Council Minutes and Exhibit 1

REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING The Regular Council Meeting was held on January 9, 2017 at 7:34 p.m. with Council President Slavin presiding. Council members present were Mr. Anderson, Mr. Sudler, Mr. Neil, Mr. Lewis, Mr. Cole, Mr. Hare, and Mr. Hutchison. Mr. Hosfelt was absent. Council staff members present were Police Chief Bernat, Mrs. Mitchell, Mr. Koenig, Mrs. Townshend, City Solicitor Rodriguez, and Mrs. McDowell. Fire Chief Carey was absent. Mayor Christiansen was also present (departed at 7:39 p.m.). OPEN FORUM The Open Forum was held at 7:15 p.m., prior to commencement of the Official Council Meeting. Council President Slavin declared the Open Forum in session and reminded those present that Council was not in official session and could not take formal action. Ms. Alexis Simms, 453 Newcastle Avenue, stated that she wanted to make members of Council aware of some reality points, as follows: 1) The very people standing behind her were the very people that voted them into their place and they were going to be the very people that vote them out of their place; 2) If members of Council don't want the homeless speaking at the library or being at the library at all, or the bus stop, or lingering around, why haven't they given them a place where they can help the homeless to get a place, have resources, and get jobs; and 3) The homeless will be there every other week until members of Council help them or they lose their place as Councilmen. Mr. Timothy Lee Tague advised that he has noticed that there are sidewalks that are terrible to walk on. He suggested replacing the brick sidewalks with cement, because if somebody falls, they could sue the city. Mr. Steven Hall asked members of Council to think about how they felt when they started their cars that morning in the frigid temperatures and how they looked out the window that past weekend and watched the snow fall and realized how cold it was. Mr. Hall stated that he had to endure that cold all weekend and it was so frigid cold that it brought him to tears. He asked members to use the resources that they have to help him and others like him to find a place so that he does not have to endure the cold again. Mr. Alex Cropper advised that he was there to support those who are the voice of homelessness, and to offer and extend any support. He stated that he works for Connections Community Support Programs which has many different programs to help the homeless. Mr. Cropper stated that he was aware that they need more resources in the community; however, they do have some very limited programs. Pastor Aaron Appling, 2660 Forrest Avenue, noting that the freezing weather had arrived, stated that they had found people on the streets, in the cold, that suffer from mental illness and there should be something for those that are dealing with mental illness. Pastor Appling advised that they have had to scoop them up, as well as those who were unable to get to the Code Purple shelters, and take them to their church. He stated that, even with the Code Purple shelters, the rules and regulations related to opening a shelter are becoming so stringent, so rigid, that most churches don't even qualify to open up. Pastor Appling stated that, even if they wanted to, it is against the rules because it does not have

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 9, 2017 PAGE 2 a sprinkler system or something. He thought that it should be considered a natural disaster when it is cold like this and somebody is outside and, in those situations, churches should be able to bring people in. Pastor Appling stated that it was obviously safer inside of their church, or another church that doesn't necessarily have a sprinkler system, than it is to be outside on the streets. He noted that regulations are making it more difficult for those that are helping the homeless or trying to do these civil services. Pastor Appling stated that it would be beneficial to have partnerships in the City or municipalities so they were not always bumping heads and fighting over helping people. He advised that it seems to be a very, very hard process to find any type of partnerships with their government and municipalities. Pastor Appling stated that it would behoove them, and it would be a great thing, if they started looking into taking down some of the red tape so that they could help. He suggested that the rules and regulations hurt more than they help and, although these laws are meant to save or protect life, they are actually doing the very opposite. Pastor Appling added that he and his group of people support Deputy Chief Mailey being the next Police Chief. Ms. Sue Harris stated that they need a solution to homelessness and asked what the City of Dover would do with all of the desperate people if Code Purple was not saving lives each night that they give them sanctuary from the freezing cold. She stated that people would, without a doubt, be dying out there. Ms. Harris stated that, from her perspective, Code Purple was established to be the emergency backup for those in a desperate situation and she felt as though the City had decided that Code Purple is, instead, their solution to the problem. Ms. Harris advised that Code Purple leaders and volunteers are miracle workers. Ms. Harris stated that she prays for guidance for the City leaders to realize how vital the services of all these unpaid volunteers are and to recognize that the City has a responsibility in this problem. She noted that stretching the services offered beyond their capacity could lead to unintended consequences. Ms. Harris stated that she also prays for the strength and continued passion for all the leaders of these volunteer groups in Dover that go so far above and beyond the call to provide for their fellow man. They too have limits and capacity that can run over. Ms. Harris stated that assuming that they will just continue to do this, year after year, is not an assumption that should be made. Ms. Harris advised that a solution is needed and everyone, including the City leaders, needs to be an active participant in finding one. She noted that she was speaking on behalf of herself and Port Hope Delaware. Ms. Harris stated that she was a proud volunteer of Code Purple, but that she had no authorization to speak on their behalf. She advised that opportunities for support of affordable, permanent housing, is something that the City can offer through abandoned and vacant properties and land within their boundaries, whether it be property already owned by the City or property like 106 North New Street or 1351 North Street. Ms. Harris advised that she had offered many suggestions and that the main thing that 80% of these people need to begin their battle to a better life is a safe, stable, supportive home. Once they have that, all the other services that are offered can be more useful and successful. Ms. Harris stated that

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 9, 2017 PAGE 3 she looks forward to what is ahead and hopes that the commission being formed will provide a path towards viable and permanent answers to this problem. Mr. Eric Chandler stated that he thought that drug addiction was another issue that went along with homelessness and incarceration. He also noted that there were a lot of housing foreclosures and that they have to revitalize Section 8 housing. Mr. Chandler suggested that they should all be able to work together, collectively as a group, to figure out what to do to save some of these people's lives that just fell on hard times. He stated that they have got to focus on drugs, drug addiction, and getting these people off the drugs and into drug programs instead of sending them to jail. Mr. Chandler suggested that they network and help the church write grants so that they can get some money to get these people off the street. 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. Neil and unanimously carried. Mr. Hare moved for approval of the Consent Agenda, seconded by Mr. Neil and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Hosfelt absent). ADOPTION OF MINUTES - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 12, 2016 The Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of December 12, 2016 were unanimously approved by motion of Mr. Hare, seconded by Mr. Neil and bore the written approval of Mayor Christiansen. TRIBUTE NO. 2017-01 - JOSEPH M. MCDONOUGH The City Clerk read Tribute No. 2017-01 into the record. By motion of Mr. Hare, seconded by Mr. Neil, Tribute No. 2017-01 was unanimously adopted, as follows: A TRIBUTE EXPRESSING SYMPATHY AND CONDOLENCES UPON THE PASSING OF JOSEPH M. MCDONOUGH WHEREAS, the Mayor and Council of the City of Dover have been greatly saddened by the passing of Joseph M. McDonough, former Mayor and Councilman of the City of Dover, on December 27, 2016; and WHEREAS, Joseph M. McDonough served as Councilman from February 10, 1975 to May 12, 1980, and during his tenure served as a member of the Legislative and Finance Committee, the Parks, Playgrounds and Trees Committee, the Safety Advisory Committee, and the Utility Committee. He resigned as Councilman, was elected Mayor of the City of Dover effective May 12,1980, and served in that capacity until May 10, 1982, dedicating his expertise and attention to the complex problems encountered by the City. Under his leadership, the City successfully negotiated

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 9, 2017 PAGE 4 three employee contracts, underwent a smooth transition to a new City Manager, and experienced steady, orderly growth; and WHEREAS, Joseph M. McDonough’s contributions to the community extended well beyond his service to the City of Dover, as he was a member of Kent County Levy Court for many years; served as President and fundraiser for Mom’s House, which provides free childcare for single mothers; and devoted his time, talents, and energy to the building of the new Holy Cross Church; and WHEREAS, Joseph M. McDonough will be deeply missed by his friends, family, and all of those whose lives he has touched. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mayor and Council extend their deepest sympathy and condolences to the family and friends of Joseph M. McDonough, and hope that they will be consoled by the memories of his exemplary life and achievements. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and Council direct the City Clerk to place this Tribute in the permanent records of the City of Dover and that a copy of this Tribute be provided to the family of Joseph M. McDonough. ADOPTED: JANUARY 9, 2017 REZONING REQUEST - PUBLIC HEARING/FINAL READING OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2016-28 A public hearing was duly advertised for this time and place to consider the rezoning of property located on the west side of McKee Road north of College Road between 1216 and 1282 McKee Road, consisting of 4.35+/- acres, owned by George J. Kays and John J. Kays. The equitable owner is Medcore Partners c/o Michael Graham. The property is currently zoned C-PO (Commercial and Professional Office) and subject to the COZ-1 (Corridor Overlay Zone) and the proposed zoning is IO (Institutional and Office) and subject to the COZ-1 (Corridor Overlay Zone). (Tax Parcel: ED-05- 067.00-01-33.00-000; Planning Reference: Z-16-07; Council District 1) Mr. Neil moved that the Final Reading of Proposed Ordinance #2016-28 be acknowledged by title only, seconded by Mr. Hutchison and unanimously carried. (The First Reading of the ordinance was accomplished during the Council Meeting of November 28, 2016.) Planner's Review Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, reviewed the petition to amend the zoning district and the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission. She noted that the Planning Commission recommended approval of the rezoning request. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mrs. Townshend advised that Staff had heard no opposition from the community. She noted that the applicant held a meeting with residents of Emerald Pointe about the proposed project prior to the Planning Commission meeting, so there was dialogue at that meeting and people were able to get more information. Mrs. Townshend advised that there is some concern

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 9, 2017 PAGE 5 about traffic in the area and the applicants have indicated that they would work with the Department of Transportation and the Planning Office and continue dialogue with the residents on those issues. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mrs. Townshend stated that Staff had not received any input from Westminster Village regarding the project. Public Hearing Council President Slavin declared the public hearing open. Mr. Greg Moore, Becker Morgan Group, advised that they represent the applicants who wish to build a 34-bed rehabilitation hospital. He noted that Bayhealth offers this service in Milford; however, such a facility is not currently available in Dover. Mr. Moore noted that this rehabilitation facility is for stroke, injury, or traumatic injury and is not a drug rehab. He advised that it is a low traffic generator and they have heard from the neighbors that traffic is a key discussion point. Mr. Moore stated that the current zone allows for medical office buildings, which would be a very high traffic generator, and a facility like this would not produce the same patient turnover as a medical office. Responding to Mr. Hare, Mr. Moore stated that this facility is a private interest that has facilities throughout the country and it is not affiliated with Bayhealth. There being no one else wishing to speak, Council President Slavin declared the hearing closed. Mr. Hare moved for approval of the rezoning request, as recommended by the Planning Commission. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hutchison and, by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Hosfelt absent), Council adopted Ordinance #2016-28, as follows: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF DOVER BY CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF MCKEE ROAD WHEREAS, the City of Dover has enacted a zoning ordinance regulating the use of property within the limits of the City of Dover; and WHEREAS, it is deemed in the best interest of zoning and planning to change the permitted use of property described below from C-PO (Commercial and Professional Office Zone) and subject to the COZ-1 (Corridor Overlay Zone) to IO (Institutional and Office Zone) and subject to the COZ-1 (Corridor Overlay Zone). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 1. That from and after the passage and approval of this ordinance the Zoning Map and Zoning Ordinance of the City of Dover have been amended by changing the zoning designation from C-PO (Commercial and Professional Office Zone) and subject to the COZ-1 (Corridor Overlay Zone) to IO (Institutional and Office Zone) and subject to the COZ-1 (Corridor Overlay Zone) on an unaddressed parcel located on the west side of McKee Road north of

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 9, 2017 PAGE 6 College Road between 1216 and 1282 McKee Road, consisting of 4.35+/- acres, owned by George J. Kays and John J. Kays. The equitable owner is Medcore Partners c/o Michael Graham. (Tax Parcel: ED-05-067.00-01-33.00-000; Planning Reference: Z-16-07; Council District: 1) ADOPTED: JANUARY 9, 2017 PUBLIC HEARING/FINAL READING OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2016-25 A public hearing was duly advertised for this time and place to consider approval of proposed zoning text amendments to Appendix B - Zoning, Article 6 - Off-Street Parking, Driveways and Loading Facilities and Article 12 - Definitions. Mr. Lewis moved that the Final Reading of Proposed Ordinance #2016-25 be acknowledged by title only, seconded by Mr. Neil and unanimously carried. (The First Reading of the ordinance was accomplished during the Council Meeting of November 28, 2016.) Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, advised members that the proposed amendment would prohibit the parking of tractor trailers, or any part of a tractor trailer, in all residential zones and in certain non-residential zones. It would also limit the parking of tractor trailers to designated loading zones or areas in non-residential zones. Mrs. Townshend advised that the amendment went through the Development Advisory Committee (DAC) process and there were two proposed amendments that came forward. She noted that Staff Amendment #1 would add the language that normal loading and unloading is permitted and Staff Amendment #2 would replace the relatively simplistic definition of tractor-trailer with something that would align more closely with the Department of Motor Vehicle definition. Mrs. Townshend stated that a public hearing was held before the Planning Commission on December 19, 2016 and one (1) member of the public spoke regarding the proposed text amendment. The Planning Commission members expressed a number of concerns about the proposed text amendment and where tractor-trailers would be able to park. Mrs. Townshend advised that they were concerned about making it difficult on a segment of the community that could rely on tractor-trailers for their living and would not have a location to be able to park tractor-trailers. The public comment somewhat supported the Planning Commission’s comments. Mrs. Townshend advised that the Planning Commission recommended against adoption of the proposed ordinance, primarily because they were concerned that there had not been input from the affected community and that it would create a barrier for people who rely on this as their livelihood. Mr. Anderson stated that he had several concerns with the proposed ordinance, one of them being that there did not seem to be a time limit that the driver of a tractor-trailer could park just for an hour and get lunch, even if the vehicle was not running. It appeared to him to be a blanket prohibition. Responding, Mrs. Townshend advised that it was a blanket prohibition. She noted that Staff Amendment #1 would specify that normal loading and unloading would be permitted. Mrs. Townshend stated that, from the perspective of this being in the zoning code and applying to private property, if something were parked for an hour, Code Enforcement would notify the property owner of the violation instead of issuing a ticket or a fine on the spot. She advised that the ordinance would allow them to address tractor-trailer complaints in areas where they are currently permitted

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 9, 2017 PAGE 7 to park. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mrs. Townshend stated that the process would not have to be complaint driven. Mr. Hare stated that he thought there should be time, such as an hour, where the driver could park to get something to eat. He also thought that a place such as Home Depot should be able to permit tractor-trailers to park overnight if they wanted to. Mrs. Townshend stated that the section of the zoning ordinance that deals with parking already prohibits parking of commercial vehicles in residential zones and the amendment adds those commercial zones. Mr. Slavin stated that the amendment was written as a result of a meeting that was held by Councilman Sudler in the Fourth District related to complaints that were brought forward by the Fourth and the First District residents, specifically related to the Hamlet Shopping Center. The constituents told them that what they were seeing more and more of was private property owners allowing trucks and tractor-trailers to park, sometimes unhitching the trailers and leaving in the cab, and it had a detrimental impact on the neighborhood. Mr. Slavin stated that he did not know if the intent was to clamp down on business people who are trying to conduct business in a legal manner and they would have to resolve that issue. Mr. Hare suggested that something could be done on a commercial property that is not within 200 yards of any residence, noting that there are quite a few residents within 200 yards of the Hamlet Shopping Center but not the Home Depot. Mr. Slavin stated that the issue would then become one of fairness and he believed that they have different parts of government for a reason and when the Planning Commission returns something with a unanimous recommendation not to pass it, that is something that he will listen to. Council President Slavin declared the hearing open. There being no one present wishing to speak during the public hearing, Council President Slavin declared the hearing closed. Responding to Mr. Hare, Mr. Slavin advised that the issue in the Hamlet was running trucks, parked trucks, and parked trucks without the cab. He stated that the parking lot was being used as a storage yard for trailers. Mr. Slavin stated that he thought the situation cleared up after Councilman Sudler’s meeting and the pressure that the property owner now feels. Mr. Anderson moved for adoption of Proposed Ordinance #2016-25. The motion was seconded by Mr. Cole and failed by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Hosfelt absent). C O U N C I L CO MMI T T E E OF T H E WH O L E RE PO R T - DECEMBER 13, 2016 The Council Committee of the Whole Meeting was held on December 13, 2016 at 6:00 p.m., with Council President Slavin presiding. Members of Council present were Mr. Anderson (arrived at 6:11 p.m.), Mr. Sudler, Mr. Neil, Mr. Cole, Mr. Hosfelt, and Mr. Hare. Mr. Lewis and Mr. Hutchison were absent. Mayor Christiansen was

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 9, 2017 PAGE 8 also absent. Civilian members present for their Committee meetings were Mr. Caldwell and Mrs. Horsey (Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement). PARKS, RECREATION, AND COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT COMMITTEE The Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee meeting was held with Chairman Sudler presiding. Addition of Bollard Lighting - Mallard Pond Park Trail Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, informed members that the City of Dover recently completed construction of the Mallard Pond Park multi-use path, which connects Marsh Creek Drive to North Caroline Place, in the Mallard Pond development. She advised that the City completed the path and installed playground equipment this year, noting that the concrete path came in under the original estimate. Mrs. Townshend explained that Community Transportation Funds (CTF) and Delaware Land and Water Conservation Trust Funds were used for the project and, to date, there was no City money spent on the project. She stated that the path is a critical link between Dover High School and housing developments, primarily Mallard Pond and some of the condominiums near Mallard Pond. Mrs. Townshend advised that these areas are not easily accessible from Kenton Road and Route 8; however, the path makes the high school accessible to these areas by foot. Mrs. Townshend stated that, since there was money remaining in the budget and in the grant funds that had been secured for this project, staff would like to install bollard lighting along the path. She noted that this type of lighting was used to light the Capital City Trail on Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard, explaining that it is low lighting that should not interfere with neighboring residences. Mrs. Townshend explained that bollard lighting would be less intrusive than street lighting and improve the safety of the path, especially during the time of year when there could be kids going to and from the school in the dark. She advised that the Electric Department had put together an estimate of just under $20,000 for the lighting and noted that almost $29,000 in funding remained. She indicated that any unexpended Delaware Land and Water Conservation Trust Fund grant funds would go back to the State and CTF monies could be allocated to another project. Mrs. Townshend advised that there may still be funds remaining at the end of the project. Staff recommended proceeding with the installation of bollard lighting along the Mallard Pond Park multi-use path. Mrs. Horsey noted that 50-watt lighting was proposed and asked if this would be LED lighting or light bulbs. Responding, Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, stated that he did not believe there would be LED lighting. He noted that bollard lighting is similar to the lighting next to the Dover Public Library, which is not LED. Mr. Koenig advised that, if he recalled correctly, the lighting on the Capital City Trail

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 9, 2017 PAGE 9 was not LED and the estimate provided was without LED; however, he stated that clarification could be provided. Mr. Sudler asked what the cost differential would be between LED versus non-LED lighting. In response, Mr. Koenig indicated that he did not know the difference in cost but could try to get the information before the next City Council meeting scheduled for January. He stated that he was unsure if LED lights could be put into the bollard lighting fixtures. Mr. Sudler requested that Mr. Koenig provide a cost differential and a determination regarding whether the fixtures would be compatible with LED. Mr. Hare asked if this was use-it-or-lose-it money. Responding, Mrs. Townshend reiterated that unused grant allocation funds from the Delaware Land and Water Trust Fund would be returned to the State and unexpended CTF monies could be reallocated to another project. The Committee recommended proceeding with the installation of bollard lighting along the Mallard Pond Park multi-use path, as recommended by staff. During the Council meeting, Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, advised that staff was asked to evaluate potential LED lighting for this application. The Electric Department Staff estimated that the installation of 20 lighting fixtures at bollard, or waist-height along the new path, would result in approximately 1,000 feet of new space that would be lit. He advised that the estimated cost of the metal halide for bollard lighting was $19,897.67 for supplies and equipment out of the City warehouse. Mr. Koenig stated that Staff was not able to get an LED lighting estimate for the bollard fixtures; however, they prepared an LED lighting estimate for the colonial street lighting fixtures, which are used for residential streetlights. The colonial fixtures are approximately 18 feet tall and have an LED fixture. The Staff estimate for colonial street lighting fixtures with LED lighting is $24,517.59. Mr. Koenig advised that the Electric Department prefers the LED fixtures higher off the ground at 18 feet because they are concerned about the bollard lighting being vandalized. He also noted that they have not confirmed with the Parks and Recreation Staff as to which lighting fixture is most appropriate for the park. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Koenig advised that $100,000 was authorized for the pathway project, $50,000 of which came from Community Transportation Funds and $50,000 from the Delaware Land and Water Conservation Trust Fund. Mr. Koenig advised that approximately $14,500 from each of those funds is remaining and the lighting would qualify as an expense that could be charged against those funds. The Committee recommended proceeding with the installation of bollard lighting along the Mallard Pond Park multi-use path, as recommended by staff. Staff revised their recommendation to authorize the lighting project with the best option to be determined. Mr. Neil moved for approval of Staff’s recommendation. The motion was seconded by Mr. Cole and unanimously carried.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 9, 2017 PAGE 10 Mr. Sudler moved for acceptance of the Council Committee of the Whole/Parks Recreation and Community Enhancement Committee Report. The motion was seconded by Mr. Anderson and unanimously carried. Proposed Land Swap - Capitol Baptist Church/Mayfair Park During their Regular meeting of August 22, 2016, Council approved the Council Committee of the Whole/Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee’s recommendation for approval of staff’s recommendation to authorize the City Manager and other City staff to negotiate a proposed land swap which is mutually beneficial to the property owners and the City of Dover, including any necessary research and legal expenses necessary to determine the terms and conditions of a potential land swap that involves the public open space known as Mayfair Park with four (4) caveats, as follows: 1) that staff would come back and present at least three (3) alternatives on the proposed land swap that include maps and drawings; 2) that there would be commentary from the Parks and Recreation Department on what the potential effect would be on the future uses of the park for the land swap; 3) that it would include an estimate of costs, and a proposed cost sharing arrangement with the church would be identified, and 4) that staff was not authorized to expend any funds at this point without further approval. Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, informed members that concerns about the uses of the Mayfair Park began approximately a year ago. He advised that basketball nets and goals were removed from the park by staff because the neighborhood felt they detracted from the neighborhood. Mr. Koenig reminded members that various discussions had been held with the Capitol Baptist Church regarding a potential land swap. Referring to the four (4) caveats that Council had established regarding this matter, Mr. Koenig stated that no money had been spent. He advised members that, based on previous discussions, the City’s Geographical Information Systems (GIS) Department was able to develop maps by moving property lines reflecting four (4) potential land swap options. He indicated that a meeting was held with Capitol Baptist Church and Pastor Terri Moore on Monday, November 7, 2016, and the potential impact of each option was discussed. Referring to the map entitled “Mayfair Park - Potential Land Swap: Option 1”, Mr. Koenig stated that staff and the church felt that this option would have the least impact on new property owners. He reviewed the map, noting that two (2) residences currently front on Alder Road and back up to the park, and the park extends to the Capitol Baptist Church parking lot. Mr. Koenig stated that, according to this option, there would be a land swap of approximately 0.66 acres. He explained that the polygon outlined in red, located next to the church parking lot, would be transferred to Capitol Baptist Church and the rectangular section outlined in red to the north would be transferred to the City of Dover. Mr. Koenig stated advised members that this option would impact the property owner at 156 Blue Beach Drive. Mr. Koenig explained that each of the other options would affect more landowners. Referring to the map entitled “Mayfair Park - Potential Land Swap: Option 2”, he advised that Option 2 would take the City park away from the residents that front on

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 9, 2017 PAGE 11 Alder Road and impact two (2) additional residences on Blue Beach Drive. Mr. Koenig referred to the map entitled “Mayfair Park - Potential Land Swap: Option 3”, explaining that, similarly to Option 2, Option 3 would give up some frontage property on Alder Road, noting that one (1) of those residences would no longer abut the City park but two (2) property owners on Blue Beach Drive would be impacted. Referring to the map entitled “Mayfair Park - Potential Land Swap: Option 4”, he stated that under Option 4, the property owners on Alder Road would no longer abut the City park; however, five (5) properties along Blue Beach Drive would be affected. Mr. Koenig noted that this would also create an odd-shaped piece of land for the City. Based on the conversation with the church during the meeting on November 7, 2016, Mr. Koenig indicated that both staff and the church representatives felt that Option 1 would be the best option to put before the Committee to receive comments. He stated that, since that meeting, Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, had emailed the City’s contact at the Department of Natural Resources and Environment Control (DNREC) regarding the park. Mr. Koenig reminded members that State and federal money had been used at some point to improve the park, and concurrence from the State was needed to modify the boundary of the park. He advised that staff had not yet received any feedback at this point from DNREC; therefore, this part of the equation had not been resolved. Mr. Koenig stated that the purpose of this evening’s meeting was to get feedback on the options and take public comment. He advised that some of the options had been shared with Mr. Hare, and Mr. Koenig stated that he believed that Mr. Hare had shared them with people in the neighborhood. Mr. Koenig also noted that Pastor Moore had indicated that the church had talked to people in the neighborhood. Mr. Koenig stated that costs related to the land transfer had not yet been discussed because staff was unsure if the City would be moving forward to the next step. Staff recommended Option 1 if the City is going to pursue a potential land swap. Responding to Mr. Neil regarding the types of costs that would be involved, Mr. Koenig explained that there would be legal costs for the preparation and recording of the deed for the property for the land swap. He also noted that there were currently park improvements on the piece of land adjacent to the church property, and there was a question about whether those park improvements would need to be moved. Mr. Koenig advised that the City does not want to bear the cost to move those park improvements, but explained that there may be some other mechanism to transfer the value to the church. He noted that these types of discussions had not yet been held. Mr. Koenig reiterated that there would be real costs associated with the preparation of deeds and things like that, which Council had indicated staff should not pursue at the City’s expense. Referring to the map entitled “Mayfair Park - Potential Land Swap: Option 1,” Mr. Hosfelt asked what land the City currently owned. In response, Mr. Koenig

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 9, 2017 PAGE 12 stated that the City owns several pieces of property in this area and identified them on the map. Mr. Slavin referred to the map entitled “Mayfair Park - Potential Land Swap: Option 1” and asked who owned the small grassed area behind the church, noting that it did not appear in either of the polygons depicted. Responding, Mr. Koenig indicated that this small grassed area belonged to the church. Mr. Slavin asked if that area was a small in-holding of the church that was surrounded by park land and Mr. Koenig stated that it was, explaining that the church has an odd-shaped property. Mr. Slavin asked if all the properties on Blue Beach Drive were abutted by church property, and Mr. Koenig stated that they currently were. In response to Mr. Slavin, Mrs. Townshend stated that the vacant church property is zoned R-10, One-Family Residence Zone. She noted that this zoning would allow for 10,000 s.f. lots, which would be approximately four (4) lots per acre. Mrs. Townshend advised that this was approximately nine (9) acres, which would theoretically allow for 36 lots if roads, etc., could be put in. Mr. Sudler asked what the second option would be if Option 1 was not obtainable. Responding, Mr. Koenig advised that this had not been discussed; however, he would not recommend Option 4 because it would create an odd-shaped piece of land. He stated that Option 3 would probably be the next most attractive option because it would result in land that is closer to a square. Mr. Slavin stated his understanding that this was proposed to be a fee-simple swap and the City would be the outright owner of the land that it would receive. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that this was what had been discussed. Mr. Slavin stated that there would be some low costs and it would just be a swap. He asked if, rather than having the City own fee-simple land, discussions had taken place about conservation easements on a bigger amount of property that would be declared unbuildable land, with underlying ownership by the church. Mr. Slavin explained that his thought was that the land would then be conserved, and the City could design it to be behind all of the houses on Blue Beach Drive to provide a buffer that could never be developed behind those houses. Responding, Mr. Koenig advised that staff had not discussed that option. Mr. Slavin noted that this would give the church, and perhaps the City, the option to use it as open space. He stated that, at the very least, it would give the residents comfort knowing that the property right behind them may not end up being housing in the future. Mrs. Janice Sibbald, 144 Blue Beach Drive, stated that she had spoken during the August 9, 2016 Council Committee of the Whole/Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee meeting when this was discussed and recalled that an easement was granted or offered to the church. She stated that this was not being mentioned now, and there was only talk of a land swap. Responding, Mrs. Townshend stated that she thought there had been some discussion about

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 9, 2017 PAGE 13 potential easements; however, the motion made by members did not address easements but a land swap, the effect it would have on recreation, and no expenditure of funds. Mr. Sudler asked how an easement would impact staff’s recommendation in regard to this matter. In response, Mrs. Townshend stated that it would depend on what that easement entails. She indicated that if the City proceeded with an easement instead of a land swap, it could affect the grant covenants because the land that is put under an easement would no longer be accessible for public recreation. Mrs. Townshend explained that, for instance, if a parking lot or drive aisle is placed on the land, it could end up complicating things with DNREC. Mrs. Sibbald expressed her understanding from the August 9, 2016 meeting that the easement would be for two-way traffic to go back and forth from the property where the church is located to the vacant property that the church owns. She stated that traffic would cross the park, but the church would not own that land. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that Mrs. Sibbald was correct. He recalled that there had been discussions as long as two (2) years ago when the church had indicated that they would potentially like to obtain an easement from the City of Dover to drive through the parking lot adjacent to the substation through a drive aisle to access the nine (9) acres of land, where they would potentially build some kind of building and a parking lot that would be associated with the church. He advised that the problem was that the area where the easement would most likely go was where the playground was currently located, which would potentially create a conflict with the playground. Mr. Koenig stated that, during the discussion at the Committee meetings, everybody felt that it may be a cleaner transaction if there was a swap of land that would better define the City’s park, potentially give the City a better shape of land, and at the same time potentially transfer land to the church so they could proceed with future development that would enhance the community. He stated that there were discussions about this early on. Mr. Koenig advised that Mrs. Townshend was correct that if an easement was granted, there would be no exchange of land, and the easement would reduce the area of the park that the City could utilize for community purposes. He advised that granting an easement could have a negative effect on how the transaction is viewed from the State, as far as maintaining parkland, etc. Mr. Koenig indicated that the discussion had gravitated to a land swap, whereby the City would indicate to the State that the City would give up 0.66 acres of the park but replace it with another 0.66 acres, and the shape of the park would then be more appropriate for modern application and recreation. Mr. Sudler asked if staff had looked at the impact of providing an easement from the Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT) or the entity that would approve this from the State. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that if the City provided an easement, the only review required to his knowledge would be internal review of the drive aisle across City property. He explained that the development of the nine (9) acres, whether with a parking lot or a building, would most likely require Planning Commission review because of the land disturbance area. Mr. Koenig indicated that

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 9, 2017 PAGE 14 staff had not reviewed any associated costs. He stated that, in their discussion with church representatives, staff had stated that if the City granted an easement, the costs to prepare the easement document and to build the drive aisle, etc., would be the church’s costs. Mr. Koenig advised that this would become somewhat of a problem if the church were to improve the City’s property. Although this sounded like a good idea on the surface, he explained that there would be issues of maintenance in perpetuity, and if someone was hurt on the property, there would be a question of who owns the property. Mr. Koenig stated that if the City were to do a transaction, in his opinion a land swap would be a cleaner transaction. He indicated that there was discussion about the location of the playground equipment that is now near the church’s area, the composition of the children in the area, and what it is that they want. Mr. Koenig advised that he did not know whether the playground should be moved, if there is even a need for this type of playground equipment in a revised park, or if, in the transaction, the City should decide to leave the equipment and plan for something new. He explained that this discussion had not yet been held. Mrs. Sibbald, referring to the map entitled “Mayfair Park - Potential Land Swap: Option 1,” stated that she was confused by the way the lines were drawn, explaining that she did not know why a yellow line was running through the park and a jagged line going up, as if there was an entrance to the park outlined in yellow. She advised that there was an entrance to the park next to the two (2) houses at the bottom that were adjacent to the church. In response, Mr. Koenig stated that he did not believe the lines were meant to indicate entrances but parcels, noting that the park currently exists on two (2) different parcels. Mrs. Sibbald stated that the park was one (1) whole, big piece. Responding, Mr. Koenig explained that legally there were two (2) parcels. Mrs. Sibbald stated that they could not be subdivided or held for anything else and asked for explanation. In response, Mrs. Townshend advised that the park is made up of two (2) parcels of land, one (1) on the corner outlined in yellow, and one (1) just north of it that extends to the playground. She explained that these two (2) separate parcels were part of the park, noting that this did not mean that it would be developed but that the two (2) parcels had never been combined into one (1). Mrs. Sibbald stated that the existing land use had always been a park and this would not change, and Mrs. Townshend indicated that this was correct. She stated that it appeared that at some point the land was divided into two (2) parcels, or possibly the northern parcel was added later, noting that it would be necessary to look at the history to make a determination. Mrs. Townshend reiterated that it was all one (1) park with two (2) different parcels. Mr. Anderson asked if the Parks and Recreation Department had determined what type of use would best fit this particular park through discussions or a needs assessment. Responding, Mrs. Townshend indicated that staff had planned to hold a park planning workshop at the park during the summer; however, they decided to wait and see what happened with the land swap and then work with the neighbors to develop a park plan. She stated that it was clear that the City had not made any

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 9, 2017 PAGE 15 upgrades to the park, other than the playground equipment that was installed in 2005. Mrs. Townshend indicated that there was asphalt from the basketball courts, some goal posts, and a backstop, so people could use the park for pick-up activities; however, there was no manicured ballfield. She stated that the question was if the needs in that specific area had evolved. Mrs. Townshend explained that once the park boundary is determined, staff wants to have a neighborhood park planning meeting to find out specifically what activity people would like to see at the park. Mr. Anderson stated that it was an interesting conundrum that one (1) department wanted to know what was needed to effect the change and the other department wanted to know what the change would be to know the needs, and he asked how this would work out. In response, Mrs. Townshend stated that the park is a very odd shape, with a lot of property extending beyond the church that is shielded from public view, which had been part of the problem with the basketball court. Mrs. Townshend indicated that, regardless of what improvements are ultimately put in the park, reshaping the park could be a benefit to the community and could accommodate whatever types of amenities would be wanted in the park. Mr. Anderson asked what the total acreage of the park was projected to be. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that it would not change from its current size. Mrs. Townshend explained that the acreage would stay the same, since one (1) area would be changed for another. She estimated the total acreage at just under three (3) acres, noting that any amount that goes to the church would have an equal swap. Mrs. Sibbald stated that, during the August 9, 2016 meeting, she provided photographs of signs on the church property that state no trespassing. She indicated that it was discussed that the City had found that the parking lot had been paved so that people would be able to access the park through the church property, and this was part of $1,500 that was paid to pave the church’s parking lot. Mrs. Sibbald noted that the signs were still there and nothing had been done about it. She stated that there was talk about access to the park; however, there is no access as long as the church has signs up that state that people cannot walk or go through. Mrs. Sibbald indicated that the agreement stated that people could park in the church parking lot when they wanted to use the park; however, they had never been allowed to do so by the church. She stated that this had been presented in public at the meeting that she attended. Mr. Koenig advised that Pastor Moore had indicated that, while this agreement was reflected in the minutes, he was unsure that it actually happened. Mr. Koenig explained that staff had not told the church to take the signs down because they wanted to have the discussion about the land swap. He explained that Pastor Moore had indicated that one (1) of the reasons for the signs being up was because the church had problems with residents at the apartment complexes using the church parking lot as overflow, or parking there for days and taking up the off-street parking. Mr. Koenig stated that he would defer to Pastor Moore, but Mr. Koenig believed that related conversations indicated that the church’s position was not that they did not

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 9, 2017 PAGE 16 want people in the neighborhood coming to stay at the park for a few minutes with their kids, but they were having difficulty with people at the apartment complexes leaving cars and other items in their parking lot for many hours. Mr. Caldwell recalled that during the August 9, 2016 meeting, there was discussion about illegal activities taking place in the park and questioned if this was still a concern. In response, Mr. Koenig stated his recollection that residents along Alder Road were concerned about activity in the park, specifically kids doing things related to the basketball courts and vandalism. He advised that he was unsure about what illegal activity was occurring; however, when there are isolated areas, a number of different things can happen. Mr. Koenig stated that he would defer to Pastor Moore to provide a first-hand perspective regarding the activity that was occurring. Mrs. Sibbald informed members that the basketball hoops were removed, the light had been turned off, and there had not been illegal activity going on there anymore. She advised that she had seen young children, probably around the ages of 10 to 12, playing soccer on the basketball court, which is still paved. Mrs. Sibbald indicated that there had not been any problems since the basketball hoops were taken down and this was not a valid complaint anymore. She stated that the discussion had been that if an easement was given to the church to cross over to their own property, the church would have to pay for moving the equipment. Mrs. Sibbald explained that if it was being stated that the City needed to do a land swap now because of illegal activity, there was no such activity. Pastor Terri Moore, Capitol Baptist Church, advised that the reason that the no trespassing signs are at that location is because there are no entrances to the park there, noting that a fence runs all the way across and there is no way to get in. Referring to the map entitled “Mayfair Park - Potential Land Swap: Option 1,” he indicated the location of the fence and the entrances to the park. Pastor Moore advised that the problem was that a lot of people from Clearfield Apartments would flood through the properties of the church and the two (2) adjacent houses on Alder Road to get to the basketball courts. He stated that these people had destroyed the fence many times and the church repaired it, noting that the church went in with the City to redo the fence several years ago and paid to make it higher, hoping that the individuals would use the entrance. Pastor Moore explained that this had not stopped these individuals, who had ripped open the fence and kicked the gate in, noting that much of this was because of the design of the property. Pastor Moore stated that the church wants to work with, attract, and minister to the community and it would be odd to say that they would not allow people to do things. He explained that the no trespassing signs are there because the fence had been torn down, noting that the whole thing was torn down where the house is located next to the church. Pastor Moore advised that their gate had been kicked in and they had repaired the fence over and over again. He stated that the City had a problem with the activity, noting that the problem was twofold, the items in the park and also the

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 9, 2017 PAGE 17 shape of the park, explaining that its location was attracting the group to come through the way they were. Pastor Moore explained that the land swap would be good for everyone and would help the church with their parking. He noted that a redesign would solve the problems of trespassing through everybody’s property, since the individuals accessing the park would go a different way, which would curb the activity. Pastor Moore indicated that there had never been any longstanding agreement with the City about letting people park at the church, stating that people had parked there and the church understood this. Pastor Moore advised that the fence was the problem, since one cannot get to the park where the fence is located. Pastor Moore provided a copy of a statement that Mrs. Sunny Schmidt, 375 Alder Road, asked him to submit on her behalf. He stated that Mrs. Schmidt resides two (2) houses over from the church, had wanted to be present, and was in favor of the land swap. Mr. Neil asked if Pastor Moore believed that Option 1 was the strongest option for the church. Responding, Pastor Moore stated that he thought it was best for the community. He indicated that his first thought would be to go straight up to make the park square; however, the church wanted the situation to be good for the community as well and to be good neighbors. Pastor Moore stated that the church felt that the best way would interfere the least with anyone, and Option 1 would not affect anyone that was not already affected. Referring to the map entitled “Mayfair Park - Potential Land Swap: Option 1,” he explained that the park was already along the side and part of the back of the property belonging to the house at 156 Blue Beach Drive, and Option 1 would increase that. Pastor Moore noted that the two (2) houses on Alder Road already had the park behind them, so they would not be affected. He stated that there would certainly be other designs that would benefit the church; however, the church wanted everyone to be happy and felt that working together would solve the problems of the park and the activity there, as well as the church’s parking problem. Pastor Moore advised that Option 1 would help the church and the City, noting that the church currently has two (2) services on Sunday and people have to park on the street. He indicated that proceeding with this approach would remove parking on the street during service times and allow the church to increase their parking lot, noting that they must see what the agreement and design would be before moving forward. Ms. Sandy Kinkus, 365 Fiddler’s Green, asked Pastor Moore when parking is an issue, other than Sunday. Responding, Pastor Moore advised that they have a lot of things going on, including Sunday services, Wednesday services, and special meetings throughout the week. Ms. Kinkus asked if the church definitely wanted to use this property as a parking lot. Responding, Pastor Moore indicated that the church did not know exactly what they would be doing yet or the design and noted that the church owns other land there as well.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 9, 2017 PAGE 18 Ms. Kinkus stated her understanding that the City could not make plans until there is a land swap and asked if it had been established that a land swap would be legal. In response, Mrs. Townshend advised that, because of the grant covenants, the land cannot be removed from outdoor recreation and would have to be replaced with an equivalent. She stated the need to go through DNREC to determine if any of the proposed alternatives would be considered an equivalent. Mrs. Townshend indicated that, in preliminary discussions when this issue first came up, DNREC had stated that a land swap would be less rigorous than reducing the size of the park and trying to replace it elsewhere. Mr. Sudler expressed his understanding that the land swap could be considered equivalent, but had not been deemed as equivalent. In response, Mr. Slavin stated that he was dealing with a similar issue in Delaware City in his State job, and that a swap must be the same amount acre for acre, and also the same quality of land. He advised that land could not be taken out of active recreation and open space and swapped for an identical amount of land that is wetlands and inaccessible, and Mrs. Townshend concurred. In regard to the City’s current discussion, Mr. Slavin indicated that the land parcels are adjacent to each other which is the easiest type of swap that can be done under these covenants. Mrs. Townshend indicated that she did not see any issues that would prevent a swap from going forward; however, she advised that the City needed to be sure to follow the process through the State. Ms. Kinkus stated her understanding that the City would not incur any expense; however, she noted that cost-sharing had been mentioned and asked what this meant. Responding, Mr. Koenig explained that cost-sharing had been part of the overall motion that was made during the August 9, 2016 meeting and approved by Council on August 22, 2016; however, there was no commitment of funds on behalf of the City. He advised that this would be the next step in the process, noting that the City was not even close to being done. Mr. Koenig stated that the question about cost- sharing would be whether there is a benefit to the City in sharing the cost of a fence or something else in the future, noting that this had not yet been discussed. He explained that staff was trying to react to the different concerns of residents who abut the existing park and the facilities that had been constructed in that park that they were not happy with, as well as the church entity that had expressed interest in a potential land swap. Mr. Koenig indicated that staff was trying to present alternatives to the Council and Committee that may add value to the overall community. He stated that the City may end up not selecting any of the options and leaving everything as is, or choosing one of the options to move forward with and evaluate further. Mr. Koenig reiterated that there was clear direction from Council that they did not want staff to spend any money up to this point, and staff had not done so. Ms. Kinkus stated that the City wants to develop the park but cannot until the land swap issue is settled, because it is not known which parcel of land will be swapped. She indicated that her first impression was that Pastor Moore wanted the piece of property for a parking lot; however, she now understood that the church did not know what they wanted to do with the property. Ms. Kinkus stated that if the church

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 9, 2017 PAGE 19 wanted the piece of property, there had to be a plan in mind which she thought needed to be made clear before doing the swap. She noted that there may be zoning, conservation, and water runoff issues. Ms. Kinkus suggested that if the City and church were going to move forward, there should be a committee made up of the residents in the area and Pastor Moore to be clear about what the church would do with the piece of land. She advised that, as far as the park is concerned, she has some ideas that she would like to present at a later date, noting that this all seemed very foggy to her at this point. Mr. Sudler asked Pastor Moore if, after hearing some of the concerns, he was willing to sit down with residents and come up with a clear plan of action in regard to the property. Responding, Pastor Moore stated that he would be happy to discuss it; however, he explained that the truth was that the church already owns nine (9) acres there and would or would not develop it regardless. Pastor Moore noted that just a little strip of land was being discussed and they were open to any type of discussions with the community. He indicated that it seemed that Ms. Kinkus was trying to put the cart before the horse, noting that the church knew some of the things that were possibilities; however, it would depend on what happens with the land. Pastor Moore explained that the church did not have a grand plan awaiting and noted that they are a non-profit organization and do not have millions of dollars in the bank, and anything they would do would take years. He advised that if the church develops the land, they would come to the Council Chambers again, and the City could decide whether or not they want something there. Pastor Moore stated that these subjects should be addressed at that time, rather than before dealing with the land swap, noting that the church does not know what could be done without the swap happening first. Mr. Hare asked why Pastor Moore wanted the land. In response, Pastor Moore advised that the church has two (2) pieces of property that are not connected. Mr. Hare asked if the piece of land could be cut down and if the tip of it, one-third or perhaps 0.22 acres, could be swapped with the City for 0.22 acres. He explained that the church would then have the land in the corner where the playground equipment is located and would have full access to their other land. Responding, Pastor Moore indicated that this would limit options for the park, stating that there is a small strip there to do what the City wants to do. Mr. Hare advised that it would not limit the park any more than it is now. Pastor Moore expressed his understanding that this was why the City was trying to change the situation. Mr. Hare advised that the City was not trying to change it, but the church was proposing that the City change it. Pastor Moore stated his understanding that this was a mutual problem that the City and the church were trying to solve together. He noted that the church was landlocked, and this would help them; however, there were also a lot of problems with the park that had prompted these meetings. Pastor Moore stated that what was in the park and its design were problems, and moving and redesigning it would help the problems of the park and the church at the same time, and this was why he felt this would be a good solution for everyone and was the way to go.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 9, 2017 PAGE 20 Mr. Hare indicated that the problems with basketball had been alleviated since late April or early May when the equipment was taken down, noting that he and Mr. Slavin had been over there. Responding, Pastor Moore stated that people were still climbing the fence to get to the park. Mr. Hare noted that the basketball hoops where there were drug dealers had been cleared. Mr. Simon Lowe, 140 Blue Beach Drive, stated that of the proposals he had seen, he liked Option 1, which would have the least impact. He noted that his wife concurred with this but was unable to be present. Mr. Lowe advised that he liked this option because it was the church’s property and they could build whatever the City authorized, and it would also impact the least amount of property owners. Mr. Lowe stated that Option 1 would not impact his property, which was the fifth property. In regard to the park, he stated that he had more issues with kids and parents playing in the street than playing in the park. Mr. Lowe advised members that he would like to hear what the plan is for the park. He stated that the biggest problem is kids playing at the intersection and people zooming down Blue Beach Drive, noting that the stop signs serve no purpose other than places for the kids to play. Ms. Susan Murphy, 116 Blue Beach Drive, stated that she was in favor of the land swap and agreed that Option 1 seemed best. She stated that she had been a resident on Blue Beach Drive for 14 years and had never cared for the way that the park is. Ms. Murphy noted that there is a playground right next to an electrical substation and although it was fenced in, it was not welcoming to the community. She stated that she felt it would benefit the community much more to have the land swap, a much more defined square shape, and a more community-friendly setting. Ms. Sibbald stated that she wanted to make a comment that she had made in August. She explained that there are two (2) entrances through the gate and through the fence on the church property to the park, noting that the church had been using that park for a playground since they put their school in. Ms. Sibbald stated that the church was allowed to have a church and a school because of the park, since they did not have any room for a playground and they were using the park for a playground. She indicated that the church uses two (2) entrances and exits to go back and forth with the children into the park and she did not know why it was just stated that there were no entrances there. Ms. Sibbald stated that this entrance was what the public was using when they would walk through the church property. Responding, Pastor Moore advised that this was not a public entrance, and when the church went in with the City to rebuild the fence and paid for the second half, they also paid to put the gate in because they do use it as a park, noting that it is a park to be used. He stated that this was not a public entrance and there was only one (1) gate there for the kids from the church to go in. At the request of Mr. Sudler, Pastor Moore referred to the map entitled “Mayfair Park - Potential Land Swap: Option 1,” and identified the gate, noting that there was six-foot fencing that dropped to four (4) feet. Ms. Elaine Kesselring, 1315 New Burton Road, stated that she was in favor of Option 1. She noted that everyone had said that she does not live on that street;

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 9, 2017 PAGE 21 however, she can see everything that is happening, the park, and the property because it is wide open. Ms. Kesselring indicated that the field was the only thing between her and the church. She stated that she did not think that she would like to have the church landlocked, although she believed that it currently was. Ms. Kesselring explained that the church does not have access to their property for a parking lot, or if they want to build, etc. She stated that the only way to preclude anything happening in your backyard is to own the property. Mr. Sam Knickerbocker, 943 Buck Drive, stated that he was in favor of the land swap and Option 1, which he thought benefitted both the church and the community for the park. He indicated that he has three (3) kids and thought it was an interesting area of the park. Mr. Knickerbocker noted that the church had been in Dover for 50 years and 40 years in that location. He stated that he is an attender of the church and several hundreds of people also attend. Mr. Knickerbocker advised that being in a landlocked position is detrimental not only to the church, but also to the community, because of all that takes place on the streets when there are events and activities. He noted that he knew there were a lot of legal issues and things that would have to be dealt with, as far as whether there would be a land swap or something else that would take place. Mr. Knickerbocker indicated that the most important question was whether this answer would help the community and also the church, and he stated that he thought it would benefit everyone. Noting that this had nothing to do with the park, Mr. Neil stated that he was the producer of the 300th anniversary show honoring the City of Dover on May 7, 2017 and extended a personal invitation to Pastor Moore to have a group participate and perform on stage at this event. He asked Pastor Moore to contact him. Mr. Neil stated that he was unsure if members were ready at this point to take any specific action, noting that if they indicate that they will move ahead with Option 1, there is still a lot of work to do. He stated that other agencies must be contacted to find out what must happen and details must be worked out, such as the costs and how it would move forward. Mr. Neil suggested making a motion to continue on the basis of Option 1 being favored, but to come back with a further report on the details of how the City would be able to do this. Mr. Neil moved to recommend moving ahead with the process using Option 1 and coming back with a report at a later meeting, seconded by Mr. Anderson. Mr. Hare suggested an addition to the motion, stating that he did not want the impression out there that members were the ones who wanted this, noting that this was not something the City was actively wanting to get done. He stated that he did not think that any City expense should be involved and any expenses should be incurred by the church, noting that it would be a bigger benefit for the church than for the City.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 9, 2017 PAGE 22 Responding to Mr. Sudler, Mr. Neil stated that he was receptive to a friendly amendment to the motion. Mr. Anderson stated that, as the seconder, he would agree to the motion since it is all part of the negotiation and he thought it was a good starting point. Mr. Sudler requested the City Clerk to restate the motion and the friendly amendment to the motion for the record. Responding, Mrs. Traci McDowell, City Clerk, advised that the motion was to recommend moving ahead with the process using Option 1, that staff come back to the Committee with details at a later meeting, and that any expenses shall be incurred by the church. Mr. Slavin noted that none of this would signify Council’s approval for any action at this time, but would simply move the process further along. He supported, promoted, and encouraged the church and the neighbors to communicate the best they can on this issue. Mr. Slavin stated that he thought that members were missing a level of understanding and what the benefits would be to the church and the community, noting that in some ways he thought that it was a win-win for the community and the church. Mr. Sudler echoed Mr. Slavin’s comments, stating that the community and the church had a lot of questions and they should talk and try to work out a clear understanding of what would take place. He suggested that they may agree or agree to disagree. Mr. Sudler stated that members were trying to make sure that all City constituents are served and that there is a clear understanding. Mr. Anderson stated that members had heard from five (5) people, an overwhelming number, who were in favor of Option 1 for various reasons. He asked what the essence was of the letter from Mrs. Schmidt and if it supported a particular option or the concept in general. As requested by Mr. Sudler, Mrs. McDowell read the correspondence from Mrs. Sunny O. Schmidt, dated December 13, 2016, into the record. The Committee recommended moving ahead with the process using Option 1, that staff come back to the Committee with details at a later meeting, and that any expenses shall be incurred by the church. By consent agenda, Mr. Hare moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Neil and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Hosfelt absent). Mr. Sudler moved for acceptance of the Council Committee of the Whole Report, seconded by Mr. Anderson and unanimously carried.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 9, 2017 PAGE 23 MONTHLY REPORTS - NOVEMBER 2016 By motion of Mr. Hare, seconded by Mr. Neil, the following monthly reports were accepted by consent agenda: City Assessor's Report City Manager's Report City Planner's Report Controller/Treasurer's Budget Report Fire Chief's Report Police Chief's Report EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS - SALT STORAGE BARN Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, advised that the need for a salt storage barn to be constructed at the rear of the Schutte Park property was identified. This building will allow City staff to store salt under cover, thereby greatly reducing the environmental impacts of this operation. Mr. Koenig noted that salt is currently stored at Old PW II (Water Street yard) under a tarp within the old wastewater treatment plant concrete clarifying rings. The current method of covering this material is inadequate and has potential environmental impacts on the St. Jones River. Mr. Koenig advised that this project will increase compliance with the City’s NPDES MS4 permit, as housing the salt under a roof will dramatically decrease the environmental impact of salt entering a water body. He reminded members that the City of Dover received a Conciliation Order by Consent from the Secretary of the Department of Natural Resources & Environmental Control (DNREC), which was executed on June 29, 2016. Mr. Koenig advised that the order mandates that this salt barn be constructed within fourteen (14) months of the signed order, or August 29, 2017. Mr. Koenig advised that bids received for this project in July 2014 did not meet the design requirements and a bid request in February 2016 received no responses. He advised that another proposal was advertised in October of 2016 and one responsive proposal was received from Dutchman Contracting, LLC of Denver, PA, for a base bid of $88,942. City staff reviewed the submissions and found that Dutchman Contracting, LLC's proposal met all the requirements for the qualifications of the project. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Koenig advised that the additional $60,000 needed would come from the FY17 Street and Alley Program, Project Number 1701 and Staff expects that they will be able to bring all these projects in within the total authorized budget. He noted that it is possible that the segment that would be delayed is the last segment on the program which is currently Mockingbird Avenue. Mr. Koenig noted that, prior to Mockingbird Avenue being paved, the current order is Delaware Avenue; a small portion of alley that needs to be constructed between Kirkwood and West Streets, depending on the weather; Buck Drive; Lincoln Street; and Wyoming Avenue. Mr. Koenig stated that they are in the process of applying for Community Transportation Funds from various legislators to the program. He reiterated that Mockingbird Avenue is the last street on the plan and it could potentially be moved from the FY17 program to the FY18 program for budget compliance.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 9, 2017 PAGE 24 Staff recommended awarding the contract to Dutchman Contracting, LLC for the City of Dover Salt Storage Barn Project, RFP 17-0017PW, for the amount of $88,942. The remaining funds required for the construction of the slab, which will be built under the current Street, Concrete and Alley Program contract by George & Lynch has an anticipated cost of $33,458. Mr. Neil moved for approval of Staff’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Cole and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Hosfelt absent). CLARIFICATION OF APPOINTMENT APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS/PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO APPLICATION During their Regular Meeting of October 10, 2016, City Council approved revisions to the application for appointment to a City Committee, Commission, or Board. After having received the new applications, Staff requested clarification on whether the application was sufficient or if a resume should also be requested, both for new applicants and members wishing to be reappointed. Mr. Lewis advised that, after discussion with Mrs. McDowell, City Clerk, he agreed that the application should be revised to include more detailed information related to job duties and responsibilities and the requirement for resumes be eliminated. Mr. Lewis moved for approval of the revised application (Exhibit #1) and elimination of the resume requirement for new appointments and re-appointments. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hare and unanimously carried. APPOINTMENT OF DELAWARE MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC CORPORATION (DEMEC) DIRECTOR AND ALTERNATE DIRECTOR (SCOTT D. KOENIG, CITY MANAGER, AND HARRY A. MALONEY, ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR) By consent agenda, Mr. Hare moved to appoint Mr. Scott D. Koenig and Mr. Harry A. Maloney to serve as Delaware Municipal Electric Corporation (DEMEC) Director and Alternate Director, respectively. The motion was seconded by Mr. Neil and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Hosfelt absent). APPOINTMENT RECOMMENDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT SLAVIN - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - CLAYTON E. HAMMOND II - ANNUAL APPOINTMENT TO EXPIRE MAY 8, 2017 Council President Slavin recommended the appointment of Mr. Clayton E. Hammond II to serve on the Economic Development Committee for a term to expire May 8, 2017. By consent agenda, Mr. Hare moved for approval of the appointment of Mr. Hammond, as recommended by Council President Slavin. The motion was seconded by Mr. Neil and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Hosfelt absent). CITY MANAGER’S ANNOUNCEMENTS Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, thanked all the Public Works, Electric, Water, Sewer, Warehousing, Fleet Maintenance, Emergency Management, Police, and Fire staff for the additional efforts put forth to clear snow and maintain services over the weekend. Mr. Koenig noted that, other

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 9, 2017 PAGE 25 than the library and recreation center closing a few hours early on Saturday, the weather over the weekend seemed to be handled relatively smoothly. Mr. Koenig thanked City Council members for the discussion and opportunity to review a number of issues at the Retreat on Friday, January 6, 2017. He stated that he thought it was a very worthwhile effort and exercise and that he looks forward to the implementation of those discussions. COUNCIL MEMBERS’ ANNOUNCEMENTS Council President Slavin echoed the City Manager’s comments regarding the snow removal efforts and asked that Mr. Koenig pass along Council’s thanks to all of the staff that were involved. He noted those who were sitting at home watching the snow fall do not know what it is like to ride up 20 feet in the air or in a snow plow and how dangerous that can be. Mr. Slavin stated that Staff did a tremendous job and that he had received an e-mail from a constituent stating that "the City nailed snow removal this time." Mr. Hutchison advised that he had e-mailed Mr. Koenig about snow removal in his neighborhood. Mr. Slavin advised that this was Police Chief Paul Bernat’s last meeting and that his last day with the City would be that Friday. Mr. Slavin requested the right to invite Chief Bernat back to Council for a formal “thank you” upon his retirement. Mr. Sudler stated that City Staff did a great job clearing the roads and thanked all of the public safety Staff. Mr. Anderson thanked Chief Bernat for doing a great job being available to the community and engaging members of the community in a very, very positive way. He stated that he hoped the legacy that Chief Bernat started in restoring community policing, restoring the cadet program, and restoring the Police Athletic League continues because it has been tremendous in the community. Mr. Anderson also expressed appreciation that Chief Bernat was able to get more law enforcement officers, which was desperately needed in the community. Mr. Anderson thanked the Public Works Staff, noting that he had not received one complaint about the snow removal. Mr. Anderson thanked President Slavin for issuing a clarification and apologized for any misinterpretation on his part. Mr. Lewis thanked Chief Bernat for his service, one law enforcement officer to another. He noted that he had met the Chief many years ago when he was getting his hair cut at the Colonial Barber Shop by the late Mike Sullivan and he had thought very highly of the Chief ever since. Mr. Hutchison echoed the comments already made about Chief Bernat and personally thanked him for the leadership that he brought to the men and women of the Dover Police Department. He stated that, as Chief Bernat prepares to leave, he can be extremely proud of the foundation that he laid. Mr. Hutchison stated that he feels very strongly that Dover has the finest police department in the state of Delaware and noted that there has never been more demand placed on law enforcement. He

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 9, 2017 PAGE 26 noted that training and selection of personnel continue to be extremely important and there will be future challenges, but Mr. Hutchison stated that he thought they were prepared to handle them. Police Chief Paul Bernat thanked Mr. Hutchison, former Police Chief, for hiring him 27 and a half years ago, noting that he will think of him every month. Mr. Lewis moved for adjournment, seconded by Mr. Neil and unanimously carried. Meeting adjourned at 8:19 p.m. TRACI A. McDOWELL CITY CLERK All ordinances, resolutions, motions, and orders adopted by City Council during their Regular Meeting of January 9, 2017, are hereby approved. ROBIN R. CHRISTIANSEN MAYOR /TM S:\AGENDAS-MINUTES-PACKETS-PRESENTATIONS-ATT&EXH\Council-Minutes\2017\01-09-2017 Council Minutes.wpd Exhibits Exhibit #1 - Revised Committee, Commission, and Board Application

EXHIBIT #1 CITY OF DOVER, DELAWARE Regular Council Meeting of 01/09/2017 APPLICATION FOR COMMITTEE, COMMISSION, OR BOARD APPOINTMENT Section 1 - Basic Information Full Name (Prefix/Title, Last, First, MI, Suffix/Designation) Address (No. , Street, City, State, Zip) City ofDover residency is required for appointment to the Board of Adjustment, Compensation Commission; Dover Housing Authority; Election Board; Historic District Commission; Human Relations Commission; Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee; Parks, Recreation and Community Enhancement Committee; Planning Commission; Property Maintenance Code Board of Appeals; Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee; St. Jones Greenway Commission; and Utility Committee. Phone (home) Phone (cell) E-Mail pt 2nd 3rd 4th lam I I am not registered to vote Council District Voter registration is required for appointment to the Election Board. Please list any elected or appointed office that you currently hold under the government of the United States or the State, County, or City. No member ofthe Ethics Commission or Human Relations Commission shall hold any elected or appointed office under the government of the United States or the State, County, or City. No member of the Board of Adjustment, at the time of appointment and throughout the term of office, shall be candidates nor members ofthe legislative body nor employees ofthe City. Section 2- Employment Experience- Please provide your professional work history (most recent first) Employer/Company Position/Title Start and End Dates Please provide a brief description of the duties and responsibilities below. Employer/Company Position/Title Start and End Dates Please provide a brief description of the duties and responsibilities below. Employer/Company Position/Title Start and End Dates Please provide a brief description of the duties and responsibilities below.

Application for Committee, Commission, or Board Appointment Page 2 Section 3 - Professional Licenses and Certificates License/Certificate Date Issued/Date Expires Status (active, inactive, pending) Section 4 - Education - Please provide your complete educational backgrounds . Dates do not have to be exact. School Certificate, Diploma, or Degree Dates Attended High School College Other Section 5 - Organizations/Society Memberships, Previous Experience Serving on Committees, CommunityNolunteer Experience - Please list all organizations and societies of which you have been, or are currently, affiliated. Organization Name Previous Current Section 6 - Questionnaire Please provide the name of the Committee, Commission, or Board on which you are interested in serving. See Committee, Commission, and Board Listing. Provide any special knowledge, education, experience, qualities or talent that qualify you to serve on the committee, commission or board listed above . . Please explain why you wish to serve on this committee, commission, or board.

Application for Committee, Commission, or Board Appointment Page 3 Please describe what skills you have that would enhance the productivity of the committee, commission, or board. Do you, your spouse, or any immediate family members have any potential conflicts of interest (personal or financial) that could require you to recuse yourself from votes of the cotmnittee, commission, or board for which you are applying? If yes, please explain. No Yes Do you, your spouse, or any immediate family members own real property, personal property, financial holdings or receive income from any source which might present, or appear to present, a conflict of interest with your requested appointment? If yes, please explain. No Yes Have you, your spouse, or any immediate family members ever been affiliated (as an officer, owner, director, trustee, partner, advisor, or consultant) with any institutions (corporations, firms, partnerships, business enterprises, non-profit organization, etc.) which might present, or appear to present, a potential conflict of interest with your requested appointment? If yes, please explain. No Yes Do you have a personal or business relationship with any members of City Council, members of any City committees, commissions, or boards, or employees ofthe City of Dover? If yes, please list them. No Yes Have you ever been registered or served as a lobbyist (paid or unpaid) with the State of Delaware or any government organization? If yes, please list the organizations you represented. No Yes Have you been convicted of a misdemeanor or felony as an adult? If yes, please explain. No Yes Are you currently under any federal, state, or local investigation for violation of a criminal law? If yes, please explain. No Yes Please list three references that are not related to you and would be able to speak to your ability to serve on this committee, commission, or board . - - .. -

Application for Committee, Commission, or Board Appointment Page 4 I acknowledge that I am in good financial standing with the City of Dover, which includes being current on all taxes, utilities, and other obligations owed to the City. Yes No I acknowledge that applications are public documents and are subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act of the State of Delaware ifrequested. Yes No I certify that the information submitted in this application is true to the best of my knowledge and recognize that if any of the information included in this application is false, my application may be disqualified from consideration. If any information in this application changes during the consideration process or during my term if appointed, I agree to submit the updated information to the City Clerk's Office to be appended to my application as soon as possible. Yes No Signature Date The following questions are optional. They will enable the appointing authority to consider the appointment of a diverse group of individuals. Are you a person with a disability? Yes No Do you have a relative with a disability Yes No Please describe your gender Please describe your etlmicity -- - ·- - - ~ ~