COUNCIL PACKET

Regular Council Meeting Agenda November 23, 2020 - 7:30 p.m. This meeting will be held remotely via WebEx. Public participation information is as follows: Phone: 1-408-418-9388 Link: https://cityofdoverde.webex.com/cityofdoverde/onstage/g.php?MTID=ed37aa364ce6ff56 2556c58b80e3abcf8 Event number: 173 011 8000 Event password: DOVER (if needed) If you are new to WebEx get the app now at https://www.webex.com/ to be ready when the meeting starts. Invocation by Mayor Christiansen Pledge of Allegiance Led by Councilman Neil Adoption of Agenda * Consent Agenda Those items on the Council Agenda which are considered routine and non-controversial shall be marked with an asterisk (*) and will be acted upon by a single roll call vote of the Council. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a member of Council so requests, in which event the matter shall be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered a separate item. * 1. Adoption of Minutes A. Special Council Meeting of November 5, 2020 B. Regular Council Meeting of November 9, 2020 * 2. Council Committee of the Whole Report - November 10, 2020 A. Utility Committee - Actionable Items (1) Evaluation of Bids - SCADA (Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition) Equipment Technology Upgrade (Committee recommendation: Award the contract to Freemire & Associates, Inc. for the SCADA Equipment Technology Upgrade, ITB #21-0009WW, for the amount of $197,118)

Council Agenda - November 23, 2020 Page 2 * 2. Council Committee of the Whole Report - November 10, 2020 (Continued) A. Utility Committee - Actionable Items (Continued) (2) Evaluation of Proposals - College Road Pump Station Upgrade Engineering Design Support (Committee recommendation: Award the contract to Remington & Vernick Engineers for the College Road Pump Station Upgrade Engineering Design, RFP #21-0010WW, for the amount of $17,523) (3) Water Treatment Plant Process Improvement Project - Construction Support Services Fees - Change Order (Committee recommendation: Approval of the proposed amendment to the construction support services by Duffield Associates, in the amount of $39,000) B. Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee - Informational Items (1) Proposed Revision to the Reciprocal Borrowing Agreement (Committee recommendation: Endorsement of the proposed revisions) 3. Dover Police Department - CIP Project: Police Station Computer Wiring Upgrade (PD2104) (Staff recommendation: Award the contract to Assurance Media, LLC. in the amount of $122,654.22) 4. Acting City Manager’s Announcements 5. Council Members’ Announcements 6. Adjournment /tm S:\AGENDAS-MINUTES-PACKETS-PRESENTATIONS-ATT&EXH\Council-Agendas\2020\11-23-2020 COUNCIL.wpd Executive Session Pursuant to: 29 Del. C. §10004(b)(2) - Preliminary discussions on site acquisitions for any publicly funded capital improvements, or sales or leases of real property; 29 Del. C. §10004(b)(4) - Strategy sessions, including those involving legal advice or opinion from an attorney-at-law, with respect to collective bargaining or pending or potential litigation, but only when an open meeting would have an adverse effect on the bargaining or litigation position of the public body; 29 Del. C. §10004(b)(6) - Discussion of the content of documents, excluded from the definition of "public record" in §10002 of this title where such discussion may disclose the contents of such documents; 29 Del. C. §10004(b)(9) - Personnel matters in which the names, competency and abilities of individual employees are discussed, unless the employee requests that such a meeting be open THE AGENDA ITEMS AS LISTED MAY NOT BE CONSIDERED IN SEQUENCE. PURSUANT TO 29 DEL. C. §10004(e)(2), THIS AGENDA IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE TO INCLUDE THE ADDITION OR THE DELETION OF ITEMS, INCLUDING EXECUTIVE SESSIONS, WHICH ARISE AT THE TIME OF THE MEETING.

SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING A Special City Council Meeting was held on November 5, 2020 at 4:30 p.m. with Council President Hare presiding. Members present were Mr. Anderson, Mr. Sudler, Mr. Neil, Mr. Slavin (arrived at 4:40 p.m. and listened by telephone), Mr. Rocha, Mr. Taylor, and Mr. Lindell. Mr. Cole was absent. Mayor Christiansen was also present (arrived at 4:42 p.m. and departed at 5:26 p.m). Council staff member present was Mrs. McDowell. Others present were Mr. David Deutsch, The Mercer Group, Inc., and Mrs. Kim Hawkins, Director of Human Resources. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Mr. Lindell moved for adoption of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Neil and unanimously carried. Mr. Neil moved to recess into Executive Session pursuant to 29 Del. C. §10004 (b)(1) Discussion of an individual citizen's qualifications to hold a job or pursue training unless the citizen requests that such a meeting be open and 29 Del. C. §10004 (b)(9) - Personnel matters in which the names, competency and abilities of individual employees are discussed, unless the employee requests that such a meeting be open. The motion was seconded by Mr. Sudler and unanimously carried. The Special Council Meeting recessed into Executive Session at 4:30 p.m. The Executive Session adjourned at 7:26 p.m. ACTION RESULTING FROM THE EXECUTIVE SESSION Appointment of Acting City Manager During the executive session, members of Council considered the appointment of an interim or acting City Manager, as the result of Mrs. Donna S. Mitchell’s retirement. Mr. Taylor moved to appoint Mr. Matthew Harline as the Acting City Manager effective October 15, 2020 with a 5% pay increase to continue until a new City Manager is in place. The motion was seconded by Mr. Rocha and unanimously carried. Mr. Neil moved for adjournment, seconded by Mr. Rocha and unanimously carried. The Special Council Meeting adjourned at 7:27 p.m. TRACI A. McDOWELL CITY CLERK

SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 5, 2020 PAGE 2 All ordinances, resolutions, motions, and orders adopted by City Council during their Special Meeting of November 5, 2020 are hereby approved. ROBIN R. CHRISTIANSEN MAYOR /TM S:\AGENDAS-MINUTES-PACKETS-PRESENTATIONS-ATT&EXH\Council-Minutes\2020\11-05-2020 SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING - ES ACTION (PUBLIC) - Appointment of Acting CM-jt.wpd

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING The Regular City Council Meeting was held by video conference on November 9, 2020 at 7:31 p.m. with Council President Hare presiding. Council members present via video or telephone were Mr. Anderson, Mr. Sudler, Mr. Neil, Mr. Slavin, Mr. Rocha, Mr. Taylor, and Mr. Lindell. Mr. Cole was absent. Staff members present via video or telephone were Police Chief Johnson, Ms. Peddicord, Mr. Harline, Mr. Hugg, Mr. Rodriguez, and Mrs. McDowell. Mayor Christiansen was also present. The invocation was given by Mayor Christiansen, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Mr. Sudler moved for adoption of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Neil and unanimously carried. Mr. Neil moved for adoption of the consent agenda, seconded by Mr. Lindell and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Cole absent). ADOPTION OF MINUTES - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 26, 2020 The Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of October 26, 2020 were unanimously approved by motion of Mr. Neil, seconded by Mr. Lindell and bore the written approval of Mayor Christiansen. PUBLIC HEARING/FINAL READING - PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2020-13 A public hearing was duly advertised for this time and place to consider approval of proposed zoning text amendments to Appendix B - Zoning, Article 3 - District Regulations, Section 20B - Industrial Park Manufacturing Zone - Industrial Aviation and Aeronautics Center (IPM3); Article 5 - Supplementary Regulations, Section 21 - Public Utility Infrastructure and a new Section 23 - Wireless Communications Facilities; Article 12 - Definitions and Chapter 98 - Streets, Sidewalks, Storm Sewers and Other Public Places; and Appendix F - Fees and Fines (Wireless Communications). Mr. Neil moved that the Final Reading of Proposed Ordinance #2020-13 be acknowledged by title only, seconded by Mr. Anderson and unanimously carried. (The First Reading of the ordinance was accomplished during the Council Meeting of September 28, 2020.) Mr. Dave Hugg, Director of Planning and Community Development, provided a history of the consideration of the ordinance and advised members that the text amendments would establish uniform standards for the signing, design, permitting, construction, maintenance, and use of wireless communication facilities throughout the City of Dover. Also associated with this ordinance is the development of the City of Dover “Small Wireless Communications Facility (SWCF) Design Manual” as referenced for design standards for Small Wireless Communications Facilities. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended adoption of the ordinance. Council President Hare declared the hearing open.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2020 PAGE 2 There being no one present wishing to speak during the public hearing, Council President Hare declared the hearing closed. Mr. Neil moved for adoption of #2020-13, as recommended by the Planning Commission. The motion was seconded by Mr. Rocha and, by a unanimous roll call vote (Cole absent), Council adopted Ordinance #2020-13, as follows: BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: That Appendix B - Zoning, Article 5 - Supplementary Regulations of the Dover Code, be amended by inserting a new Section 23 - Wireless Communications Facilities, as follows: Section 23. Wireless Communications Facilities 23.1 Purpose and intent. The purpose of this section is to establish uniform standards for the siting, design, permitting, construction, maintenance, and use of wireless communications facilities (WCF) in the City of Dover (referred to herein as the "City"). While the City recognizes the importance of wireless communications facilities in providing high quality communications service to its residents, the City also recognizes that it has an obligation to protect public safety and to minimize the adverse effects of such facilities through the standards set forth in the following provisions and as referenced. 23.11 By enacting these provisions, the City intends to: (a) Promote the deployment of wireless communications facilities in the City while regulating their location and number to ensure the provision of necessary services; (b) Provide for the managed development of wireless communications facilities in a manner that enhances the benefits of wireless communication and accommodates the needs of both City residents and wireless carriers in accordance with federal and state laws and regulations; (c) Address new wireless technologies, including but not limited to, distributed antenna systems, data collection units, small cells, cable Wi-Fi and other wireless communications facilities; (d) Establish procedures for the design, siting, construction, installation, maintenance and removal of small wireless communications facilities, non-tower based wireless communications facilities, and tower-based wireless communications facilities, in the City, including facilities both inside and outside the public rights-of-way; (e) Preserve the character of the City's neighborhoods and corridors;

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2020 PAGE 3 (f) Minimize the adverse visual effects and the number of such facilities through proper design, siting, screening, material, color and finish and by requiring that competing providers of wireless communications services collocate their commercial communications antennas and related facilities on existing wireless support structures where feasible; (g) Promote the health, safety and welfare of the City's residents. 23.2 Definitions. Accessory Equipment. Any equipment serving or being used in conjunction with a wireless communications facility or wireless support structure. The term "Accessory Equipment" includes but is not limited to utility or transmission equipment, power supplies, generators, batteries, cables, equipment buildings, cabinets and storage sheds, shelters or similar structures. Antenna. An apparatus designed for the purpose of emitting radiofrequency (RF) radiation, to be operated or operating from a fixed location pursuant to Federal Communications Commission authorization, for the provision of wireless service and any commingled information services. Changes in height. Changes in height is measured from the original wireless support structure in cases where deployments are or will be separated horizontally, such as on buildings' rooftops; in other circumstances, changes in height should be measured from the dimensions of the tower or base station, inclusive of originally approved appurtenances and any modifications that were approved prior to the passage of the Spectrum Act (47 CFR §1.4001(b)(7)(i)(A)). Collocation. The mounting of one or more WCFs, including antennae, on a pre-existing structure, or modifying a structure for the purpose of mounting or installing a WCF on that structure. Eligible Facilities Request. Any request for modification of an existing WCF that does not constitute a substantial change. Such request may involve: (i) collocation of new transmission equipment; (ii) removal of transmission equipment; or (iii) replacement of transmission equipment. Emergency. A condition that (1) constitutes a clear and immediate danger to the health, welfare, or safety of the public, or (2) has caused or is likely to cause facilities in the rights-of-way to be unusable and result in loss of the services provided. Equipment Compound. An area surrounding or adjacent to a wireless support structure within which base stations, power supplies, or accessory equipment are located. FCC. Federal Communications Commission.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2020 PAGE 4 Height of a Tower-Based WCF. The vertical distance measured from the ground level, including any base pad, to the highest point on a tower-based WCF, including antennae mounted on the tower and any other appurtenances. Modification or Modify. The improvement, upgrade or expansion of existing wireless communications facilities or base stations on an existing wireless support structure or the improvement, upgrade, or expansion of the wireless communications facilities located within an existing equipment compound, if the improvement, upgrade, expansion or replacement does not substantially change the physical dimensions of the wireless support structure. Non-Tower Wireless Communications Facility (Non-Tower WCF). A wireless communications facility located or collocated on existing structures, such as, but not limited to buildings, water towers, electrical transmission towers, utility poles, light poles, traffic signal poles, flag poles and other similar structures that do not require the installation of a new tower. This term includes the replacement of an existing structure with a similar structure that is required to support the weight of the proposed WCF. This definition excludes any installation constituting a Small Wireless Communications Facility. Person. Individuals, corporations, companies, associations, joint stock companies, firms, partnerships, limited liability companies, corporations and other entities established pursuant to statutes of the State of Delaware, provided that "Person" does not include or apply to the City, or to any department or agency of the City. Replacement. The replacement of existing wireless communications facilities on an existing wireless support structure or within an existing equipment compound due to maintenance, repair or technological advancement with equipment that does not result in increased wind or structural loading, is substantially similar in size and weight as the wireless communications facilities initially installed, and that does not substantially change the physical dimensions of the existing wireless support structure. Small Wireless Communications Facility (Small WCF). A wireless communications facility that meets the following criteria: (1) The structure on which antenna facilities are mounted a) is 50 feet or less in height, or b) is no more than 10 percent taller than other adjacent structures, or c) is not extended to a height of more than 50 feet or by more than 10 percent above its preexisting height as a result of the collocation of new antenna facilities; and (2) Each antenna associated with the deployment (excluding the associated equipment) is no more than three cubic feet in volume; and (3) All antenna equipment associated with the facility (excluding antennas) are cumulatively no more than 28 cubic feet in volume; and

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2020 PAGE 5 (4) The facilities do not require antenna structure registration under 47 CFR Part 17; and (5) The facilities are not located on Tribal lands, as defined under 36 CFR §800.16(x); and (6) The facilities do not result in human exposure to radiofrequency radiation in excess of the applicable safety standards specified in 47 CFR §1.1307(b). Stealth Technology. Camouflaging or screening methods applied to wireless communications facilities and accessory equipment which render them more visually appealing or blend the proposed facility into the existing structure or visual backdrop in a manner appropriate to the site's context and surrounding environment. Such methods include, but are not limited to, architecturally screened roof-mounted antennae, building-mounted antennae painted to match the existing structure and facilities constructed to resemble trees, shrubs, and light poles. Substantial Change. A modification to an existing WCF substantially changes the physical dimensions of a wireless support structure if it meets any of the criteria set forth in 47 CFR §1.6100, as amended. Tower-Based Wireless Communications Facility (Tower-Based WCF). Any structure that is used for the primary purpose of supporting one or more antennae, including, but not limited to, self-supporting lattice towers, guy towers and monopoles. This definition excludes any installation meeting the definition of a Small Wireless Communications Facility. Wireless. Transmissions through the airwaves including, but not limited to, infrared line of sight, cellular, PCS, microwave, satellite, or radio signals. Wireless Communications Facility (WCF). An antenna facility or a wireless support structure that is used for the provision of wireless service, whether such service is provided on a stand-alone basis or commingled with other wireless communications services. Wireless Communications Facility Applicant (WCF Applicant). Any person that applies for a wireless communications facility building permit, zoning/conditional use approval, and/or permission to use the public right-of-way or other City owned land or property. Wireless Support Structure. A freestanding structure, pole, tower, or other building, whether or not it has an existing antenna facility, that is used or to be used to support the placement or installation of a wireless communication facility for the provision of wireless service (whether on its own or comingled with other types of services). 23.3 Applicability. The terms and provisions of this section shall apply to wireless communication facilities in the City. As defined, each type of WCF has specific allowable locations, development regulations, and design standards as follows:

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2020 PAGE 6 (a) Small WCF described in Article 5, Section 23.6. (b) Non-Tower WCF described in Article 5, Section 23.7. (c) Tower WCF described in Article 5, Section 23.8. 23.31 Exceptions. The activities by City residents to utilize satellite dishes, citizen and/or band radios, and Antennae for the purpose of maintaining television, phone, and/or internet connections at their residences for non-commercial activity shall be exempt from the regulations enumerated in this Section 23. 23.32 Nonconforming Uses. The following provisions shall apply to all buildings, support structures, and uses as related to wireless communication facilities: (a) All types of WCFs shall be permitted to collocate upon existing non-conforming WCFs, wireless support structures, and other non-conforming structures subject to the provisions of this Section 23. (b) Collocation of Antennae is permitted on non-conforming structures. (c) Collocation of Non-Tower WCFs upon existing Tower-Based WCFs is encouraged even if the Tower-Based WCF is non-conforming as to use within a zoning district. (d) WCF which are hereafter damaged or destroyed due to any reason or cause may be repaired and restored at their former location but must otherwise comply with the terms and conditions of this Section 23. 23.4 Type of Activity Determination. The following provisions outline the types of wireless communication facility applications. 23.41 Eligible Facilities Request. The WCF Application Type is classified as an Eligible Facilities Request if the request for modification of an existing WCF that does not constitute a Substantial Change under 47 CFR §1.6100, as amended. The request may involve: (I) collocation of new transmission equipment; (ii) removal of transmission equipment; or (iii) replacement of transmission equipment. 23.42 Substantial Change Activity. The WCF Application Type is classified as a Substantial Change Activity if the modification substantially changes the physical dimensions of a wireless support structure by meeting any of the criteria set forth in 47 CFR §1.6100, as amended, relating to height of the support structure or addition of new appurtenances or equipment cabinets. 23.43 New Facility. The WCF Application Type is classified as a New Facility if it involves the construction and placement of a new wireless support structure and does not meet the definition of Small WCF. 23.44 Small WCF. The WCF Application Type is classified as a Small WCF if the proposed antennas, accessory equipment and support structure

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2020 PAGE 7 (whether an existing, replacement or new structure) comply with the volume and height parameters set forth in the definition of Small WCF. 23.5 Application Procedures. The following provisions outline the procedures for wireless communication facility applications. Policies and procedures for the administration of the WCF permitting and review process shall be developed by the City Manager and City Planner. 23.51 Location within Public Right-of-way. WCF Applicants proposing a WCF to be located within the public right-of-way, shall be required to obtain application approvals as follows: (a) Pole Attachment Process. Compliance with the procedures found in Dover Code Ordinances, Chapter 110 - Utilities, Section 110-32 Pole Attachment, for a WCF proposed for attachment to Dover Electric Department facilities. (b) Master license agreement required. Any WCF Applicant for a WCF proposed for attachment to a utility pole owned or controlled by the City of Dover Electric Department shall first enter into a valid Master License Agreement with the City authorizing such attachment. No WCF shall be permitted to be attached to such utility poles without proof a valid Master License Agreement being provided as part of the permit application. (c) Permit - Use of Rights-of-Way. Obtain a Right-of-Way Use Permit from the City in accordance with permit policies and procedures pursuant to Dover Code of Ordinances, Chapter 98 - Streets, Sidewalks, Storm Sewers and Other Public Spaces, for a WCF proposed with City rights-of-way. (d) Permit. Obtain a WCF Building Permit from the City in accordance with applicable permit policies and procedures pursuant to Appendix B, Article 8, Section 1 - Building Permit of the City of Dover Code. (e) Documentation. WCF application shall also be accompanied by documentation demonstrating that the proposed WCF complies with all applicable provisions of this Section 23 for the type of WCF. (f) Fee. Each application to be approved under this section shall be accompanied by fees as provided for in Appendix F - Fees and Fines. 23.52 Compliance with Zoning Ordinance. The following section of the zoning ordinance shall be adhered to, as applicable, in the approval of a WCF application: (a) Architectural Review Certificate. WCF located within the Historic District (H) shall be required to obtain an Architectural Review Certificate pursuant to Article 3, Section 21 and Article 10, Section 3 of this ordinance.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2020 PAGE 8 (b) Airport environs. Locations within the Airport Environs Overlay Zone (AEOZ) shall document compliance pursuant to Article 3, Section 22 of this ordinance. (c) Environmentally sensitive areas. Location shall document compliance with the environmental protection measures for flood hazard areas and waterbodies and wetlands pursuant to Article 5, Section 11 of this ordinance. 23.53 Eligible Facilities Request. WCF Applicants proposing an Eligible Facilities Request shall be required to obtain application approvals as follows: (a) Type. WCF Applicant shall designate in writing that the application constitutes an Eligible Facilities Request pursuant to 47 CFR §1.6100 and as defined by this Section 23. (b) Permit. Obtain a WCF Building Permit from the City in accordance with applicable permit policies and procedures pursuant to Appendix B, Article 8, Section 1 - Building Permit of the City of Dover Code. (c) Documentation. WCF application shall also be accompanied by documentation demonstrating that the proposed WCF complies with all applicable provisions of this Section 23 for the type of WCF. (d) Fee. Each application to be approved under this section shall be accompanied by fees as provided for in Appendix F - Fees and Fines. 23.54 Substantial Change Activity. WCF Applicants proposing a Substantial Change Activity shall be required to obtain application approvals as follows: (a) Type. WCF Applicant shall designate in writing that the application constitutes a Substantial Change Activity as defined by this Section 23. (b) Permit. Obtain a WCF Building Permit from the City in accordance with applicable permit policies and procedures pursuant to Appendix B, Article 8, Section 1 - Building Permit of the City of Dover Code. (c) Documentation. WCF application shall also be accompanied by documentation demonstrating that the proposed WCF complies with all applicable provisions of this Section 23 based on the type of facility. (d) Fee. Each application to be approved under this section shall be accompanied by fees as provided for in Appendix F - Fees and Fines. 23.55 New Facilities. WCF Applicants proposing a New Facility located in a public right-of-way shall be subject to the provisions of Section 23.51. WCF Applicants

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2020 PAGE 9 proposing a New Facility meeting the definition of Tower-Based WCF outside of a public right-of-way of shall be required to obtain application approvals as follows: (a) Conditional use authorization required. Any WCF Applicant proposing the construction of a new facility shall first obtain conditional use authorization pursuant to Appendix B, Article 10 Section 1 of the Dover Code. (b) Documentation. The conditional use application shall demonstrate that the proposed WCF complies with all applicable provisions of Section 23 based on the type of facility. (c) Conditional use application requirements. The additional requirements for conditional use applications shall include the following: I. A description of the type and manufacturer of the proposed transmission/radio equipment, the power in watts at which the WCF Applicant transmits, and any relevant related tests conducted by the WCF Applicant in determining the need for the proposed site and installation. ii. Documentation demonstrating that the proposed Tower-Based WCF complies with all applicable state and federal laws and regulations concerning aviation safety. iii. Evidence that the owner of the property on which the Tower-Based WCF is proposed has granted authorization to construct and operate the Tower-Based WCF. iv. Written certification from a structural engineer licensed in the State of Delaware that the proposed WCF's ability to meet the structural standards offered by either the Electronic Industries Association or the Telecommunication Industry Association and certify the proper construction of the foundation and the erection of the structure. v. An application for a new Tower-Based WCF shall demonstrate that the proposed Tower-Based WCF cannot be accommodated on an existing or approved structure or building. The Planning Commission may deny an application to construct a new Tower-Based WCF if the WCF Applicant has not made a good faith effort to mount the Antenna(s) on an existing structure. The WCF Applicant shall address the viability of any existing Wireless Support Structures within a one quarter (1/4) mile radius of the site proposed and demonstrate that such alternative candidates are inferior with respect to technical feasibility, cost, or terms of use.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2020 PAGE 10 (b) Permit. Obtain a WCF Building Permit from the City in accordance with applicable permit policies and procedures pursuant to Appendix B, Article 8, Section 1 - Building Permit of the City of Dover Code. (c) Documentation. WCF application shall also be accompanied by documentation demonstrating that the proposed WCF complies with all applicable provisions of this Section 23 based on the type of WCF. (d) Fee. Each application to be approved under this section shall be accompanied by fees as provided for in Appendix F - Fees and Fines. 23.56 New Small WCF. WCF Applicants proposing a new Small WCF that does not qualify as an Eligible Facilities Request shall be required to obtain application approval as follows: (a) Type. WCF Applicant shall designate in writing that the application constitutes a Small WCF as defined by this Section 23. (b) Permit. Obtain a WCF Building Permit from the City in accordance with applicable permit policies and procedures pursuant to Appendix B, Article 8, Section 1 - Building Permit of the City of Dover Code. (c) Documentation. WCF application shall also be accompanied by documentation demonstrating that the proposed WCF complies with all applicable provisions of this Section 23 based on the type of facility. (d) Fee. Each application to be approved under this section shall be accompanied by fees as provided for in Appendix F - Fees and Fines. (e) New Wireless Support Structures. An application involving installation of a new Wireless Support Structure shall demonstrate that the proposed Small WCF cannot be reasonably accommodated on an existing or approved structure or building within the right-of-way. The WCF Applicant shall address the viability of any existing Wireless Support Structures within 100 feet of the site proposed and demonstrate that such alternative candidates are inferior with respect to technical feasibility, cost, or terms of use. 23.57 Timing of Approvals. Each specific type of WCF is subject to specific approval timeframes. Such timeframes shall be subject to the tolling procedures established by the FCC. (a) Small WCF: Timing of Approval for all Small WCF facilities that do not meet the definition of Eligible Facilities Request. Once a WCF application is submitted these are the approval time lines:

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2020 PAGE 11 I. Notification of Incomplete Applications for Small WCF. Within ten (10) days of receipt of an application for a Small WCF, the City shall notify the WCF Applicant in writing of any additional information required to complete application. ii. Approval Timeframe - Collocation. Within sixty (60) days of receipt of an application for a collocation of a Small WCF on a preexisting Wireless Support Structure, the City shall make a final decision on whether to approve the application and the City shall notify the WCF Applicant in writing of such decision. iii. Approval Timeframe - New Facility. Within ninety (90) days of receipt of an application for a Small WCF requiring the installation of a new Wireless Support Structure, the City Planning Department shall make a final decision on whether to approve the application and shall notify the WCF Applicant in writing of such decision. (b) Non-Tower WCF: Timing of Approval for all Non-Tower WCF facilities that do not meet the definition of Eligible Facilities Request. Once a WCF application is submitted these are the approval time lines: I. Notification of Incomplete Applications for Non-Tower WCF. Within thirty (30) days of receipt of an application for a WCF on a preexisting wireless support structure, the City shall notify the WCF Applicant in writing of any additional information required to complete application. ii. Approval Timeframe - Substantial Change. Within ninety (90) days of receipt of an application for a Non-Tower WCF on a preexisting Wireless Support Structure that Substantially Changes the Wireless Support Structure to which it is attached, the City shall make a final decision on whether to approve the application and the City shall notify the WCF Applicant in writing of such decision. iii. Approval Timeframe - Not Substantial Change. Within sixty (60) days of receipt of an application for a Non-Tower WCF on a preexisting Wireless Support Structure that does not Substantially Change the Wireless Support Structure to which it is attached, the City Planning Department shall issue the required building permit authorizing construction of WCF. (c) Tower-Based WCF: Timing of Approval for all Tower-Based WCF facilities that do not meet the definition of Eligible Facilities Request. Once a WCF application is submitted these are the approval time lines: I. Notification of Incomplete Applications for Tower-Based WCF. Within thirty (30) days of receipt of an application for a Tower-Based WCF,

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2020 PAGE 12 the City shall notify the WCF Applicant in writing of any additional information required to complete application. ii. Approval Timeframe - All applications for Tower-Based WCFs shall be acted upon within one hundred fifty (150) days of the receipt of a fully completed application for the approval of such Tower-Based WCF and the City shall advise the WCF Applicant in writing of its decision. If additional information was requested by the City Planning Department to complete an application, the time required by the WCF Applicant to provide the information shall not be counted toward the one hundred fifty (150) day review period 23.58 Fees. Each application for permit or plan approval shall be accompanied by a fee as provided for in Appendix F - Fees and Fines. (a) Permit fees. The City may assess appropriate and reasonable permit fees directly related to the City's actual costs in reviewing and processing the application for approval of a WCF, as well as related inspection, monitoring and related costs. Such permit fees shall be established by Appendix F - Fees and Fines and shall comply with the applicable requirements of the FCC. (b) Reimbursement for WCF in Right-of-way. In addition to permit fees as described in this section, every Small WCF in the right-of-way is subject to the City's right to recover its actual costs incurred as a result of the Small WCF's presence in the right-of-way, including, but not limited to, the costs of the administration and performance of all reviewing, inspecting, permitting, supervising and other right-of-way management activities by the City. The owner of each Small WCF shall reimburse the City for the City's costs reasonably incurred in connection with the activities described above. All fees shall comply with applicable state and federal law and not exceed amounts presumed reasonable by the FCC. 23.6 Small Wireless Communication Facilities (Small WCF). The following regulations shall apply to all Small WCF and associated Wireless Support Structures as defined by this Section 23. (a) Location. I. Small WCF are permitted to be located in all City zoning districts subject to the application requirements of this Section 23. ii. Small WCF are subject to compliance with Zoning Ordinance provisions outlined in Section 23.52.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2020 PAGE 13 iii. Small WCF are permitted to be located within the public right-of-way subject to application requirements of this Section 23. (b) Development Regulations. I. Sizing. To be considered as Small WCF, the WCF must comply with the criteria established in the definition of Small Wireless Communications Facility in Section 23.2. ii. Height . The total height of a Small WCF shall comply with the maximum height permitted in the zoning district of the property to the extent technically feasible. In accordance with industry standards, Small WCF Applicants must submit documentation to the City justifying the total height of the WCF. iii. Height. The total height of a Small WCF when located in the public right-of-way shall be no more than ten percent taller than the tallest existing utility pole or wireless support structure within a two hundred fifty (250) radius of the proposed WCF or fifty (50) feet above ground level, whichever is greater. iv. Placement. All Small WCF shall comply with the applicable requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act and all applicable requirements pertaining to streets and sidewalks, as codified in Chapter 98 of the Dover Code. v. Placement. Small WCF in the public right-of-way requiring the installation of a new Wireless Support Structure shall not be located directly in front of any building entrance or exit such that it would interfere with ingress or egress. vi. Accessory equipment. Small WCF and Accessory Equipment shall be located so as not to cause any physical or visual obstruction to pedestrian or vehicular traffic, create safety hazards to pedestrians and/or motorists, or to otherwise inconvenience public use of the ROW as determined by the City. (c) Design standards. All Small WCF shall be designed to meet applicable requirements of the City "Small Wireless Communications Facility Design Manual," a copy of which is kept on file at the City Planning Department. 23.7 Non-Tower Wireless Communication Facilities (Non-Tower WCF). The following regulations shall apply to all Non-Tower WCFs as defined by this Section 23 and that do not meet the definition of a Small WCF.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2020 PAGE 14 (a) Location. I. Non-Tower WCF are permitted to locate in all City zoning districts subject to the application requirements of this Section 23. ii. Non-Tower WCF are subject to compliance with Zoning Ordinance provisions outlined in Section 23.52. iii. Non-Tower WCF are permitted to be located within the public right-of-way subject to application requirements of this Section 23. iv. Non-Tower WCF shall be collocated on existing wireless support structures, such as poles, certain existing buildings or Tower-Based WCF. v. Historic buildings. Non-Tower WCF may be located within one hundred (100) feet of any property, or on a building or structure that is listed on the National Register of Historic Places if an approved Architectural Review Certification is obtained pursuant to Article 10, Section 3 of this ordinance. (b) Prohibitions on certain structures. Non-Tower WCF shall not be located on one-family detached dwellings, one-family attached dwellings, semi-detached dwellings, duplexes, townhouses, manufactured homes, mobile homes, modular homes, or any residential accessory structure. (c) Development Regulations. I. Sizing. To be considered as Non-Tower WCF, the WCF must comply with the criteria established in the definition of Non-Tower Wireless Communications Facility in Section 23.2. ii. Height. The total height of a Non-Tower WCF shall not exceed the maximum height permitted in the zoning district. In accordance with industry standards, Non-Tower WCF Applicants must submit documentation to the City justifying the total height of the WCF. iii. Replacement of Existing Support Structure. The replacement of an existing support structure with a similar structure that is required to support the weight of the proposed WCF is allowed. iv. Accessory Equipment Buildings. If Accessory Equipment is to be located in a separate building, the building shall comply with the minimum requirements for accessory structure in the applicable zoning district. v. Fences. A security fence with a minimum height of six (6) feet and a maximum height of eight (8) feet shall surround any separate equipment compound located outside the right-of-way.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2020 PAGE 15 vi. Access. Vehicular access to the accessory equipment building or equipment compound shall not interfere with the parking or vehicular circulations on the site for the principal use. (d) Design Standards. Where appropriate, Non-Tower WCF shall employ Stealth Technology and be treated to match the Wireless Support Structure in order to minimize aesthetic impact. The Stealth Technology utilized by the WCF Applicant shall be subject to the application approval process. 23.8 Tower-Based Wireless Communication Facilities (Tower-Based WCF). The following regulations shall apply to all Tower-Based WCFs as defined by this Section 23 and that do not meet the definition of a Small WCF. (a) Conditional uses. Tower-Based WCF are permitted outside the public Rights-of-Way in certain zoning districts upon conditional use approval of the Planning Commission in accordance with the procedures and subject to the general conditions set forth in Article 10 Section 1 of this ordinance. I. In approving the conditional use, the Planning Commission may take into consideration the following: a. the aesthetic impact of the proposed facility, including but not limited to whether its decision upon the subject application will promote the harmonious and orderly development of the zoning district involved; b. encourage compatibility with the character and type of development existing in the area; c. prevent a negative impact on the aesthetic character of the community; d. preserve woodlands and trees existing at the site to the greatest possible extent; and e. encourage sound engineering and land development design and construction principles, practices and techniques. ii. Additional antennae. As a condition of approval for all Tower-Based WCF, the WCF Applicant shall provide with a written commitment that it will allow a minimum of two (2) other service providers the opportunity to Collocate Antennae on Tower-Based WCF where technically feasible. (b) Location. I. Tower-Based WCF are conditionally permitted to locate in the nonresidential zones. Nonresidential zones are defined in Article 12 - Definitions of this ordinance.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2020 PAGE 16 ii. Exception. Tower-Based WCF in the IPM3 (Industrial Park Manufacturing Zone - Industrial Aviation and Aeronautics Center) zoning district are only allowed in support of aviation, aeronautics, or related operation per Article 3, Section 20B of the ordinance. iii. Tower-Based WCF are subject to the application requirements of this Section 23. iv. Tower-Based WCF are subject to compliance with zoning ordinance provisions outlined in Section 23.52. v. Historic places. Tower-Based WCF may be located within one hundred (100) feet of any building or structure that is listed on the National Register of Historic Places if an approved Architectural Review Certification is obtained pursuant to Article 10, Section 3 of this ordinance. (c) Uses on Property. I. Principal use. A Tower-Based WCF shall be permitted as a sole principal use on a lot. ii. Combined with another use. A Tower-Based WCF may be permitted on a property with an existing use, or on a vacant parcel in combination with another permitted use. iii. Existing uses. The existing use on the property may be any permitted use in the applicable zoning district and need not be affiliated with the WCF. iv. Ability to use. Where applicable, the WCF owner shall present documentation that the property owner has granted an easement or other property right for the proposed facility. (d) Development Regulations. I. Minimum lot area. The minimum lot area shall comply with the requirements for the applicable zoning district and shall be the area needed to accommodate the Tower-Based WCF and guy wires, the equipment building, security fence, and buffer planting. ii. Height. Tower-Based WCFs shall be designed and kept at the minimum functional height. The maximum total height of a Tower-Based WCF shall not exceed the one hundred fifty (150) feet. No WCF Applicant shall have the right under these regulations to erect a tower to the maximum height specified in this section unless it proves the necessity for such height.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2020 PAGE 17 iii. Minimum setbacks. The minimum distance between the base of a Tower-Based WCF and any property line or street Right-of-Way line shall equal 110% of the proposed height of the Tower-Based WCF, unless the WCF Applicant shows to the satisfaction of the Planning Commission that the proposed Tower-Based WCF has been designed in such a manner that a lesser setback will have no negative effects on public safety. (e) Design Standards. I. Multiple Antennae. Any proposed Tower-Based WCF shall be designed structurally to accommodate both the WCF Applicant's Antennae and at least two (2) comparable Antennae for future users. ii. Security. Any Tower-Based WCF shall be equipped with an anti-climbing device, as approved by the manufacturer. iii. Lighting. No Tower-Based WCF shall be artificially lighted, except as required by law. If lighting is required, the WCF Applicant shall provide a detailed plan for sufficient lighting, demonstrating as unobtrusive and inoffensive an effect as is permissible under state and federal regulations. iv. Surrounding environs. Existing vegetation, trees and shrubs located within proximity to the Tower-Based WCF structure shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible. v. Fences. A security fence having a minimum height of six (6) feet and a maximum height of eight (8) feet shall surround any Tower-Based WCF, as well as guy wires, equipment compound or housing WCF equipment. vi. Screening. A screen of evergreen trees planted eight (8) feet on center, each at least four (4) feet in height, shall surround the Tower-Based WCF and security fence. Existing vegetation shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible and landscaping is not required where landscaping already exists. vii. Accessory equipment. Where feasible, Accessory Equipment associated, or connected, with a Tower-Based WCF shall be placed underground. Any above-ground Accessory Equipment associated or connected with a Tower-Based WCF shall be screened from public view using Stealth Technology. All ground-mounted Accessory Equipment, utility buildings and accessory structures shall be architecturally designed to blend into the environment in which they are situated. viii. Accessory equipment buildings. If Accessory Equipment is to be located in a separate building, the building shall comply with the minimum requirements for accessory structures in the applicable zoning district.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2020 PAGE 18 ix. Accessory equipment. Accessory Equipment not exceeding five hundred (500) square feet in area shall be permitted for each unrelated company sharing space on the Tower-Based WCF. x. Access road. Where necessary, an access road, turnaround space and parking shall be provided to ensure adequate Emergency and service access to Tower-Based WCF. Maximum use of existing roads, whether public or private, shall be made to the extent practicable. Road grades shall closely follow natural contours to assure minimal visual disturbance and minimize soil erosion. xi. Visual Appearance. Tower-Based WCF shall employ Stealth Technology which may include painting or finish of the tower portion. All Tower-Based WCF and Accessory Equipment shall be aesthetically and architecturally compatible with the surrounding environment and shall maximize the use of a like facade to blend with the existing surroundings and neighboring buildings to the greatest extent possible. 23.9 General Requirements for Wireless Communication Facilities. The following shall apply to all types of wireless communication facilities. Each application for a WCF shall require proof of compliance with the following. 23.91 Standards for Wireless Communication Facilities. (a) Wind and ice. Each WCF shall be designed to withstand the effects of wind gusts and ice to the standard designed by the American National Standards Institute as prepared by the engineering departments of the Electronics Industry Association, and Telecommunications Industry Association (ANSI/TIA-222, as amended), or to the industry standard applicable to the structure. (b) Aviation safety. WCF shall comply with all federal and state laws and regulations concerning aviation safety. (c) Interference. WCF shall not interfere with public safety communications or the reception of broadband, television, radio or other communication services by occupants of nearby properties. (d) Radio frequency emissions. WCF shall not, by itself or in conjunction with other WCFs existing on the same structure at the time of installation, generate radio frequency emissions in excess of the standards and regulations of the FCC, including but not limited to, the FCC Office of Engineering Technology Bulletin 65 entitled "Evaluating Compliance with FCC Guidelines for Human Exposure to Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields," as amended.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2020 PAGE 19 (e) Signage. WCF owners shall post a sign in a readily visible location identifying the name, phone number of a party to contact in the event of an Emergency, and permit number. The only other signage permitted on the WCF shall be those required by the FCC, or any other federal or state agency. (f) Noise. WCF shall be operated and maintained so as not to produce noise in excess of applicable noise standards under state law and the City Code, except in Emergency situations requiring the use of a backup generator, where such noise standards may be exceeded on a temporary basis only. (g) Engineer seal and signature. All plans and drawings for a WCF shall contain a seal and signature of a professional structural engineer, licensed in the State of Delaware. (h) FCC license. Each Person that owns or operates a Tower-Based WCF shall submit a copy of its current FCC license, including the name, address, and Emergency telephone number for the operator of the facility. 23.92 Maintenance and Care of Wireless Communications Facilities. (a) Standard of care. Any WCF shall be designed, constructed, operated, maintained, repaired, modified and removed in strict compliance with all current applicable technical, safety and safety-related codes, including but not limited to the most recent editions of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Code, National Electrical Safety Code, National Electrical Code, National Association of Tower Erectors, or to the industry standard applicable to the structure. (b) Maintenance. Any WCF shall at all times be kept and maintained in good condition, order and repair by qualified maintenance and construction personnel, so that the same shall not endanger the life of any Person or damage any property in the City. Such maintenance shall be performed to ensure the upkeep of the WCF in order to promote the safety and security of the City's residents and utilize industry standard technology for preventing failures and accidents. The following maintenance requirements shall apply: I. The WCF shall be fully automated and unattended on a daily basis and shall be visited only for maintenance or Emergency repair. ii. Such maintenance shall be performed to ensure compliance with applicable structural safety standards and radio frequency emissions regulations.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2020 PAGE 20 iii. All maintenance activities shall conform to industry maintenance standards. (c) Lighting. The WCF Applicant shall promptly report any outage or malfunction of FAA-mandated lighting to the appropriate governmental authorities and to the City. (d) Graffiti. Any graffiti on the WCF or on any Accessory Equipment shall be removed at the sole expense of the owner within thirty (30) days of notification by the City. 23.93 Inspection of Wireless Communication Facilities. The City reserves the right to inspect any WCF to ensure compliance with the provisions of the Appendix B: Zoning and any other provisions found within the City Code or state or federal law. The City and/or its agents shall have the authority to enter the lease area of any property upon which a WCF is located at any time, upon reasonable notice to the operator, to ensure such compliance. 23.94 Construction and Repairs in the Right-of-way. (a) Work in Right-of-Way. The City of Dover Electric Department and the City of Dover Public Works Department, in consultation with the City Planning Department, shall determine the time, place and manner of construction, maintenance, repair and/or removal of all Small WCF in the ROW based on public safety, traffic management, physical burden on the ROW, and related considerations. All construction, maintenance, repair and/or removal of Small WCF shall comply with the applicable requirements of the City code. (b) Pole Repairs. In the event of damage to a Small WCF attached to a utility pole owned or controlled by the City of Dover Electric Department, the owner of the Small WCF shall be solely responsible for all costs associated with the repair of the Small WCF, unless such damage was caused by the City's own negligence or willful misconduct. (c) Repairs of City property. In the event of damage to City property during installation of any WCF, including utility poles, streets, sidewalks, streetlights, signs, or other infrastructure, the company responsible for the damage shall make repairs accepted by the City or shall reimburse the City for the cost of such repairs. (d) Change or Alteration Required. Within ninety (90) days following written notice from the City, or such longer period as the City determines is reasonably necessary or such shorter period in the case of an emergency, an owner of a Small WCF in the ROW shall, at its own expense, temporarily or permanently remove, relocate, change or alter the position of any WCF

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2020 PAGE 21 when the City, consistent with its police powers and applicable Public Utility Commission regulations, determines that such removal, relocation, change or alteration is reasonably necessary under the following circumstances: I. The construction, repair, maintenance or installation of any City or other public improvement in the right-of-way; ii. The operations of the City or other governmental entity in the Right-of-Way; iii. Vacation of a street or road or the release of a utility easement; or iv. An Emergency as determined by the City. In such cases the City will make reasonable efforts to assist the WCF owner in identifying and permitting an alternate location for the WCF. 23.95 Removal. In the event that use of a WCF is to be discontinued, the owner shall provide written notice to the City of its intent to discontinue use and the date when the use shall be discontinued and removed. Unused or abandoned WCF, or portions of WCF, shall be removed as follows: (a) Complete removal of the structure of a Tower-Based WCF shall require a Demolition Permit in accordance with permit policies and procedures pursuant to Appendix B, Article 8, Section 1 - Building Permit. (b) Any unused portions of Tower-Based WCF, including Antennae, shall be removed within ninety (90) days of the time of cessation of operations. All Replacements of portions of a Tower-Based WCF previously removed are subject to the provisions of this Section 23. (c) All used or abandoned WCFs and Accessory Equipment shall be removed from the wireless support structure within ninety (90) days of the cessation of operations at the site unless a time extension is approved by the City. (d) If the WCF or Accessory Equipment is not removed from the wireless support structure within ninety (90) days of the cessation of operations at a site, or within any longer period approved by the City, the WCF and/or associated facilities and equipment may be removed by the City and the cost of removal assessed against the owner of the WCF. BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED: That Appendix B - Zoning, Article 12 - Definitions of the Dover Code, be amended by inserting the following in correct alphabetical order:

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2020 PAGE 22 Antenna: An apparatus designed for the purpose of emitting radiofrequency (RF) radiation, to be operated or operating from a fixed location pursuant to Federal Communications Commission authorization, for the provision of wireless service and any commingled information services. Wireless Communications Facility (WCF). An antenna facility or a wireless support structure that is used for the provision of wireless service, whether such service is provided on a stand-alone basis or commingled with other wireless communications services. BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED: That Appendix B - Zoning, Article 3 Section 20B - Industrial park manufacturing zone - Industrial aviation and aeronautics center (IPM3), Subsection 20B.1 - Uses permitted of the Dover Code, be amended to read as follows: 20B.1 Uses permitted. In an IPM3 zone, no building or premises shall be used and no building or part of a building shall be erected, which is arranged, intended or designed to be used, in whole or in part, for any purpose, except the following, and in accordance with performance standards review procedure as set forth in article 5 sections 8.2 and 8.6, and subject to site development plan approval as set forth in article 10, section 2: 20B.11 Airports, spaceports, and related facilities, including passenger terminals, cargo facilities, hangars, refueling operations, parking facilities and other uses integral to airport or spaceport operations. 20B.12 Commercial or industrial uses that are related to aviation or aeronautics and/or require direct access to an airport, spaceport, or aviation/aeronautics services, including assembly or sale of aircraft or spacecraft, air frames, aircraft or spacecraft engines, associated parts and components, radios or navigational equipment, and similar products or services. 20B.13 Public and institutional uses that support the aviation or aeronautics industries such as aviation or aeronautics technical schools, security services, and inspection facilities. 20B.14 Bulk storage of fuel, lubricants, fire suppression and other materials integral to design, construction, testing, maintenance, or operation of aircraft or spacecraft. 20B.15 Printing, publishing, binding, packaging, storage, warehousing, and transshipment and distribution. 20B.16 Business, professional, or administrative offices.20B.17?Radio or television broadcasting towers, telecommunications towers, antenna arrays, and receiving satellite dishes that support aviation, aeronautics, or related operations.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2020 PAGE 23 BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED: That Appendix B - Zoning, Article 3 Section 20B - Industrial park manufacturing zone - Industrial aviation and aeronautics center (IPM3), Subsection 20B.2 - Uses permitted of the Dover Code, be amended to read as follows: 20B.2 Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted, conditional upon the approval of the planning commission in accordance with the procedures and subject to the general conditions set forth in article 10, section 1. The application for conditional use shall clearly demonstrate the relationship of the proposed use to an existing or proposed airport or spaceport. 20B.21 Service establishments such as auto rental and travel agencies, commercial parking lots and garages, automobile service stations, car washes, banks, gift shops, newsstands, bookstores, restaurants, bars, medical offices, postal facilities, laundry services, and similar facilities available to airport or spaceport users and employees. 20B.22 Radio or television broadcasting towers, tower based wireless communications facilities, antenna arrays, and receiving satellite dishes that support aviation, aeronautics, or related operations. BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED: That Appendix B - Zoning, Article 5 Section 21 - Public utility infrastructure of the Dover Code, be amended to read as follows: Section 21. - Public utility infrastructure. Public utility infrastructure shall be permitted in all zones and generally exempt from the requirements of Article 4-Zoning Bulk and Parking Regulations, except as provided in this section. 21.1 Setback. The minimum setback for public utility structures shall be equal to the setback of the zone in which the structure is located. 21.2 Fences. Fences shall be limited to a maximum height of eight feet above ground. 21.3 Site development plan required. Site development plan approval in accordance with article 10, section 2 hereof shall be required prior to the issuance of building permits for the erection or enlargement of all structures and related accessory structures. 21.4 Exceptions. 21.41 Electric power generation facilities shall be subject to all zoning requirements.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2020 PAGE 24 21.42 Wireless communication facilities as defined in Article 5, Section 23 shall not be considered public utility infrastructure under the provisions of this subsection, and shall be subject to the provisions of Article 5, Section 23. BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED: That Chapter 98 - Street, Sidewalks, Storm Sewers and Other Public Places of the Dover Code, be amended by inserting a new Section 98-11 - Placement of wireless communications facilities within rights-of-way, as follows: Sec. 98-11. - Placement of wireless communications facilities within rights-of-way. (a) Applicability. The provisions of this section shall apply to the use of rights-of-way as dedicated to the city or as otherwise maintained by the city. (b) Definitions. The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this section, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this subsection, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning: Wireless Communications Facility (WCF). An antenna facility or a wireless support structure that is used for the provision of wireless service, whether such service is provided on a stand-alone basis or commingled with other wireless communications services. Wireless Support Structure. A freestanding structure, pole, tower, or other building, whether or not it has an existing antenna facility, that is used or to be used to support the placement or installation of a wireless communication facility for the provision of wireless service (whether on its own or comingled with other types of services). (c) Uses of Rights-of-way Permit required. It shall be unlawful for any person to construct, erect or affix any wireless support structure within or that encroaches upon any right-of-way owned or maintained by the city, unless and until such use of the right-of-way shall have been approved. A Rights-of-Way Use Permit shall be obtained from the city manager or their designee. (1) Permit Fees. Each application for permit shall be accompanied by a fee as provided for in Appendix F - Fees and Fines. (2) Annual Fee for Rights-of-Way Use. Each wireless support structure not owned or maintained by the city located within or that encroaches upon any right-of-way owned or maintained city shall be subject to an annual fee as provided for in Appendix F - Fees and Fines. (d) Approval required. Construction, erection or placement any wireless communication facility or wireless support structure within or encroaches upon any right-of-way owned

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2020 PAGE 25 or maintained by the city shall be in accordance with the provisions of Appendix B - Zoning, Article 5 Section 23. BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED: That Appendix F - Fees and Fines of the Dover Code, be amended by inserting new sections, as follows: Chapter 98. - Streets, Sidewalks and Other Public Places Chapter 98. Streets, Sidewalks and Other Fees and Fines Public Places Article I. In General Sec. 98-11 Placement of wireless communications facilities within rights-of-way (c) Use of Rights of Way Permit (1) Permit Fee $25 for ROW Permit (2) Annual Fee for Rights-of-way Use No charge for WCF placement on existing City owned wireless support structure in City ROW $220 for Placement of new wireless support structure/pole in City ROW $220 for WCF placement on a third party/non-City wireless support structure/pole in City ROW Chapter 110. - Utilities Chapter 110. Utilities Fees and Fines Article II. Electric Service Sec. 110-32. Pole attachment fee; use of Dover Electric Department facilities If payment is not received for any fee or other amount owed within 30 calendar days after it becomes due, the licensee shall pay interest at the rate of one and one-half percent per month, on the amount due (subsec. (f)).

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2020 PAGE 26 Subsection (4) Fees and charges Annual pole attachment fee $8.17 per attachment Wireless Communications Facility $50 Annual Fee per Attachment on City Attachment owned wireless support structure/pole Appendix B. Zoning Appendix B. Zoning Fees and Fines Article 5. Supplementary Regulations Sec. 23 Wireless Communications Facilities Subsec. 23.5 Application Procedures 23.51 Location within Public Right-of-way (f) Fee WCF Building Permit Fee is $25.00 for first $1,000.00 of costs and $8.00 for each additional $1,000.00 of costs or multiples thereof up to $10,000,000.00 of costs 23.53 Eligible Facilities Request (d) Fee WCF Building Permit Fee is $25.00 for first $1,000.00 of costs and $8.00 for each additional $1,000.00 of costs or multiples thereof up to $10,000,000.00 of costs 23.54 Substantial Change Activity (d) Fee WCF Building Permit Fee is $25.00 for first $1,000.00 of costs and $8.00 for each additional $1,000.00 of costs or multiples thereof up to $10,000,000.00 of costs 23.55 New Facilities (a) Conditional use authorization $425.00, plus $25.00 per acre of the required. area or multiple thereof involved in the Conditional Use Permit application

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2020 PAGE 27 (d) Fee WCF Building Permit Fee is $25.00 for first $1,000.00 of costs and $8.00 for each additional $1,000.00 of costs or multiples thereof up to $10,000,000.00 of costs 23.56 New Small WCF (d) Fee WCF Building Permit Fee is $25.00 for first $1,000.00 of costs and $8.00 for each additional $1,000.00 of costs or multiples thereof up to $10,000,000.00 of costs BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED: That this Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption. ADOPTED: NOVEMBER 9, 2020 COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE REPORT - OCTOBER 27, 2020 The Council Committee of the Whole was held by video conference on October 27, 2020 at 6:03 p.m., with Council President Hare presiding. Council members present via video or telephone were Mr. Anderson, Mr. Neil, Mr. Slavin, Mr. Cole, Mr. Rocha, Mr. Taylor, and Mr. Lindell (arrived at 6:04 p.m.). Mr. Cole and Mr. Sudler were absent. Mayor Christiansen was also present. Civilian members present via video or telephone for their Committee meetings were Mr. Contant and Mr. Shevock (Legislative, Finance, and Administration). Mr. Wagner and Mr. Shelton (Safety Advisory and Transportation) were absent. LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE The Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee met with Council President Hare presiding in the absence of Chairman Lindell. Adoption of Agenda Mr. Neil moved for adoption of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Rocha and unanimously carried. Budget Amendment - Community Policing Unit Mr. Matthew Harline, Assistant City Manager, reviewed the background and analysis regarding the budget amendment for the Community Policing Unit.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2020 PAGE 28 Staff recommended approval of the proposed Budget Amendments totaling $177,900 for Fiscal Year 2021. Mr. Neil moved to recommend approval of Staff's recommendation, seconded by Mr. Anderson and unanimously carried. By consent agenda, Mr. Neil moved for approval of the proposed Budget Amendments totaling $177,900 for Fiscal Year 2021. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lindell and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Cole absent). Project Management Services - Enterprise Resources Planning Systems (ERP) Ms. Lori Peddicord, Controller/Treasurer, reviewed the background and analysis regarding the project management services for Enterprise Resources Planning Systems (ERP). Staff recommended authorization for the Controller/Treasurer to enter into a contract with BerryDunn for the purpose of Project Management with the Enterprise Resource Planning system implementation for the remaining phases of this project and to amend the Electric Improvement and Extension Fund budget for the requested amount as projected each fiscal year. Mr. Neil asked if the new request had moved from the consulting and teaching phase to the operational management phase, noting that they would be temporary contractual employees for a period from 2020 to December 2023. Responding, Ms. Peddicord stated that they were considering converting the contract with BerryDunn from project oversight to project management and that was to ensure that the software vendor performed as promised. She advised that, as the project management team, it would be their responsibility to train City Staff. Ms. Peddicord stated that as the project manager, they would closely monitor, with the City, to manage the implementation activities for each of the upcoming phases. Ms. Peddicord noted that they would serve to identify any risks and/or issues that they encountered in implementing the new software. Ms. Peddicord advised that she discovered over the past three years, and more recently, that the project management was very time consuming and they needed a full-time, or at least part-time, dedicated person to ensure nothing was missed. Mr. Neil asked how much the new efficiency was expected to save in taxpayer dollars during the next 5 - 10 years. Responding, Ms. Peddicord stated that she could not equate it to an expected tax savings, but could reference that when they signed the original contract there was recognition of savings in the action form provided. She advised that it appeared in the annual maintenance cost comparison from the Legacy system to the new system, that the old system entailed about $349,000 and the new system was going to reduce that to $244,000. Ms. Peddicord stated that they were going to see a lot more efficiencies, improvements, and communications with citizens. She noted that the program would enable online payments through the portal

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2020 PAGE 29 and would provide the ability for Staff, vendors, and citizens to access their accounts online. Responding to Mr. Neil, Mr. Harline stated that the Tyler Munis system would do more than the AS400 base Naviline system. He noted that the new technologies would provide additional options and give the user the experience that they would expect. He noted that the different pieces would fit together and allow for integration. Ms. Peddicord noted that it was hard to equate the dollar amount of the implementation of the six-phase project in the front end. She stated that after the users learn the system and understand how to gain the best knowledge of it, she believed they were going to see a lot more cost saving. Mr. Contant stated that he remembered eight or nine months ago, that it was suggested that there might be a possibility or a need to hire a full-time person to interface between City Staff and Tyler. He noted that looking at the increase, $421,800 was a lot of money but, according to the documents, that should be recouped in roughly four years. He stated that if they used the system for the next 20 years, that would turn out to be a significantly larger sum that they would hopefully be saving. Mr. Contant stated they would have the opportunity to grow the system into smart meters and everything else that they would want to do over time. Responding to Mr. Contant's concern, Ms. Peddicord provided the following information: • The project manager would be aggressive in ensuring that Tyler Technologies fulfilled their obligations. • BerryDunn has been involved throughout the project in a management oversight capacity and could be more aggressive in addressing issues. • If they decided that BerryDunn was not being as aggressive as they wanted, they could address recourse. • Regarding a contract that laid out their expected responsibilities, authority, and mediation process, Ms. Peddicord did not have it on hand, but that in addition to the change request form shifting from oversight to management, there were other areas that were covered under the contract a little differently from one position to the other. Mr. Contant stated that he wanted the information in writing and agreed upon before payment is made. He noted that he wanted someone that was going to be aggressive with the software vendor to ensure what was best for the City of Dover. Ms. Peddicord stated if they did not already have that, she would make sure they got verbiage on it and take the appropriate actions.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2020 PAGE 30 Mr. Neil moved to recommend authorization for the Controller/Treasurer to enter into a contract with BerryDunn for the purpose of Project Management with the Enterprise Resource Planning system implementation for the remaining phases of the project and to amend the Electric Improvement and Extension Fund budget for the requested amount, as projected each fiscal year, as recommended by Staff. The motion was seconded by Mr. Shevock. Responding to Mr. Rocha, Ms. Peddicord stated that the City dealt with Tyler Technologies directly and that BerryDunn was retained to serve as the project oversight consultant because of their previous knowledge and experience with Tyler Technologies. She stated that BerryDunn originally assisted them with the Tyler Technologies contract and user acceptance testing under the current contract. Ms. Peddicord advised that they were not the go-to person then and they were going to change that scope of work and responsibility. Responding to Mr. Rocha regarding a line in the budget for BerryDunn, Ms. Peddicord stated that it was in the project cost for the ERP implementation. She noted that the consultant for the project oversight and the implementation costs were in that line item. Mr. Rocha asked if the $421,000 was in addition to BerryDunn’s cost for project oversight. Responding, Ms. Peddicord stated that the $421,000 is for project management for the next two or three years that they are contracted. (City Clerk’s Office Note: Upon further clarification Ms. Peddicord stated that only the $421,000 costs for Project Management would be added to the remaining project implementation and/or life of the project timeline anticipated to be December 2023. The Project Oversight services contract with BerryDunn ends upon the approval and transition of the services being provided to the City of Dover on behalf of the Tyler implementation.) Mr. Neil moved to recommend authorization for the Controller/Treasurer to enter into a contract with BerryDunn for the purpose of Project Management with the Enterprise Resource Planning system implementation for the remaining phases of the project and to amend the Electric Improvement and Extension Fund budget for the requested amount projected each fiscal year, as recommended by Staff. The motion was seconded by Mr. Shevock and carried with Mr. Taylor voting no. By consent agenda, Mr. Neil moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Lindell and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Cole absent). Mr. Neil moved for adjournment of the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee meeting, seconded by Mr. Rocha and unanimously carried. Meeting adjourned at 6:30 p.m.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2020 PAGE 31 SAFETY ADVISORY AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE The Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee met with Chairman Taylor presiding. Adoption of Agenda Mr. Neil moved for adoption of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Rocha and unanimously carried. Reconsideration - Prioritization of City of Dover State Capital Transportation Program (CTP) Projects During the Regular City Council meeting of October 12, 2020, Council members referred this item back to the Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee. Mr. David Hugg, Director of Planning and Community Enhancement, reviewed the revised 2020 Prioritization of the City of Dover State Capital Transportation Program. Staff recommended approval of the Revised 2020 Prioritization of the City of Dover State Capital Transportation Program (CTP) Projects. Responding to Mr. Anderson regarding item #5 of the Prioritization of the City of Dover State CTP Projects - Sidewalks within the walk zone of the new Dover High School, Mr. Hugg stated that he had communicated the only information he had received. He noted that Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT) has a separate program for sidewalk improvements that was not part of their specific Capital Program. Mr. Hugg advised that he did not receive an update that indicated increased activity on that project, other than the recognition that those sidewalks and the sidewalks on Route 13 were critical. Mr. Hugg advised that some of the work had been done as part of the bikeway improvements and that there would be some sidewalk improvements as part of both the Kenton Road and Scarborough intersection. Mr. Hugg stated that he could follow up for additional details. Mayor Christiansen stated that their priority was economic development and, as Chairman of the Dover/Kent County MPO, he had pressed that issue. He stated that it was imperative that they realized that the next area for economic development was the $14.7 million that they invested in Garrison Oak. Mayor Christiansen noted the potential for a Civil Air Terminal to be located next to the Kent County Industrial Park and that the property adjacent to it were prime areas for the manufacturing jobs and warehousing facilities that they needed. He noted that it also had potential as a hub for rapid delivery aircraft, as they had seen an overload at Newark and Philadelphia and other airports. Mayor Christiansen stated that if those areas had easy access to Route 1 and to I-95, they had the potential to have DHL, FedEx, and other major carriers locate there. He noted that there was also potential to bring aircraft repair to the industrial park

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2020 PAGE 32 because they would have a captive audience of people that were well-qualified to repair aircraft. Mayor Christiansen stated that he concurred with moving the State College Road project priority up, particularly between Kenton Road and McKee Road. He noted that anybody that had the opportunity to drive out there knew it was a nightmare. Mr. Lindell moved to recommend approval of the Revised 2020 Prioritization of the City of Dover State Capital Transportation Program (CTP) Projects, as recommended by Staff. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hare and unanimously carried. By consent agenda, Mr. Neil moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Lindell and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Cole absent). Mr. Neil moved for adjournment of the Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee meeting, seconded by Mr. Anderson and unanimously carried. Meeting adjourned at 6:46 p.m. Mr. Neil moved for adjournment of the Council Committee of the Whole meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. Anderson and unanimously carried. Meeting adjourned at 6:46 p.m. By consent agenda, Mr. Neil moved for acceptance of the Council Committee of the Whole Report, seconded by Mr. Lindell and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Cole absent). MONTHLY REPORTS - SEPTEMBER 2020 By motion of Mr. Neil, seconded by Mr. Lindell, the following monthly reports were accepted by consent agenda: City Assessor's Report City Council’s Community Enhancement Fund Report City Manager's Report City Planner's Report Controller/Treasurer's Budget Report Police Chief's Report QUARTERLY REVIEW - CAPITAL INVESTMENT PLAN (CIP) (JULY, AUGUST, AND SEPTEMBER) Members were provided the Quarterly Capital Investment Plan as of September 2020. By consent agenda, Mr. Neil moved for acceptance of the Quarterly Capital Investment Plan Report as of September 2020. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lindell and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Cole absent).

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2020 PAGE 33 APPOINTMENT RECOMMENDED BY MAYOR CHRISTIANSEN - PUBLIC ADVISORY COMMITTEE OF THE DOVER/KENT COUNTY MPO - DR. SHANITA A. POWELL (TO FILL THE EXPIRED TERM OF DR. CARLTON L. CANNON, JR. - TERM TO EXPIRE JULY 1, 2022) Mayor Christiansen recommended the appointment of Dr. Shanita A. Powell to serve on the Public Advisory Committee of the Dover/Kent County MPO for a term to expire July 1, 2022 (to fill the expired term of Dr. Carlton L. Cannon, Jr.). By consent agenda, Mr. Neil moved for approval of the appointment of Dr. Shanita A. Powell, as recommended by Mayor Christiansen. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lindell and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Cole absent). UPDATE ON CODE ENFORCEMENT AND CRIME MITIGATION - REED AND NEW STREETS Mr. Dave Hugg, Director of Planning and Community Development, provided the following update: • Approximately 50 of the 128 enforcement actions in the areas south of Division Street, including Governors Avenue, Queen Street, New Street, Kirkwood Street, and Reed Street to Loockerman Street, were related to tall grass or exterior property maintenance. • There were a number of rental and fire inspections, a few fire complaints, three dangerous buildings, some interior property maintenance questions, and electric cutoffs for nonpayment. • Seventy-five of the 128 units were brought into compliance. Seven were determined not to have an actual violation. 19 active cases were underway and 12 cases were voided or not pursued for some reason. Mr. Hugg reviewed a map of the general area of Reed Street and New Street (Exhibit #1) and advised that the red dots represented the locations of violations or code enforcement actions. He noted that a fair number of them were on South Governors Avenue and New Street, with the majority concentrated in the area north of, or immediately adjacent to, Reed Street. Mr. Sudler advised that he has gone past the Reed Street area often in the past couple of weeks and noticed debris on Reed Street where the graffiti garage is, as well as a lot of people loitering. He asked who the owner of that property was and how much emphasis or influence had been placed on getting that area cleaned up. Mr. Sudler noted that it was very intimidating to be in that area and asked if code enforcement and the police department had partnered to address the situation. He advised that a lot of his constituents are starting to think that the City wants those individuals or elements to stay confined or contained to that location so that they will not spread out to other areas. Mr. Sudler acknowledged that it was an ongoing battle but at one point they appeared to be winning the battle by demolishing buildings that were pre-existing with the Hope Program but now it seemed like people were using that spot to party and it seems like they were starting to go backward instead of forward. Mr. Sudler suggested stepping up a partnership between code enforcement and the police department to focus on the area or maybe set up a mini police station or code enforcement station in the area.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2020 PAGE 34 Responding, Police Chief Thomas Johnson advised that there is collaboration between code enforcement and the police department. He noted that the police department recognizes that environmental conditions, in addition to crime behavior conditions, matter so they always have an eye towards reporting anything that they can across departmental lines for coordination, particularly when it involves special operations. Police Chief Johnson provided the following update, noting that some of the data was from midsummer and some is year-to-date: • Due to COVID-19, telereporting and online reporting have been encouraged for calls for service and, as a result, the year-to-date numbers are lagging behind 2019. • They looked specifically at the Reed Street corridor from Queen Street to Governors Avenue and about a half a block in either direction. In just that zone this year, nine firearms out of the 42 that had been seized so far citywide had come from enforcement action in that area, which is more than 20%. • From a proactive patrol standpoint the standing order is east-west. When not on other business, the Loockerman Street corridor is to be utilized to increase presence, and the north-south route of preference when traveling from one task to another is the New Street corridor to increase that visibility. • When possible cadets are in that area, not only in the business district, but a block or two in other directions. The additional patrols are scheduled based on their data and they are usually from 7:00 or 8:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. or midnight Thursday through Saturday. The pandemic caused them to decrease their efforts for the protection of the officers. • Ms. Diane Glenn has three active follow-up cases related to domestic violence. They are trying to take the overarching approach and looking at preventative measures with standard operating practices and additional overtime efforts when they have that discretion and those resources available. • They, along with Mr. Hugg, Mayor Christiansen, and other elected officials, are participating in discussions with NCALL and Habitat for Humanity to try and get stakeholder input. Mr. Taylor stated that the data is important, but the area of New Street and Reed Street does not pass the eye test. He advised that people are saying that they are unsafe and do not feel safe in that area and he requested stepped-up enforcement of loitering, drunk on the highway, and other City ordinances because the area is a legitimate concern. Mr. Neil asked if the decrease in complaints from 31,228 in 2019 to 24,796 in 2020 and the decrease in traffic arrests were related to COVID-19. Responding, Chief Johnson stated that the vast majority of the decreases were COVID-related because they made an operational decision, in collaboration with more than just the police department, that relatively minor infractions were going to be handled in a way that was not typically how they would address those traffic concerns. He advised that right after the 4th of July holiday, when COVID rates were going down, they returned to proactive

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2020 PAGE 35 enforcement of traffic violations. Mr. Rocha advised that the people who have been in contact with him were running out of patience. He asked what the Chief envisioned for the downtown area once the community policing strategy was implemented. Responding, Chief Johnson advised that, once the eight officers complete the academy, they would be able to supplement the existing cadet foot presence. He noted that it would not be an extra duty detail, rather it would be a part of the core deployment plan. Chief Johnson advised that planning and organizing resources for community policing were ongoing. He noted that in addition to posting officers in uniforms to serve as a deterrent, they also want to bring programs and services in the neighborhood. Mr. Sudler asked Major David Spicer what his thoughts were regarding Reed and New Street. Responding, Major Spicer stated that officers in that area see the loitering on the corner, they see the drug activity, and they take enforcement action when they can. He reiterated that the officers have been asked to travel on New Street when they are going to and from complaints to provide additional presence in that area. Major Spicer also reiterated that foot patrols had been deployed in that area since mid-August. He noted that they made 100 arrests in that one block radius and they are investing in the citywide camera project to assist with investigative resources. Major Spicer cautioned against a zero-tolerance approach that would impact all types of good people. FINAL READING - PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2020-14 The First Reading of the Proposed Ordinance was accomplished during the Council Meeting of October 26, 2020. Council President Hare reminded members of the public that copies of the proposed ordinance were available on the City’s website at www.cityofdover.com under “Government.” Mr. Neil moved that the Final Reading of the proposed ordinance be acknowledged by title only, seconded by Mr. Lindell and unanimously carried. Mr. Matt Harline, Acting City Manager, reviewed the proposed amendments. By motion of Mr. Neil, seconded by Mr. Anderson, Council, by a unanimous roll call vote (Cole absent), adopted Ordinance #2020-14 Project Carry-Forward Budget Balances/Proposed Budget Amendments (Exhibit #2). ACTING CITY MANAGER'S ANNOUNCEMENTS Mr. Matt Harline, Acting City Manager, announced that there had been a number of new COVID-19 infections and, as a result, they have reduced the amount of direct service at the window in the Customer Service and Inspections departments. Additionally, they were working on plans to reduce direct interactions with the public and among staff members by either working from home or splitting shifts to minimize the impact of an infection within a department. Mr. Harline stated that this strategy would aid in continuity of vital services. Mr. Harline reminded members that the library reopened on Tuesday and approximately 600 patrons were in the first day and patronage declined each day with 347 patrons in the library on Saturday.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2020 PAGE 36 He noted that city staff would like to remain open and that they are also getting feedback that there is an even split between people who would like to see curbside service and in-person service. Mr. Harline thanked members of Council for their support in naming him the Interim City Manager. He advised that he would be on vacation Thursday and Friday of that week and that Mrs. Sharon Duca would be the onsite Acting City Manager in his absence. COUNCIL MEMBERS' ANNOUNCEMENTS Mr. Taylor announced that he would like for the City to review the matter of who owns the paper alleys in his neighborhood, who was responsible for the tornado cleanup, and offer a permanent solution. He advised that he had provided information to City Solicitor Rodriguez for review. Mr. Hare announced that the Delaware Military Support Organization (DMSO) would be assisting Dover Air Force Base in providing Thanksgiving baskets for 263 airmen or low income military families. He encouraged donations of corn, green beans, cranberry sauce, gravy, or mashed potatoes, noting that a list was available on the DMSO Facebook page. Mr. Hare noted that Mayor Christiansen had donated 250 cans of cranberry sauce and 250 boxes of stuffing and Harvest Ridge Winery donated 263 turkeys. Mr. Anderson wished all who serve a happy Veterans day. Mr. Taylor moved for adjournment, seconded by Mr. Rocha and unanimously carried. Meeting adjourned at 8:18 p.m. TRACI A. McDOWELL CITY CLERK All ordinances, resolutions, motions, and orders adopted by City Council during their Regular Meeting of November 9, 2020 are hereby approved. ROBIN R. CHRISTIANSEN MAYOR /TM S:\AGENDAS-MINUTES-PACKETS-PRESENTATIONS-ATT&EXH\Council-Minutes\2020\11-09-2020 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES.wpd Exhibits Exhibit #1 - Map of the general area of Reed Street and New Street Exhibit #2 - Ordinance #2020-14 Project Carry-Forward Budget Balances/Proposed Budget Amendments

104 34 16 36 35 32 21 11 118 316 t 102 2 te S EXHIBIT #1 31 30 1 Pe 103 318 10 2 112 n St Focus Downtown Area 113 110 Fult on S t 37 34 29 27 28 24 112 30 9 2 N Sta E Div isio 40 vern N Br Regular City Council Meeting of 11/09/2020 35 30 102 410 N Go 519 3 23 22 ad 34 26 434 6 5 20 101 442 440 32 31 24 19 18 N Ne v ors A 444 16 2 3 38 452 28 22 15 12 119 6 w St 29 NQ 29 18 e 11 526 520 34 24 27 1 ve 205 11 1 ueen 528 an A 534 25 16 209 91 542 23 22 211 3 12 19 19 217 ! ( eric 108 2 28 221 St 223 N Kir 12 114 21 16 225 118 116 15 18 75 26 11 19 122 30 303 kwo 2 22 17 14 309 307 10 25 20 71 317 313 ! ( 210 ! (4 29 od S 15 7 8 319 212 ! ( 27 139 18 13 325 n St 214 ! ( 26 t ivisio 224 222 8 9 61 16 WD ! ( 230 14 29 417 415 405 31 t 12 33 ! ( ! ( est S 14 33 425 ! (2 7 15 427 ( ! ( 310 ! ( 33 34 12 ! ( 16 24 NW 53 8 429 ! ( ! ( 316( ! ! 312 11 18 ! ( ! ( 17 35 320 ! ( 13 19 45 70 505 505 501 326 8 20 ! ( 21 34 39 42 507 15 26 23 ! ( 517 509 2 ! ( Kings Hw 25 38 45 416 7 16 19 28 ! ( 40 ! ( ! ( ! ( 49 y 23 29 46 8 30 5 53 424 ! 13 ! ( 430 420 ! ( 14 ( 29 32 ! ( 33 53 89 34 ! ( 18 30 ! ( ! ( 41 43 55 ! ( ! ( 31 ! 46 54 520 11 20 ( 40 57 ed S t ! ( 37 ! ( E Re ! ( 17 24 34 ! ( 44 61 16 ! ( ! ( ! ( 39 55 S Br 31 46 107 46 20 23 28 33 38 41 117 ! ( 48 34 ! ( ! ( 35 ! ( 45 50 59 adfo 27 rd S 28 38 41 46 54 102 121 55 29 103 31 53 56 42 215 t ! ( 37 ! ( 45 50 217 e d St 30 55 W Re 109 110 7 ! ( 129 32 ! ( ! ( 39 46 ( 4 ! 54 ! ( 59 118 49 56 102 103 113 40 ! ( 43 54 51 305 222 118 40 45 ! 345 ( 222 218 106 116 117 29 57 124 47 103 27 S Sta 60 102 105 120 48 108 125 15 122 kwo 49 104 139 39 ! ( 64 111 103 S Kir te Str 53 68 ! ( ! ( 67 106 124 129 115 136 S Sta 650 61 70 ! ( 128 108 eet A 411 101 od S 54 131 ! ( ! ( 132 138 te S 110 140 63 105 60 t ! ( 127 136 133 ly t 3 109 112 146 S est 100 120 ors 47 64 420 133 148 137 SW laza vern 424 111 137 nP 432 428 436 108 150 rma S Go 118 139 cke Fe de 440 Loo t 154 401 611 115 117 St 145 ! ( 1 S Ne 102 117 112 140 145 Minor 156 ra l S 153 Ave 123 21 w St 25 119 120 158 een 27 114 15 13 t 141 144 147 109 ! ( 33 29 S Qu 127 117 115 203 123 121 (!( ! ( 101 13 118 128 0 150 123 ! 107 205 140 St 133 142 145 154 ! ( 2 209 122 131 585 127 147 217 ! ( 6 20 136 144 225 211 20 131 146 205 201 219 30 133 231 ! ( 148 235 ! ( 28 223 135 141 313 309 ! ( ! ( ! ( 8 214 680 315 303 ! ( an St (! !( 108 102 225 11 321 136 ockerm 305 For 142 317 (! ( 22 9 15 W Lo 140 604 e st S t 403 ! 407 329 134 229 rth St 409 220 2 415 E No 200 132 32 ! ( 226 Rail 209 226 222 218 207 126 107 103 road 600 303 406 222 300 210 307 300 222 Ave 312 135 309 516 212 326 304 Looc k e 412 229 10 306 308 311 7 12 217 21 317 rm an 15 St 100 312 238 416 218 230 106 217 8 16 226 219 128 221 132 2 235 124 10 301 salem 711 377 230 305 Legend Jeru 309 104 ! ( orth St ! ( Focus Points WN 316 316 26 410 25 500 Way Focus Downtown Area Building Footprints 317 655 Dover Parcels 321 reen G The ¯ 43 375 122 645 316 45 1 inch = 80 feet 300 333 k Ln 15 Ban 30 Date Printed: November 5, 2020 56 File: m:\gis_data\projects\tech_mxds 54 48 38 \focus_downtown_area 445 46 408 669 Department: Public Works GIS 123 40 673 City of Dover, Delaware 34 671 401 36 410 400 414 417 419

EXHIBIT #2 Regular City Council Meeting of 11/09/2020 CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2020-14 GOVERNMENTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2020-2021 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Eight Million Seven Hundred Fifty Thousand Four Hundred dollars ($8,750,400) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2020 and ending June 30, 2021: REVENUES 2019/20 2020/21 2020/21 REVISED ADOPTED REVISED BEGINNING BALANCE - PROJECTS $ 2,841,100 $ 369,100 $ 3,387,600 REVENUES STATE GRANTS - Other 241,800 1,245,000 1,440,000 LIBRARY COUNTY GRANT 125,000 - - BUDGET BOND/BANK PROCEEDS 528,600 1,198,300 1,498,300 TRANSFER FROM GENERAL FUND 3,261,600 2,078,100 2,078,100 TRANSFER FROM PARKLAND RESERVE 191,800 - - TRANSFER FROM CAPITAL ASSET RESERVE 445,300 346,400 346,400 TRANSFER FROM LODGING TAX - 110,000 - SUBTOTAL PROJECT RECEIPTS 4,794,100 4,977,800 5,362,800 TOTAL FUNDING SOURCES 4,794,100 4,977,800 5,362,800 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCE AND REVENUES $ 7,635,200 $ 5,346,900 $ 8,750,400 EXPENSE SUMMARY 2019/20 2020/21 2020/21 EXPENDITURES REVISED ADOPTED REVISED FIRE $ 281,100 $ 173,300 $ 173,300 GROUNDS 153,400 - - LIBRARY 125,000 - 19,900 RECREATION 1,073,600 395,000 904,000 LIFE SAFETY 48,900 - 43,400 CODE ENFORCEMENT 37,200 - 37,800 PLANNING - 20,400 20,400 INSPECTIONS 18,600 18,600 42,700 POLICE 954,700 912,400 986,800 STREETS 3,289,400 936,000 3,224,100 STORMWATER 365,000 1,110,700 1,327,500 SANITATION 287,200 475,200 475,200 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 45,600 61,600 61,600 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT 174,800 700,000 700,000 PUBLIC WORKS - ENGINEERING - 39,600 39,600 PROCUREMENT & INVENTORY 390,000 25,000 325,000 FLEET MAINTENANCE 21,600 - - DEPARTMENT SUBTOTAL 7,266,100 4,867,800 8,381,300 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 7,266,100 4,867,800 8,381,300 BUDGET BALANCE 369,100 479,100 369,100 TOTAL BUDGET BALANCE & EXPENDITURES $ 7,635,200 $ 5,346,900 $ 8,750,400 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: November 9, 2020 1

CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2020-14 WATER IMPROVEMENT & EXTENSION FUND REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2020-2021 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Six Million Thirty Eight Thousand Three Hundred dollars ($6, 038,300) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Governmentr for the fiscal year begining July 1, 2020 and ending June 30, 2021: CASH RECEIPTS 2019/20 2020/21 2020/21 REVISED ADOPTED REVISED BEGINNING BALANCE - WATER $ 5,349,000 $ 3,794,200 $ 4,618,200 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES 5,349,000 3,794,200 4,618,200 REVENUES STATE LOAN FUND - WATER 1,401,900 - - TRANS FR OPERATING FUND - WATER 1,500,000 1,300,000 1,300,000 TRANSFER FR WATER IMPACT FEE 30,900 39,200 70,100 INTEREST INCOME 10,000 50,000 50,000 TOTAL REVENUES 2,942,800 1,389,200 1,420,100 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES & REVENUES $ 8,291,800 $ 5,183,400 $ 6,038,300 EXPENSE SUMMARY 2019/20 2020/21 2020/21 EXPENSES REVISED ADOPTED REVISED ENGINEERING $ - $ 20,400 $ 20,400 WATER 1,143,500 1,205,500 1,491,900 WATER TREATMENT PLANT 3,354,100 - 568,500 TOTAL EXPENSES 4,497,600 1,225,900 2,080,800 BUDGET BALANCE - WATER 3,794,200 3,957,500 3,957,500 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE SUBTOTALS 3,794,200 3,957,500 3,957,500 TOTAL BUDGET BALANCES & EXPENSES $ 8,291,800 $ 5,183,400 $ 6,038,300 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: November 9, 2020 2

CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2020-14 WASTEWATER IMPROVEMENT & EXTENSION FUND REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2020-2021 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Three Million Sixty-three Thousand Nine Hundred dollars ($3,063,900) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for from the fiscal year begining July 1, 2020 and ending June 30, 2021: CASH RECEIPTS 2019/20 2020/21 2020/21 REVISED ADOPTED REVISED BEGINNING BALANCE - WASTEWATER $ 906,600 $ 242,100 $ 1,243,700 REVENUES STATE LOAN FUND - WASTEWATER 1,564,700 - 578,600 TRANS FR OPERATING FUND - WW 900,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 TRANSFER FR WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE 404,900 31,600 31,600 INTEREST INCOME 10,000 10,000 10,000 TOTAL REVENUES 2,879,600 1,241,600 1,820,200 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES & REVENUES $ 3,786,200 $ 1,483,700 $ 3,063,900 EXPENSE SUMMARY 2019/20 2020/21 2020/21 EXPENSES REVISED ADOPTED REVISED ENGINEERING $ - $ 14,000 $ 14,000 WASTEWATER 3,544,100 1,085,000 2,665,200 TOTAL EXPENSES 3,544,100 1,099,000 2,679,200 BUDGET BALANCE - WASTEWATER 242,100 384,700 384,700 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE SUBTOTALS 242,100 384,700 384,700 TOTAL BUDGET BALANCES & EXPENSES $ 3,786,200 $ 1,483,700 $ 3,063,900 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: November 9, 2020 3

CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2020-14 WATER IMPACT FEE RESERVE REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2020-2021 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating One Million Seven Hundred Seventy-eight Thousand dollars ($1,778,000) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2020 and ending June 30, 2021: CASH RECEIPTS 2019/20 2020/21 2020/21 REVISED ADOPTED REVISED BEGINNING BALANCE - WATER $ 1,751,500 $ 1,733,900 $ 1,764,800 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES 1,751,500 1,733,900 1,764,800 RECEIPTS TRANSFER IN FROM OPERATING FUND - - - INTEREST EARNINGS - WATER 13,300 13,200 13,200 TOTAL RECEIPTS 13,300 13,200 13,200 TOTALS $ 1,764,800 $ 1,747,100 $ 1,778,000 EXPENSE SUMMARY 2019/20 2020/21 2020/21 REVISED ADOPTED REVISED TRANSFER TO CP IMPROVEMENTS 30,900 39,200 70,100 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE SUBTOTALS 1,733,900 1,707,900 1,707,900 TOTALS $ 1,764,800 $ 1,747,100 $ 1,778,000 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: November 9, 2020 4

CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2020-14 WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE RESERVE REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2020-2021 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Four Million Six Hundred Seven Thousand dollars ($4,607,000) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2020 and ending June 30, 2021: CASH RECEIPTS 2019/20 2020/21 2020/21 REVISED ADOPTED REVISED BEGINNING BALANCE - WASTEWATER $ 4,970,700 $ 4,603,600 $ 4,603,600 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES 4,970,700 4,603,600 4,603,600 RECEIPTS INTEREST EARNINGS - WASTEWATER 37,800 35,000 35,000 TOTAL RECEIPTS 37,800 35,000 35,000 TOTALS $ 5,008,500 $ 4,638,600 $ 4,638,600 EXPENSE SUMMARY 2019/20 2020/21 2020/21 REVISED ADOPTED REVISED TRANSFER TO I & E FUND FROM WW IMPACT FEES $ 404,900 $ 31,600 $ 31,600 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE SUBTOTALS 4,603,600 4,607,000 4,607,000 TOTALS $ 5,008,500 $ 4,638,600 $ 4,638,600 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: November 9, 2020 5

CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2020-14 ELECTRIC REVENUE FUND REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2020-2021 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Ninety Million Seventy-One Thousand One Hundred dollars ($90,071,100) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2020 and ending June 30, 2021: 2019/20 2020/21 2020/21 REVISED ADOPTED REVISED BEGINNING BALANCE $ 16,550,700 $ 10,230,300 $ 10,230,300 DISTRIBUTION OF EARNINGS - PCA CREDIT (2,873,800) (5,246,100) (5,246,100) BEGINNING BALANCE - ADJUSTED 13,676,900 4,984,200 4,984,200 BASE REVENUE DIRECT SALES TO CUSTOMER 82,686,400 80,417,400 80,417,400 UTILITY TAX 1,322,000 1,245,100 1,245,100 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 528,000 530,000 640,000 RENT REVENUE 110,000 110,000 - GREEN ENERGY 127,400 127,000 127,000 INTEREST EARNINGS 195,000 157,400 157,400 TRANSFER FROM RATE STABILIZATION - 2,500,000 2,500,000 TOTAL REVENUES 84,968,800 85,086,900 85,086,900 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCE & REVENUES $ 98,645,700 $ 90,071,100 $ 90,071,100 6

2020-2021 BUDGET ORDINANCES ELECTRIC REVENUE FUND EXPENSES AND BUDGET BALANCE FOR 2020-2021 2019/20 2020/21 2020/21 EXPENSES REVISED ADOPTED REVISED POWER SUPPLY $ 22,115,400 $ 19,715,300 $ 19,715,300 SOLAR ENERGY 2,703,900 3,401,100 3,401,100 SOLAR RENEWAL ENERGY CREDITS 395,200 384,100 384,100 POWER SUPPLY MANAGEMENT 835,000 634,800 634,800 REC'S (Renewable Energy Credits) 411,000 614,600 614,600 RGGI (Regional Greenhouse Gas Init.) 67,500 12,300 12,300 PJM CHARGES - ENERGY 5,678,600 5,871,900 5,871,900 PJM CHARGES - TRANSMISSION & FEES 7,792,400 8,476,800 8,476,800 CAPACITY CHARGES 11,101,900 15,048,100 15,048,100 SUB-TOTAL POWER SUPPLY 51,100,900 54,159,000 54,159,000 PLANT OPERATIONS 5,530,700 4,706,100 4,706,100 GENERATIONS FUELS 956,300 488,400 488,400 PJM SPOT MARKET ENERGY (1,163,100) (808,300) (808,300) PJM CREDITS (516,900) (369,400) (369,400) CAPACITY CREDITS (8,422,000) (12,191,700) (12,191,700) GENERATION SUBTOTAL (3,615,000) (8,174,900) (8,174,900) POWER SUPPLY & GENERATION SUBTOTAL 47,485,900 45,984,100 45,984,100 DIRECT EXPENDITURES TRANSMISSION/DISTRIBUTION 3,802,800 3,995,600 3,995,600 ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING 1,372,900 1,396,400 1,396,400 ADMINISTRATION 615,500 707,400 707,400 METER READING 401,900 375,300 375,300 SYSTEMS OPERATIONS 853,100 871,100 871,100 DIRECT EXPENDITURE SUBTOTALS 7,046,200 7,345,800 7,345,800 OTHER EXPENSES: UTILITY TAX 1,322,000 1,245,100 1,245,100 ALLOW FOR UNCOLLECTIBLES 250,000 300,000 300,000 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES - RFP'S 200,000 - - LEGAL EXPENSES 100,000 100,000 100,000 RETIREES HEALTH CARE 721,400 789,600 789,600 GREEN ENERGY PAYMENT TO DEMEC 137,000 127,000 127,000 INTERFUND SERVICE FEES 3,912,900 3,784,300 3,784,300 INTEREST ON DEPOSITS 17,500 21,000 21,000 BANK & CREDIT CARD FEES 327,000 330,300 330,300 DEBT SERVICE 1,379,500 1,378,600 1,378,600 OTHER EXPENSES SUBTOTAL 8,367,300 8,075,900 8,075,900 TRANSFER TO: IMPROVEMENT & EXTENSION 6,816,000 6,000,000 6,000,000 GENERAL FUND 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 TRANSFER TO DEPRECIATION RESERVE 5,000,000 - - RATE STABILIZATION RESERVE 3,700,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 TRANSFER TO SUBTOTAL 25,516,000 18,000,000 18,000,000 TOTAL EXPENSES 88,415,400 79,405,800 79,405,800 BUDGET BALANCE - WORKING CAPITAL 10,230,300 10,665,300 10,665,300 TOTALS $ 98,645,700 $ 90,071,100 $ 90,071,100 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: November 9, 2020 7

CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2020-14 ELECTRIC UTILITY IMPROVEMENT AND EXTENSION FUND REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2020-2021 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Twenty Five Million Six Hundred Forty-six Thousand Five Hundred dollars ($25,646,500) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2020 and ending June 30, 2021: REVENUES 2019/20 2020/21 2020/21 REVISED REVISED REVISED BEGINNING BALANCE $ 15,157,800 $ 15,640,000 $ 18,028,300 REVENUES TRANSFER FROM ELECTRIC 6,816,000 6,000,000 6,000,000 TRANSFER FROM WATER/WASTEWATER 298,000 - - TRANSFER FROM GENERAL FUND 250,000 - - GENERAL SERVICE BILLING 400,000 400,000 400,000 TRF FROM DEPRECIATION RSV - 1,000,000 1,000,000 INTEREST EARNINGS 150,000 218,200 218,200 TOTAL REVENUES 7,914,000 7,618,200 7,618,200 TOTALS $ 23,071,800 $ 23,258,200 $ 25,646,500 EXPENSE SUMMARY 2019/20 2020/21 2020/21 EXPENSES REVISED REVISED REVISED ELECTRIC ADMINISTRATION $ 1,643,200 $ 360,000 $ 1,925,400 ELECTRIC GENERATION 376,000 1,267,000 1,302,700 TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION 1,255,000 1,100,000 1,100,000 ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING 3,293,000 2,968,900 3,011,300 METER READING 21,800 - - ERP SYSTEM 842,800 500,000 1,244,800 TOTAL EXPENSES 7,431,800 6,195,900 8,584,200 BUDGET BALANCE 15,640,000 17,062,300 17,062,300 TOTAL BUDGET BALANCE & EXPENSES $ 23,071,800 $ 23,258,200 $ 25,646,500 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: November 9, 2020 8

CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2020-14 COMMUNITY TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT FUND REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2020-2021 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Seven Hundred Ninety-Five Thousand Eight Hundred dollars ($795,800) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2020 and ending June 30, 2021: OPERATING REVENUES 2019/20 2020/21 2020/21 REVISED ADOPTED REVISED PRIOR YEAR BALANCE $ 334,000 $ 662,400 $ 312,400 GRANTS REVENUE 416,600 400,000 483,400 TOTALS $ 750,600 $ 1,062,400 $ 795,800 OPERATING EXPENSES 2019/20 2020/21 2020/21 REVISED ADOPTED REVISED PROGRAM EXP. GRANT RELATED $ 750,600 $ 750,000 $ 795,800 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE - 312,400 - TOTALS $ 750,600 $ 1,062,400 $ 795,800 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: November 9, 2020 9

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE The Council Committee of the Whole was held by video conference on November 10, 2020 at 6:06 p.m., with Councilman Slavin presiding in the absence of Council President Hare. Council members present via video or telephone were Mr. Anderson, Mr. Sudler, Mr. Neil, Mr. Rocha, Mr. Taylor, and Mr. Lindell. Mr. Cole was absent. Mayor Christiansen was also present. Civilian members present via video or telephone for their Committee meetings were Mr. Caldwell and Col. Dix, Retired, (Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement). Ms. Maucher (Utility) was absent. UTILITY COMMITTEE The Utility Committee met with Councilman Slavin presiding in the absence of Chairman Cole. Adoption of Agenda Mr. Sudler moved for adoption of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Taylor and unanimously carried. Evaluation of Bids - SCADA (Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition) Equipment Technology Upgrade (Actionable Item) Mr. Jason Lyon, Water and Wastewater Director, reviewed the background and analysis regarding the evaluation of bids for SCADA Equipment Technology Upgrade. Staff recommended awarding the contract to Freemire & Associates, Inc. for the SCADA Equipment Technology Upgrade, ITB #21-0009WW, for the amount of $197,118. Mr. Neil moved to recommend approval of Staff's recommendation. The motion was seconded by Mr. Taylor and unanimously carried. Evaluation of Proposals - College Road Pump Station Upgrade Engineering Design Support (Actionable Item) Mr. Jason Lyon, Water and Wastewater Director, reviewed the background and analysis regarding the evaluation of proposals for the College Road Pump Station Upgrade Engineering Design Support. Staff recommended awarding the contract to Remington & Vernick Engineers for the College Road Pump Station Upgrade Engineering Design, RFP #21-0010WW, for the amount of $17,523. Responding to Mr. Taylor, Mr. Lyon stated that the poly-triplex liner is like a sock slipped into the manhole. He advised that they have dealt with inflow and infiltration issues consistently throughout the City and that the poly-triplex liner provides a barrier for any groundwater infiltration. Mr. Lyon noted that it was a preventative maintenance measure to reduce the amount of water being treated by the County unnecessarily. Mr. Taylor expressed his concerns regarding the proposal price and COVID-19. Mr. Lyon stated that they spoke with Remington & Vernick Engineers and he felt confident with the proposal, which is just to create the bid documents and the specifications, not for the construction phase. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Lyon stated that they have a contract length of 120 days from notice to proceed. He noted a caveat with all the COVID-19 situations and that they may have to do things virtually,

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 11, 2020 PAGE 2 so the end of March was the game plan. Mr. Lyon noted that they budgeted the actual construction phase to be scheduled in fiscal year 2023. Mr. Rocha stated that he shared the same concerns as Mr. Taylor and asked what made Mr. Lyon feel confident that Remington and Vernick Engineering could do the work. Responding, Mr. Lyon stated that when they submitted the proposal it came with a statement of understanding, statement of qualifications, references and provided other similar projects that they had done in the past. Mr. Lyon noted that another aspect of the process was there was a question and answer phase of the proposal and each proposer of the five engineering firms had to sign off and say that they have accepted all the specifications and read and understood the addendum. Mr. Neil moved to recommend awarding the contract to Remington & Vernick Engineers for the College Road Pump Station Upgrade Engineering Design, RFP #21-0010WW, for the amount of $17,523, as recommended by Staff. The motion was seconded by Mr. Taylor and unanimously carried. Water Treatment Plant Process Improvement Project – Construction Support Services Fees – Change Order (Actionable Item) Mr. Jason Lyon, Water and Wastewater Director, reviewed the background and analysis regarding the Water Treatment Plant Process Improvement Project – Construction Support Services Fees – Change Order. Staff recommended approval of the proposed amendment to the construction support services by Duffield Associates, in the amount of $39,000. Responding to Mr. Anderson regarding a new timeframe and the cost, Mr. Lyon stated they have not received anything in writing from the contractor and that they would be onsite the week of November 16, 2020 to complete the punch list items and the programming issues that have arisen since the plan had received substantial completion. Mr. Lyon noted that they anticipated that they would finish that up the week of November 16, 2020 and then they would go into a conditional acceptance for 30 days. Mr. Lyon advised that if anything went wrong in those 30 days, the contractor would have to come back and fix it with no questions asked, which would bring them into mid-December. Mr. Lyon noted that he did not have it in writing. Regarding the amount of money that was provided in that estimate, Mr. Lyon stated that he did have in writing from Duffield that their estimate for $39,000 would go through the end of October and that it was very conservative. He noted that they felt that $39,000 was an ample amount to finish their aspect of the project. Mr. Lyon stated that he had reviewed their work logs and confirmed that. He noted that although the committee action form and attachment indicated October 30, 2020, he does have it in writing that they feel confident that they can run this out even past December if they need to. Mr. Anderson moved to recommend approval of the proposed amendment to the construction support services by Duffield Associates, in the amount of $39,000, as recommended by Staff. The motion was seconded by Mr. Neil and unanimously carried.

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 11, 2020 PAGE 3 Mr. Neil moved for adjournment of the Utility Committee meeting, seconded by Mr. Rocha and unanimously carried. Meeting adjourned at 6:29 p.m. PARKS, RECREATION, AND COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT COMMITTEE The Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee met with Chairman Anderson presiding. Adoption of Agenda Mr. Sudler moved for approval of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Neil and unanimously carried. Proposed Revision to the Reciprocal Borrowing Agreement (Informational Item) Mr. Matthew Harline, Acting City Manager, reviewed the proposed revisions to the Reciprocal Borrowing Agreement. Mr. Brian Sylvester, Library Director, stated that all four of the municipalities were reviewing the proposal and if there was any feedback that Committee or Council members would like for him to bring back to the next meeting of the library directors on November 17, 2020, he would be happy to take that to the directors. Responding to Mr. Sudler regarding negative components, Mr. Sylvester stated that when there is a surplus balance in the account, the County would distribute it five ways, not just to the four member libraries in the agreement, but also to the Kent County Library. He advised that under the proposal, the Kent County library would not receive any funding even when there is a surplus. Mr. Sylvester stated that from the County's perspective that could be considered a downside, but as far as the four member libraries, this would result in increased funding and a more stable funding source because they would not have that surplus that built up. Mr. Harline noted that the possible downside would be that the County could say no. He stated that it requires a legislative change at the County level. Responding to Col. Dix, Mr. Sylvester stated the calculation is based on circulation, an item physically being checked out. He advised that under the current agreement, each of those transactions was valued at $2.65. Mr. Sylvester stated that he was proposing to use those same numbers, but instead of linking it to the actual physical number of times a book has changed hands, they were looking at the percentage of the total. Responding to Col. Dix, Mr. Harline stated they have a budget to order books. He advised that a lot of the money goes directly towards materials, including materials that are not books. He noted that they use very little City money for materials that are not actual hard books. Mr. Neil moved to endorse the proposed revisions of the Reciprocal Borrowing Agreement, seconded by Mr. Sudler and unanimously carried. Mr. Neil moved for adjournment of the Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. Sudler.

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 11, 2020 PAGE 4 Mr. Neil moved for adjournment of the Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. Sudler and unanimously carried. Meeting adjourned at 6:41 p.m. Mr. Sudler moved for adjournment of the Council Committee of the Whole meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. Neil and unanimously carried. Meeting adjourned at 6:41 p.m. Timothy Slavin At-Large Council Member TS/jt S:\AGENDAS-MINUTES-PACKETS-PRESENTATIONS-ATT&EXH\Committee-Minutes\2020\11-10-2020 CCW Minutes.wpd

COMMITTEE INFORMATIONAL ITEM PROCEEDING: Council Committee of the Whole; Legislative, Finance and Administration Meeting DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN: Police Department DATE SUBMITTED November 13, 2020 PREPARED BY: Captain Chris Hermance / Administrative Division Commander SUBJECT: Dover Police Department - CIP Project: Police Station Computer Wiring Upgrade (PD2104) REFERENCE: CIP Budget, Projects PD2104 RELATED PROJECT: N/A REVIEWED BY: Matt Harline, Interim City Manager EXHIBITS: None EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $122,654.22 PROJECT BUDGET: $175,400 FUNDING SOURCE (Dept./Page in CIP & Budget): Police Department, CIP Project PD2104, Name: Police Station Voice/Data Infrastructure Upgrade/Replacement, Account No: 101-11-17-00-000-54031 BUDGET IMPACT: Yes. Already budgeted. Proposal in below budgeted amount. BACKGROUND CIP project PD2104 was submitted for funding because the current Cat 5 wiring infrastructure within the Police Station is becoming obsolete and starting to fail. This is the wiring in the building that supports the connectivity for all data from computers and voice instruments in the building with all external computer systems controlled by the State and the City of Dover. As technology progresses, the amount of data that passes through this infrastructure increases exponentially so the increasing the bulk of data slows down the network and eventually connectivity fails. The project upgrades the wiring in the building to Cat 6 and also upgrades all the connections in the communications wiring boxes located on each floor of the station that control the connectivity of technology equipment for both normal and emergency operations powered by the emergency generator. Most of the work for the project will be completed by contractor personnel, however, there are some smaller parts that are planned to be completed by Police Dept IT personnel which will require the purchase of additional supplies separately later. There is a Delaware state contract in place for this type of work and these contracts are awarded based on a competitive bidding process and the contracts are updated regularly. The contract for Data and Voice Structured Cabling last year had several vendors awarded to perform these services. In preparation for the FY21 budget last November, Chris Menge, the Police Dept IT Manager, contacted Under/Comm, Inc. for pricing since they were an awarded vendor on the contract. However, a new state contract, GSS16441-DATA_CBL, was awarded on 7/1/20 which added additional vendors to the award

list. Under/Comm, Inc., was still on the list and Assurance Media, LLC, was a new minority vendor that was added to the award list and their minority vendor number is DE19023130. As a result, both vendors were contacted. Chris Menge worked with both vendors to ensure the pricing received was comparable and the pricing submitted follows: Vendor (Address) Proposal Amount Under/Comm, Inc. (198 Mullet Run, Milford, DE) $121,291.66 Assurance Media, LLC. (590 Century Blvd, Suite B, Wilmington, DE) $122,654.22 Police Department interviewed both vendors and requested proposals. Staff requests that the city award the contract to Assurance Media, LLC. Although they are not the lowest cost option, they are a minority business and their price is only 1.1% over the lower proposal, which is well within the 3% allowed for minority vendor preference by the City of Dover Purchasing Policy. Assurance Media, LLC., the preferred vendor for this project, is a minority-status vendor and has 45 technicians on staff, two of which are Registered Distribution Designers. The City Manager’s Office agrees that the project does not need further Council action because the project is: • Approved in the FY21 budget and the cost in under budget; • Will employ an approved vendor that has been vetted by a competitive state contract GSS16441- DATA_CBL; • The PD interviewed two vendors under state contract and chose a vendor that was a registered minority vendor DE19023130; • Although the cost for the chosen vendor is 1.1% greater than the other vendor, the percentage is less than the 3% preference that would apply if this were put out for a formal RFP. Because the PD is already working on improvements in the dispatch area, it would make the project work much more smoothly and efficiently if they are allowed to proceed without formal action at the CCOW and City Council meetings.