car rental rates and always look to reserve the lowest rental. F. LODGING 1. General City travelers are expected to seek accommodations that are comfortable, convenient, meet business and personal needs and offer good value. Employees are expected to compare local lodging rates in the area prior to reserving lodging.

Training, Conference & Travel Policy Page 6 of 14 2. Accommodation a. Lodging accommodations for reasonably priced single occupancy rooms are reimbursable when the traveler is away from home overnight due to official travel. b. Accommodations shared with family members or others not on official City business are reimbursable at the single occupancy rate only. c. Accommodations shared with other City travelers should be billed and reimbursed to one traveler. When required, reimbursements to more than one traveler shall be based on a pro rata share as reported on each reimbursement request. 3. Conference Lodging Arrangements When hotel rooms are blocked for a conference, seminar, etc., and a special discounted conference hotel rate provided, the employee/official should compare conference rates with the rates for other local hotels within a three (3) block radius of the conference. The employee is urged to reserve hotel accommodations that offer the best value to the City. This includes conference rate, government rate or lower rate, for the employee/official. If a lower rate is not available, the conferees should make their lodging arrangements directly utilizing the conference instructions. Conference lodging will be considered to accommodate persons with special circumstances. 4. Occupancy Tax The City is exempt from the tax on occupancy of hotel, motel and tourist home rooms within Delaware only. When instate overnight accommodations are necessary, the employee should be provided with a copy of the Occupancy Tax Exemption Certificate (see Exhibit C) to be presented to the lodging facility. Tax on occupancy of hotels in other states must be paid. G. MEAL ALLOWANCES 1. General The City will pay for or reimburse an employee/official for the necessary and reasonable cost of meals and incidental expenses incurred during out of state travel requiring overnight lodging. Additional meal costs incurred over and above those provided as part of a conference or registration fee are not reimbursable, unless justified as a special circumstance and approved by the City Manager and Controller/Treasurer (e.g. special meeting or diet restrictions). Exceptions are to be pre-approved by the City Manager and Controller/Treasurer. There will not be any reimbursement for meals when the meals are provided as part of the conference/training or by the host organization and when meals are provided as part of the hotel service and/or airfare. Only per diem rates as prescribed by the Federal Government for official travel will be provided for Meals and Incidental Expenses (M&IE). (\\doverfp\Public Docs\Policies & Procedures\Travel\FY2015_PerDiemRates.pdf)

Training, Conference & Travel Policy Page 7 of 14 If an employee is traveling partial days on any calendar day, the City will prorate the applicable M&IE rate at 75 percent. This applies to both day of departure and day of return. Partial travel days begin when an employee leaves Dover after 12:00 noon on the day of departure and returns to Dover by 5:00 PM on the day of arrival. When meals are provided at the conference or by the host, the meal allowance will be reduced by 25% for each meal provided. Continental Breakfast provided by the hotel or at the conference is counted as a meal, unless justified as a special circumstance and approved by the City Manager and Controller/Treasurer (e.g. special meeting or diet restrictions). 2. Day Trips, In-state Travel and Before or After Hours The meal allowance for day trips out of the City will be reimbursed at actual cost, as long as it does not exceed 25% of the normal per diem per the M&IE Allowance. The meal allowance for working before or after hours as a general rule are not encouraged, but may be approved by the City Manager and/or Controller/Treasurer on a case-by-case basis. At no time can the amount exceed the allowances established. H. CASH ADVANCES General/Blanket travel advance checks will not be issued to employees, public officials, or appointees. Employees, public officials, and appointees will be reimbursed for specific travel related expenses after the trip or event has been completed. The City will pay specific travel and lodging costs in advance as long as the request deadlines are met. Employees, public officials, and appointees shall use a City purchase order when requesting travel cost advances. Department Directors should use their City credit card for business travel. Directors may approve the use of their departmental travel credit card when arranging employee travel. Under urgent situations and with prior approval, employees and officials can also use a personal credit card and request reimbursement when they return. The City will pay in advance the following costs: Please note: A travel packet including the Travel authorization form, the meeting program/itinerary, and a purchase order for the advanced costs listed below must be submitted to the Accounts Payable Department no later than 12 days prior to the event. a) Conference/Training registration fees. Such payment will be made payable and mailed directly to the organization. This will be done through a purchase order submitted by the department upon receipt of the approved Travel Authorization Form. A copy of the registration form describing the specific event must be attached to the purchase order. The Employee Travel packet must be submitted to Accounts Payable prior to/or along with the purchase order request for advance travel expenses. b) Airfare. Airfare is normally reserved on-line through the internet and paid with a City credit card after travel approval has been received. (See City Credit Card Policy) c) Lodging. Upon receipt of the approved Travel authorization form, the department may submit a purchase order for lodging. The check will be made payable to the hotel and will be given to the person for whom the lodging arrangements are made. The department must provide supporting

Training, Conference & Travel Policy Page 8 of 14 documentation including the daily lodging rates and applicable taxes along with the purchase order. Lodging reservations can be held with the use of a City Credit Card. (See City Credit Card Policy) d) Meal allowance. An advance for the M&IE Allowance, which includes both meals and incidental expenses, will be permitted for meals not provided by the conference or training as indicated in Section G (1) above. Only per diem rates as prescribed by the Federal Government for official travel will be provided for M&IE Allowance. I. TRAVEL EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 1. General Travel Expense Report (City of Dover Form 30) is due to Accounts Payable within ten (10) working days after travel or an expense is incurred. (Ten working-day rule) a. Timely reimbursement can be assured only if an accurate, properly substantiated Travel Expense Report is received to Accounts Payable ten (10) working days after completion of the trip. b. Failure to submit timely Travel Expense Reports after the completion of a trip will result in administrative action, such as notification to the Department Director and denial of future travel requests. Travel Expense Reports for local travel and related expenses are to be submitted monthly. In no case shall a reimbursement be made to an employee for travel/conference/training related expenses incurred in excess of 90 days. Note: This section pertains to only those travel expenses paid by the traveler; not to travel expenses directly billed to/paid by the City. 2. Receipt Requirements and Other Reimbursement Criteria a. Tickets booked on common carriers (airline, rail or bus) require original copy of the paid invoice or email confirmation containing total travel costs for arrangements booked on-line. b. Hotel/motel bills shall be the original copy of hotel/motel billing marked paid. c. Ground transportation, including airport shuttle, taxi or public transit requires a receipt. d. Car rental reimbursements require paid invoice from the rental company. e. Meals do not require receipts and are not reimbursable above the maximum daily/partial day per meal allowance. Tips are included in the M&IE Allowance and will not be reimbursed separately. When more than one City employee, public official, or appointee’s meals are being reimbursed, each employee must submit a separate Travel Expense Reimbursement for their allowance. f. Hotel/motel related expenses should be documented identifying the date and the cost for each category with the following requirements:

Training, Conference & Travel Policy Page 9 of 14 (1) Out-of-pocket costs for incidental items such as tips, baggage handling and maid service are not individually reimbursable by the City of Dover. Costs included under this category are included in the M&IE per diem rate. Only per diem rates as prescribed by the Federal Government for official travel will be provided for M&IE allowance. (2) City-business related telephone calls are reimbursable as incurred and require a receipt from the telephone service provider or included on the hotel/motel billing invoice. g. Lodging at campgrounds using traveler’s camper or recreational vehicle is reimbursable at the actual cost, not to exceed the equivalent cost of hotel/motel lodging. Receipt is required. h. Other Reimbursement Categories Reimbursement for the following categories should be submitted on a schedule identifying the date, the cost and the category. All supporting receipts must be attached: 1) The City will reimburse employees for hotel and airport self-parking. The City encourages all employees to seek ‘economy and budget parking’. 2) The City will not reimburse employees for Valet parking, unless prior approval has been granted by the City Manager and Controller. 3) The City will reimburse employees the cost of tolls for interstates, turnpike, bridges and/or ferries. All travel expenses require a receipt. 4) The City will reimburse employees for necessary airport baggage fee. A receipt is required. i. Gasoline and/or Other Supplies require a receipt. Need for emergency repairs incidental to using a City-owned vehicle shall require a Vendor receipt. j. Department Director pre-approval is required to receive reimbursement for Internet Access Costs for city business. These costs must be substantiated with receipts. k. While traveling overnight out-of-state, the City will reimburse employees for the cost of up to two (2) personal telephone calls not to exceed $8 per trip. A receipt is required for reimbursement. l. Reimbursements for travel expenses incurred without required receipts, as outlined, is strictly prohibited. A "no receipt - no reimbursement" policy applies 3. Non- Reimbursable Expenses The City shall not reimburse expenses for the following: a. Alcoholic beverages. b. In-room movies or pay television. c. Theater tickets or nightclub entertainment. d. Laundry. e. Babysitting.

Training, Conference & Travel Policy Page 10 of 14 f. Related expenses of spouse, children and other persons accompanying the authorized employee or official. g. Pleasure, historic or other tour related expenses. Expenses for business related tours would be reimbursed. h. Donations and gifts made while at training, conference, or meeting. i. Loss or damage of personal items. j. Meals for other conference attendees. k. Purchase of personal items. l. Any parking or moving violation fines. m. Any personal or pleasure travel while on City business. J. CHARTER AND CODE OF CONDUCT All City of Dover policies are subject to the City of Dover Charter Part 1, Subpart A, Article II, Section 12 “Compensation and expenses - Mayor and Council and other elected or appointed officials”, whereas, “Members of the council, mayor and other elected or appointed officials shall receive reimbursement for actual and necessary expenses incurred when on official business as prescribed by city ordinance or policy” and; Part II Code of Ordinances Chapter 2, Article 1, Division 4 “Code of Conduct”, which is “applicable to all elected and appointed officials and to all employees of the City of Dover.” K. INTERNAL REVENUE CODE - DEFINITION OF PUBLIC OFFICIAL Generally, if there is any provision in a public law which authorizes the employment of the individual, and the individual is hired or elected under this authority, the individual is considered an employee of the State or political subdivision to which the provision applies. The following factors indicate that an office is a “public office.” The office was created by the constitution or through legislation, or by a municipality or other body with authority conferred by the legislature. The office was delegated a portion of the powers of the government body. The powers conferred and the duties to be discharged are defined either directly or indirectly law or through legislative authority. The duties are being performed independently and without control of a superior power other than the law. The office has some permanency and continuity, and the officer takes an official oath. Examples of public officers are: the president and vice president, a governor or mayor, the secretary of state, a member of a legislative body, such as a state legislature, county commission, city council, school board, a judge, a justice of the peace, and members of advisory boards and committees. L. REVIEW & REVISION The City of Dover Travel Policy will be reviewed every three years by the City Manager, Controller/Treasurer and City Clerk to provide recommended changes to City Council for approval.

Training, Conference & Travel Policy Page 11 of 14 EXHIBITS Exhibit A - COD Travel Authorization Form (Form 47) Exhibit B - COD Travel Expense Report Form (Form 30) Exhibit C - COD Exemption Certificate Form 99A REVISION RECORD Revised: November 24, 2003 Revised: February 9, 2004 Revised: July 24, 2006 Revised: March 23, 2009 Revised: January 23, 2012 Revised: February 23, 2015

Training, Conference & Travel Policy Page 12 of 14 EXHIBIT A

Training, Conference & Travel Policy Page 13 of 14 EXHIBIT B

Training, Conference & Travel Policy Page 14 of 14 EXHIBIT C CITY OF DOVER DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE EXEMPTION CERTIFICATE TAX ON OCCUPANCY OF HOTEL AND MOTEL AND TOUR IST HOME ROOMS In accordance with Internal Revenue Code Section 5253(I), no tax shall be imposed under section 4251 upon any payment received for services or facilities furnished to the government of any State, or any political subdivision thereof, or the District of Columbia. This Part to be Completed by the Operator Name of Hotel, Motel, or Tourist Home Fed. EI or SS number Address City State Zip Code This Part to be Completed by the Occupant This is to certify that I, the undersigned, am a representative of the City of Dover, Delaware; that the charges for the occupancy at the above establishment on the dates set forth below has been or will be paid for by the City of Dover, a government unit; and that such charges are incurred in the performance of my official duties as a representative or employee of the governmental unit. Name (Please type or print) Signature City of Dover 51-6000092 Governmental Unit Tax I.D. # Title P.O. Box 475 Dover DE 19903-0475 Address City State Zip Code Date(s) of Occupancy If additional information is needed, please contact the City of Dover Finance Director at (302) 736- 7018. NOTE: A separate Exemption Certificate is required for each occupancy and for each representative or employee. THIS EXEMPTION CERTIFICATE IS TO BE RETAINED BY THE OPERATORS OF HOTELS, MOTELS, AND TOURIST HOMES AS EVIDENCE OF EXEMPT OCCUPANCY. \\Dover_1\finance\FORMS\DOCUMENTS\FORM99 A.wpd