Minutes

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE The Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee meeting was held on November 13, 2012, at 5:32 p.m. with Chairman Lynn presiding. Members present were Mr. Anderson (arrived at 6:05 p.m.), Mr. Hare, Mr. Rushe, and Mr. Shevock. Members of Council present were Council President Leary, Mr. Perza, Mrs. Williams, and Mr. Hutchison. Mayor Carey was also present. AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS By unanimous consent, the agenda was approved as presented. Proposed Ordinance #2012-23 - FY Budget Revisions Mrs. Donna Mitchell, Controller/Treasurer advised members that Proposed Ordinance #2012-23 would incorporate the following changes into the FY13 Budget: ! The Original Budget for the Police Grant Funds that was missed in the original budget ordinance. " The budget ordinance represents the combined fund summary for three (3) separate Federal and State grants; the individual revenue and expenditure line items will be entered into the City’s financial accounting system for each grant. ! The audited Beginning Balances for the Municipal Street Aid, Library, Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), and Police Grant funds and corresponding revisions to the expenditures. ! Capital project funds are amended to reflect the audited Beginning Balances and corresponding adjustments for those uncompleted projects with multi-year construction periods. ! Amends the Beginning Balances for the Operating Funds to include the carry forward balances to cover the purchase of the mobile and portable radios for Federal Communications Commission (FCC) compliance that was budgeted for in FY12. The offsetting expenditures are also amended by department. ! The remaining Beginning Balances for the Operating Funds will be brought forward for amendment after the completion of the audit. ! Property Taxes are adjusted to reflect higher Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILOT) from the State of Delaware that was approved in the State budget after the adoption of the City budget. ! The additional Municipal Street Aid funds that the State appropriated for capital outlay on street projects in FY12 are carried forward in the Beginning Balance. This, coupled with another additional appropriation (revenue) for capital outlay, is included in the Municipal Street Aid Budget to be spent this fiscal year.

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 2 ! Increased the Capital Investment Plan for the Electric Improvement & Extension Fund to provide funding for increased request for new developments and commercial properties, which is an increase of $300,000 which is being taken from the carry forward balance from last year. ! Amends the power supply and generation budget to provide more detail and inclusion of cost of the Solar Renewable Energy Credits. It was noted that all changes were noted in red font in the proposed ordinance. Mrs. Mitchell stated that Line #265 on Page 7 of the ordinance reflected $351,600 that was missed in the original budget. She explained that by July of 2012, adequate funds were produced through generation of electricity to realize a credit, which was included in Line #271, PJM Spot Market, in order to offset the $351,600 rather than changing the budget balance. She also noted that more detail was provided in the revised ordinance in the Electric Revenue Fund Summary regarding energy and supply items. Mr. Hare moved to recommend adoption of Proposed Ordinance #2012-23 - FY 2013 - Budget Revisions, seconded by Mr. Shevock and unanimously carried (Anderson absent). Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard During the City Council Meeting of October 8, 2012, a public hearing was held regarding consideration of renaming Division Street within the City limits as Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard. At that time, the matter was referred back to the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee with the stipulation that the Committee would provide a recommendation to City Council within 120 days and that public notification would be provided to all affected parties. (Clerk’s Office Note: Written notification of the November 13, 2012 LF&A meeting regarding the proposed renaming was sent to all owners of property on Division Street.) Councilman Adam Perza reminded members that various proposals to honor Dr. King had been considered over the past several months and that there were two (2) proposals currently before the City: 1) to rename Route 8, Division Street, and Forrest Avenue from the east boundary of the City to the west boundary of the City in Dr. King’s honor, and 2) to rename Division Street from DuPont Highway on the east to Saulsbury Road on the west. He noted that the City had provided opportunities for public comment during two (2) public meetings in order to obtain feedback from business owners, property owners, and government officials from the State and County regarding the impact on the community. He explained that there were significant concerns regarding the potential impact to the business community in terms of costs incurred, private residents had expressed concerns regarding the administrative burdens of changing home addresses, and members of the historic community had made the City aware that the Division Street corridor had been in the community since the 1850s and was historical to the City. Mr. Perza explained that these comments, criticisms, and recommendations were balanced against the concerns of the advocates for the King Street proposal, noting that the City had considered a form of recognition for Dr. King for

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 3 approximately 20 years with no decision being made. He indicated his desire to submit the Court Street corridor as an alternative plan for consideration, noting that this would not necessarily replace either Division Street plan. Councilman Perza provided a presentation entitled “Public Hearing Re: Dedication of Public Street for Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.” (Attachment #1). Referring to Page 3 of the presentation, he explained that the alternative proposal would rename the current Court Street, beginning at its intersection with Route 13, as Martin Luther King, Jr. Street or Boulevard and would “wrap around” Legislative Hall, extending to the intersection with Federal Street. The current Duke of York Street would become the northern portion of the proposed corridor, and William Penn Street would become the southern portion. This would include renaming the current Court Street, Duke of York Street, and William Penn Street after Dr. King. Mr. Perza stated that Capital Drive, which serves Courtside Apartments (on the north side of current Court Street), would be renamed as Court Street and would unite with the southern lane of existing Court Street (on the south side of Court Street) which is effectively an “alley” running parallel to Court Street extending to Cowgill Street and serving approximately eight (8) private properties. Mr. Perza advised members that there was precedent in the City for uniting streets such as Capital Drive and the alleyway, pointing out that Kings Highway Southwest extends north past the Governor’s mansion, intersects with Division Street (where Division Street becomes Kings Highway for several blocks), and then turns north at Park Drive past Silver Lake Park and intersects with Route13. He explained that if all of the suggested actions were accomplished, no residents on the north or south sides of Court Street would be impacted and no businesses would be affected. Mr. Perza advised members that four (4) State facilities, including the Haslet Armory, the Tatnall Building, the Delaware Public Archives, and Family Court would be affected. He explained that Family Court would have two (2) address options: 1) retain 400 Court Street because it would be located on the newly defined Court Street, or 2) adopt the Martin Luther King, Jr. renaming. Mr. Perza described this proposal as involving a prominent, visible thoroughfare of the Capital that serves as an entrance to the legislative corridor which attracts attention from Delawareans and legislators from all three (3) counties. He noted that it contains a mixture of residential neighborhoods (including Capital Green, Garden Court Apartments, and Courtside Apartments) and there is no commercial development in the area, with the exception of the Route 13 strip on the eastern boundary. Mr. Perza explained that the advantage of the proposal was that it would minimize much of the impact mentioned in all of the public comments received from City and Kent County residents, Delawareans, and State and County officials. In addition, the cost should be less due to the reduced number of sign changes needed. He noted that consideration of this option at the current Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee meeting was the initial introduction of the plan, which had not been vetted by the public, State, or the City and that more public comment would surely be offered. Mr. Lynn thanked Mr. Perza for his efforts in developing this proposal and expressed his opinion that this was the best solution because it addressed the concerns of residents and businesses.

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 4 Mr. Anderson stated that he liked the proposal, noting that this thoroughfare was one (1) of the best kept avenues in the City, the location of the seat of government, an entrance for tourists and visitors, and connects Capital Green to Legislative Hall, which he felt was symbolic. He stated that it was just as important that businesses not be disrupted in these economic times, noting that Dr. King was “about not just freedom but jobs.” Mr. Anderson indicated that the proposal addressed all these concerns and showed that the City was listening to the public and he thanked Mr. Perza for his work. Mr. Shevock questioned if any other proposals had been received and if the Committee would follow up to ensure that all property owners were notified of Mr. Perza’s plan. He stated his understanding that the State did not appear to object to the proposal and inquired if this would be documented in writing so that there would be no questions in the future. Mr. Perza reiterated that the plan was just being introduced; therefore, no advertised public meeting had been held to consider this proposal. He stated his belief that Council would schedule a hearing at the appropriate time and notify by mail the State and private property owners who would be impacted. Mr. Perza indicated that approximately 20-25 properties would be affected and it was his belief that 16 of them were owned by either the State or the City. He advised members that efforts had been made to reach out to the State to make them aware of the initial proposal since the City was seeking their input regarding the potential impact to users of the buildings. Mr. Lynn stated that if the proposal were adopted by the Committee it would be sent to Council for approval in two (2) weeks and the first available public hearing date would be December 10, 2012. He believed that the State would be notified and would have an opportunity to appear on or before December 10, 2012 to weigh in. Mr. Shevock questioned if everything in this regard should be in place prior to going to a public hearing because a “fly in the ointment” could appear after the public hearing. He noted that he had no problem with the proposals but felt that feedback should be received prior to going to public hearing because the public hearing could be a waste of time for the Committee and the City unless everything was in order. Mr. Hare stated his understanding that the purpose of the proposed renaming was to honor Dr. King in history and that he could understand the concept of renaming Court Street up to the Legislative Mall area; however, he was not in favor of renaming William Penn and Duke of York Streets since they were prominent in Delaware history. Mr. Perza indicated that he felt this was a fair comment to make for historians who are aware of the Duke of York’s contributions from England and William Penn’s contributions from Pennsylvania. He felt that these concerns should be considered through this process and that the Committee or Council could modify the proposal. Mr. Hare felt that renaming Court Street and honoring Dr. King “in the same breath” as William Penn and the Duke of York was appropriate. He felt that the correct process should be followed and should be “as pure as the results.”

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 5 Mr. Perza stated that a number of the components to the process had been streamlined and many of the logistical arguments that were previously obstacles were removed. He agreed that there would be discussion as to what William Penn and the Duke of York mean to the State and this would be weighed against the contributions of Dr. King to members of the community, noting that history means different things to different people. Responding to Mr. Lynn, Mr. Perza confirmed that no private individuals or businesses would be impacted by the proposal in terms of having to change driver’s licenses, social security information, etc. Mr. Hutchison thanked Mr. Perza for his efforts and inquired if any other locations had been considered by the Committee. Mr. Anderson stated that he had heard that interest was expressed in renaming the Dover Public Library after Dr. King. Mr. Hare noted that a suggestion had been received regarding renaming newly created parks or “different things in the parks” in honor of Dr. King. Mr. Koenig confirmed that emails had been received regarding the potential for naming a park system or part of a park system after Dr. King. Mr. Hutchison stated that a location directly across from the Police Memorial had been suggested as a site for a memorial for Dr. King. He indicated that he would like to see a list of the options, to include feedback, and that the selection should be made as quickly as possible. Mr. Lynn reiterated the options before the Committee regarding this matter, as follows: 1) The entirety of Division Street, as previously suggested by Councilman Bonar. 2) A portion of Division Street (the original proposal from Route 13 to Saulsbury Road). 3) Mr. Perza’s Court Street proposal. 4) The renaming of the Dover Public Library. 5) The naming of a proposed pocket park system. Mr. Lynn noted that only one (1) of these parks exists to date in the form of an empty lot on the corner of North Street and Governors Avenue, which is completely unimproved. Mr. Shevock inquired if Mr. Perza’s proposal was a three (3) pronged proposal that could be divided as follows: a) Court Street only. b) Court and Duke of York Streets only. c) Court, Duke of York, and William Penn Streets. Mr. Lynn stated that any of those alternatives were on the table.

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 6 Members were provided correspondence received regarding this matter (Attachment #2). Mr. Lynn noted that a sign-in sheet had been made available for those who wished to comment and advised speakers to keep in mind that advocates of the Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard proposal were leaning toward the Court Street option. He reminded speakers that comments would be limited to three (3) minutes and that the meeting was running a bit behind. Ms. Carroll-Lisa Malone, 1559 Forrest Avenue, inquired if Legislative Mall was the only name of the green, grassy area [between Duke of York and William Penn Streets]. Responding, Mr. Perza stated that he did not believe that this area had a name but that it may be codified as Independence Park, although he was unsure. Ms. Malone suggested that if there was concern about renaming Duke of York Street and William Penn Street, perhaps only Court Street could be renamed and the park could be named Martin Luther King Park. Mr. Perza stated that he had been taking notes from all those who appeared and would add this idea to the list of public comments. Ms. Malone indicated that she had prepared a statement with objections to the renaming of the Forrest Avenue corridor (Attachment #3) but had no objections to the Court Street proposal in its various forms that were suggested or the renaming of the Dover library. Mr. David Louie, 1684 N. Little Creek Road, read the following statement into the record: We, the 580 residents and businesses on Division Street, received a letter concerning this meeting tonight in reference to renaming Division Street from Artis Drive to Long Point Road to Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard. Since I live on North Little Creek Road and will be affected by expense and time, I wanted to be sure this committee and Council will follow City of Dover Code and Charter. Whereas, every 580 residents and businesses will be petitioned to where we either want a street name change or we do not. And, this committee or Council will not “by pass” the charter or code and pass this name change without the petition being presented to all those concerned. In Oct. 2012, I received a statement from an investment firm for my son and it still had my old address from when my address was Division Street and later changed to North Little Creek, this was over 8 years ago. I am still updating companies from that change. Mr. Emil Voshell, 1125 E. Division Street, stated that he had resided at his address for over 50 years and inquired if his property would be included in this proposal. Responding, Mr. Lynn stated that under Mr. Perza’s proposal Division Street would be completely unaffected. However, if any of the multiple proposals on the table with regard to Division Street were adopted, Mr. Voshell’s particular house may be affected. Mr. John Welgin, 1082 Forrest Avenue, stated that he spoke at the previous meeting and advised members that he was not in favor of the street name change and had failed to mention that his parcel of land was not within the City of Dover but was in Kent County. He felt that the City could not legally change his County address. He stated that he felt that Mr. Perza’s proposal was “fantastic” and he was “all for it.”

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 7 Ms. Justine Jarrell Davis, 5233 S. DuPont Highway, stated that she was 100% against changing the name of Dover’s 150-year-old historic Division Street. She explained that she and her family had owned property at 991 Forrest Avenue (on the corner of Saulsbury Road and Forrest Avenue) for over 72 years, that this address had been a constant in their lives, and it would be affected by the first two (2) proposals. She felt that renaming Division Street would create a hardship for all residents and business owners on the street as they would be forced to change the street name on many very important items, from business cards, to signs, checks, wills, etc. Ms. Davis stated that it would also cost the City a great deal for all the new signage, paperwork, and man hours. She noted that, while Dr. Martin Luther King is a prominent figure in our country’s history, he was not in Delaware or Dover history. She indicated that Dover is constantly growing and requested that if a new street name were to be chosen, that it be for a new Dover street rather than historic Division Street. Mr. Vernon Ingram, 402 Greenhill Road, stated that he is a business owner on Division Street. He thanked the Committee for the fine job that they are doing and expressed his agreement with Mr. Perza’s proposal. Mr. Gary Michaels, 1520 N. Little Creek Road, stated that he was recently informed of this issue. He stated that he takes care of an 88-year-old woman and has had a difficult time trying to take care of himself and her. He felt that making such a rapid change as the proposed renaming of Division Street was unfair to the community. He stated that this was not a racial issue to him but it was his personal opinion regarding how those affected would suffer the consequences. Mr. Michaels questioned if 1520 N. Little Creek Road would be affected. Responding, Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, stated that if the property was within City limits it would be affected by the most expansive proposal in regard to Division Street. Mr. Charles David, 751 Hatchery Road, stated that he planned to speak about history and was speaking as a private person, with no connection to any organization. He provided members with a written statement and historical information including an excerpt from “A History of Kent County Delaware,” by Harold B. Hancock, and an excerpt from a Presbyterian Church history entitled “Bridge Across the Years,” by Aline Noren Ehinger (Attachment #4). He advised members that a good deal of history made in Delaware since the time of William Penn was included in “Bridge Across the Years.” Mr. David reminded members that the City of Dover was the first City of the First State and that this creates pride among residents due to the history which has been forged over the centuries, from William Penn’s inception until today. It was his opinion that history has been made and that “history is history” and, like birthdays, cannot be changed. He felt that trying to change or do over what has gone before is not giving credence to our forefathers and that this applies to the renaming of Division Street. He read from Page 114 of “Bridge Across the Years,” as follows: A wealthy, well-known and distinguished Dover citizen, Reverend Thomas Budd Bradford, was a member of the Dover congregation from 1850 to his death 1871. He had inherited extensive property in and around Dover from his uncle, Nicholas Loockerman, and lived in the Bradford-Loockerman House at 419 South State Street. He was active in the life of the town due to his large property holdings and to his enjoyment in knowing people and in having a part in social and business activities.

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 8 He was well known in this small town which numbered about 600 people within the city limits. In the 1850's Mr. Bradford laid out all his property in building lots and streets and proposed the name Bradford City. Mr. Lynn advised Mr. David that he had exceeded the three (3) minute time limitation. He apologized for cutting Mr. David off; however, he noted that the sign-in list included two (2) full sheets of names of individuals who wished to speak on this matter. Mr. David stated that he took this as an offense against what he was attempting to present. Mr. Lynn stated that although he found the information informative and educational, only three (3) minutes could be allotted per speaker. He suggested that Mr. David provide information to Committee members in writing or at a subsequent hearing on this matter. Ms. Florene LeCompte, 1110 E. Division Street, stated that she wished to present a statement from one (1) of the residents on her street who was unavailable to speak because she was not in town and did not know about the proposal and began to read a statement, as follows: “For reasons of personal security, I prefer not to reveal my name or specific address because . . .” Mr. Lynn advised Ms. LeCompte that she could make a statement on her own behalf, but not for a third party. Speaking on her own behalf, Ms. LeCompte stated that she agreed with Mr. Perza’s proposal; however, she did not agree with the renaming of William Penn and Duke of York Streets. She expressed her opinion that these streets were part of the City’s history and she did not feel that this should be changed. Referring to Councilman Anderson’s previous comment that he approved of the Court Street option as it related to Capital Green, she questioned why Capital Green would have anything to do with this. She stated that she thought that the matter being considered was not a racial issue; however, she felt that Mr. Anderson’s comment denoted that it was a racial issue. Responding, Mr. Anderson stated that he did not perceive the issue this way, but that Ms. LeCompte should take it the way she liked. Ms. LeCompte expressed her opinion that other options, such as renaming the library or any street that had not already been named would be good options; however, she did not agree with the ABCD corridor of Division Street (from City limit to City limit) because it would affect so many people located on that road. Mr. Kenny Shelton, 1539 Forrest Avenue, stated his agreement with Mr. Perza’s proposal. He noted that he spoke with an individual from Maryland who advised him that a street dedication had been performed to honor troopers who were killed a number of years ago. A large plaque was placed at that location but no addresses were changed and the only cost was a plaque and a dedication. He felt that a memory could be honored without changing addresses. Reverend Michael Rogers, 118 Springfield Way, President, Interdenominational Ministerial Alliance (IMA) (Dover and vicinity) stated that the IMA was pleased to hear the new proposal that was brought forth. He noted that the organization’s original plan was to seek a change to Division Street; however, that Mr. Perza had brought forth a very viable alternative and the organization would like

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 9 to offer support. Rev. Rogers stated that other options were presented; however, the Court Street area seemed very plausible and prominent for honoring Dr. King. He thanked members and Councilman Perza for their efforts and trusted that Council would see this as a reasonable and viable alternative. Reverend Philemon Hill, 3728 N. DuPont Highway, stated he was glad that some reason had come forth and that “we are not like Congress and everyone has to have their way.” He indicated that the Court Street proposal seemed to be a legitimate proposal and stated that proponents were looking to unify the City rather than to divide it. Rev. Hill explained that the previous recommendation from Route 13 to Saulsbury Road was because of the location of the former William Henry High School, which he stated was predominantly a school for people of color until a change in government took place. He expressed appreciation for Mr. Perza’s efforts. Reverend Rita Mishoe Paige, 355 Rita Wilma Road, stated that the IMA supported Councilman Perza’s proposal for Court, Duke of York, and William Penn Streets and indicated that she would like to go on official record by saying that the IMA had sent the entire Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee a letter officially endorsing that proposal. From a personal standpoint, she stated that she found it offensive that the City government would consider a “scattered” park system, was “embarrassed for [Council]” that this would be considered, and requested that this option be taken off the table. Rev. Paige expressed her opinion that the leadership of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and the entire civil rights movement impacted all 50 states. She stated that because of Dr. Martin Luther King, we can vote, members such as Councilwoman Williams are able to reside on City Council, and all those present at the meeting could be in the room and attend the same schools. Rev. Paige stated that because of Dr. Martin Luther King, history was made in Delaware and all over. On behalf of the IMA, Rev. Paige stated she was in favor of Mr. Perza’s proposal because no residents or businesses would be impacted, it would be less expensive than the Division Street proposal, and it would be a win-win situation for all; therefore, she urged members “let’s do it.” Mr. Paul Davis, 5233 S. DuPont Highway, co-owner of a business at 991 Forrest Avenue, commended the Committee for their work. He noted that he and his wife were opposed to renaming Division Street. He felt that when people sit down and debate or discuss in an intelligent manner a solution can always be found, and he felt this was what had occurred with this issue. He noted that many were affected; however, everyone kept their head and ultimately a great resolution was found. Mr. Davis expressed support for the Court Street proposal; however, he noted that he agreed with Councilman Hare that Duke of York and William Penn Streets should be left alone as part of Delaware history and felt that the same mission could be accomplished by honoring Dr. King by renaming Court Street. He noted that this was how things were accomplished in Delaware, by sitting down and talking about it. Mr. Edwin Baker, Jr., 1526 Forrest Avenue, stated that when he spoke before Council previously on this matter he noted that if people would sit down and get together they could do better and that this had been accomplished. He felt that the Court Street proposal was excellent; however, he agreed with Councilman Hare that a “good look” should be taken at the other two (2) streets as they are part of the City’s history.

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 10 Mr. EShed Alston, 406 Arnold Court, stated that he had a document that was received from the Clerk of the United States Supreme Court regarding an ongoing appeal to the Court. He began to read some of the questions that he indicated that he presented to the United States Supreme Court from a prepared statement, as follows: Is it not irrefutably true that the U.S. constitutionally protected due process right of law and coinheritance in Civil Law and the equally important legal guarantee in and of the equal protection of American law trumps, outweighs, and completely circumvents any State’s ability to unconstitutionally compromise, trivialize, minimize, victimize-- Mr. Anderson called for a point of order. Mr. Lynn inquired if Mr. Alston’s statement was about the street renaming, noting that this was the topic at hand. Mr. Alston continued to read from his statement. Mr. Lynn reminded Mr. Alston that he had been addressed by the Committee. Mr. Alston stated that the statement did refer to this matter and this was why he was reading it into the record. He expressed his opinion that there was a double standard in the way that the black community was treated, that this was not just his observation but that this matter was presently before the U.S. Supreme Court, and he stated he was reading what the record was. He inquired if he should continue. Mr. Lynn inquired how Mr. Alston’s statement was pertinent to the issue at hand. Mr. Alston stated that the issue at hand was “our current circumstances.” He stated that there were currently lynchings going on in the City, whether people accepted this or not. Mr. Lynn requested that Mr. Alston take his seat since he had deviated from the topic at hand. Mr. Alston stated that the topic at hand was how “we” are treated in this town. Mr. Lynn stated that if Mr. Alston continued he would be removed from the Chamber. Mr. Anderson advised Mr. Alston that an Open Forum would be held later in the evening, beginning at 7:15 p.m. Mr. Alston stated that “there is no inextricability” and that all of this was connected. Mr. James Fogell, 360 Nimitz Road, stated that he wrote a letter to the Mayor and members of City Council about the hardships involved in changing the name of any street. He suggested that a memorial be constructed using privately donated funds, as was done for the Vietnam Veterans’ Memorial in Dover and the Martin Luther King Memorial in Washington, D.C. He noted that funds were donated for these memorials by those who really wanted to honor someone. Mr. Fogell felt that those who want to honor Dr. Martin Luther King should get together and put up a nice memorial, not just a street or a flyer by a street name. He advised members that there was a nice plot where the police officers park near the railroad tracks and he felt that this would be one (1) possible location for such a memorial, where people could sit on the grass and tell their children about Dr. King. He felt that donations could be received from black and white individuals. Mr. Fogell expressed his opinion that those who want a memorial should sacrifice.

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 11 Former City Councilman Reuben Salters, 109 Bertrand Drive, stated that he had heard a lot of dialogue about the changing of the name and was both dismayed and encouraged by the comments. He expressed his opinion that “we, as good citizens of Dover” would find a way to come to fruition with this project. He indicated that many suggestions had been made. Mr. Salters noted that one (1) individual suggested that advocates pay for a memorial; however, he felt that Dr. King had already paid. As law-abiding citizens with great hearts, he felt that if everyone looked deep into their hearts and souls and thought about what Dr. King did for our nation and world, that the conclusion would be reached that no price was to great to be paid. Mr. Salters felt that “we did not give our life, our honor, we have given nothing but words.” He noted that history changes and depends on who is writing it. He reminded members that Mr. Perza stated that Duke of York Street was named in the 1930s, which he felt was not a long time ago, and that Washington, D.C. was not always Washington, D.C. He felt that history changes all the time and that it was time to start a new chapter in Dover. Mr. Salters suggested that if Mr. Perza’s suggestions were not followed that the $18M library could be named after Dr. King. Mr. Lynn noted that one (1) additional speaker would be allowed. Pastor Richard Avant, Calvary Baptist Church, stated that he had worked with Council over the last 30 years and that 20 years ago he and the Mayor considered changing the name of a street to Martin Luther King Street or Boulevard. At that time, petitions were obtained and the project was ready to move forward, and he suggested Scarborough Road as it had not yet been built; however, 20 years later nothing had been done. Rev. Avant stated that a proposal had been made and Council made a counterproposal through Mr. Perza, and proponents liked that proposal. He stated the desire to get the project accomplished. He noted that the matter had been talked about for a long time and that everyone would never come to agreement and that Mr. Perza’s plan presented the least amount of problems with no businesses involved. He felt that it was a waste of time to talk about Forrest Avenue if Mr. Perza’s proposal were to be moved forward. Rev. Avant stated that he appreciated everything that had been done and was looking forward to moving ahead with the new proposal. Mr. Lynn expressed his pride in being a member of the Committee and in Mr. Perza’s accomplishment in bringing different ideas together. He read the following statement into the record: I have been asked by many since the inception of this debate about why I feel so passionately about the issue, and why the City of Dover, with so many other concerns, feels the need to worry itself with changing the name of one of its oldest streets. I was first introduced, and became intrigued by, the issue of renaming a street to honor to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Blvd., when I heard a presentation on the topic at a Towne Point/White Oak Community Homeowners Association Meeting. Listening to the presentation that evening under the fluorescent lights of the ‘lunch room’ in Towne Point Elementary, I quickly realized that, to my Constituents, particularly my African-American Constituents, that this street renaming held significantly more import to their community, the essence of social justice, and their sense of self and worth than merely honoring Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 12 As in all things, I began to research the topic. First, how have other communities dealt with the renaming of streets to honor Dr. King? How have these efforts been received? What are the costs and inconveniences experienced by the individuals and businesses located on those streets? My research led me to Dr. Derek Alderman, Ph.D., a Professor at the University of Tennessee, currently head of Department of Geography, who describes himself as “a cultural and historical geographer interested in public memory, popular culture, and heritage tourism in the U.S.” and whose work “focuses on the rights of African Americans to claim the power to commemorate the past and shape cultural landscapes as part of a broader goal of social and spatial justice.” Reading Dr. Alderman’s work, together with my first- hand experience meeting with my Constituents, confirmed that this issue represents more than a commemorative street renaming, but is, in the words of Dr. Alderman, “a practice of increasing importance to racial and ethnic minorities in the U.S. as they seek ways to recognize their past achievements and struggles and, in turn, to establish their current legitimacy.” Dr. Alderman suggests that more than 900 streets have been commemorated to Dr. King in the United States, across 40 states and the District of Columbia. My constituents maintain that the renaming of such an important road in the City of Dover is a testament to the City’s commitment to social justice, and affirmation of the sacrifices, trials and tribulations endured by the African-American community. Dr. Alderman, in his research, concluded that the renaming of major thoroughfare is representative of a “city’s commitment to recognizing King’s legacy” and that “by asking residents and business owners to change their mailing address, proponents seek to make King’s memory visible and personal to a larger cross section of the community.” Mr. Anderson moved to recommend setting a public hearing before City Council on December 10, 2012 to consider Councilman Perza’s proposal to rename Court, Duke of York, and William Penn Streets as Martin Luther King Street, to rename Capital Drive as Court Street, and for the alley currently named Court Street to remain Court Street, and to consider the placement of plaques of dedication to William Penn and the Duke of York on the respective streets and the proposed renaming of the Dover Public Library in honor of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lynn, and carried by a roll call vote of three (3) yes (Lynn, Anderson, and Rushe) and two (2) no (Hare and Shevock). Mr. Shevock indicated that he felt that the proposal should be presented and voted on in sections to include Court Street; Court, Duke of York, and William Penn Streets; or the Dover Public Library. Mr. Hare agreed with Mr. Shevock. He reiterated that he had no objection to renaming Court Street itself and felt that these issues should be considered separately with two (2) separate hearings.

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 13 Mr. Anderson pointed out that once the public hearing was held, Council could choose which proposal to pass, could adopt neither or both if they wished to, or could amend the proposal. He felt that there were many avenues that Council could take; however, this was the next step to “keep the ball rolling.” Mr. Shevock noted that if these options could be put forward to Council as separate proposals and if this were part of the motion, he could support the motion. Mr. Lynn stated that the motion had already been voted on. Mr. Hare requested that when this matter is considered before Council that enough time be allowed so that everyone can be heard. Mr. Hare moved for adjournment, seconded by Mr. Rushe and unanimously carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:07 p.m. Sean M. Lynn Chairman SML/DD/js/mk/tm U:\Minutes\11-13-2012 LFA.wpd Attachments Attachment #1 - Public Hearing RE: Dedication of Public Street for Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. Attachment #2 - Correspondence Received Regarding Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard Attachment #3 - Statement Provided by Ms. Carroll-Lisa Malone Attachment #4 - Statement and Historical Information Provided by Mr. Charles David

Attachment #1 LF&A Committee Meeting November 13, 2012 City of Dover Legislative Finance and Administration Committee Attachment #1 Public hearing re: Dedication of Public Street for Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. November 13, 2012 LF&A Committee Meeting November 13, 2012

LFA Proposals • Division Street ABCD – East boundary of City to west boundary of City (Route 8/Division Street/Forrest Avenue) • Division Street BC – DuPont Highway (east) to Salisbury Road (west) • Court Street/Duke of York/William Penn Street – DuPont Highway (east) to Federal Street (west)

Court Street • Rededicate Court Street (main artery) as “Martin Luther King Street” • Rededicate – Capital Drive as “Court Street” • No change to Court Street (alley) • Rededicate – Duke of York Street – William Penn Street

Residential impact • Courtside Apartments – no address change, residents retain United Way address • Garden Court Apartments – no address change, residents retain Court Street address • Court Street (alley) private residences – no address change, resident retain Court Street address

Residential classified properties • Residential properties impacted on: • Division Street ABCD 226 • Division Street BC 80 • Court Street 0

All property classifications • Division Street ABCD 373 • Division Street BC 143 • Court Street 24

Address impact • Division Street ABCD 580 • Division Street BC 309 • Court Street 5

Capital Drive (Court Street) • Capital Drive presently situated to north of present Court Street • Capital Drive will be renamed Court Street and connect with existing Court Street (alley) • Garden Court Apartments access road • All residents will retain their Court Street addresses

Family Court (400 Court Street) • Family Court is one of four state owned properties in proposal • Proposal presents state with two options: – 1. Retain 400 Court Street – 2. Adopt 400 Martin Luther King Boulevard • State will confer with the Administrative Office of the Courts – Avoid public confusion over location of the court

Court Street (alley) • Court Street (alley) already exists • Bounded on south by private property, private residences • Unofficial parking for Family Court (400 Court) • King proposal will not impact any property on Court Street (alley)

Entrance to Legislative Corridor • Prominent thoroughfare to the Capital • Mixture of residential neighborhoods – Entrance to Capitol Green – Entrance to Garden Court Apartments • No commercial development

Duke of York Street • Laid out and constructed in 1930s during eastward expansion of Dover to recently completed DuPont Highway • Duke of York was the original grantor of the land that would become Delaware to William Penn • Delaware Public Archives building is presently situated on Duke of York Street

William Penn Street • William Penn, original fee simple holder of the Three Lower Counties (Delaware • Street constructed in 1930s during eastward expansion of Dover to DuPont Highway • Formerly location of minor league baseball field • Site of two state office buildings (Tattnall, former Armory Building)

Attachment #2 LF&A Committee Meeting November 13, 2012 Kelsall, Melanie From: McDowell, Traci Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 3:33 PM To: Kelsall, Melanie Subject: FW: Martin Luther King Blvd From: McDowell, Traci Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2012 11:40 AM To: Williams, Beverly C. Subject: FW: Martin Luther King Blvd From: Charles Moor [mailto:mmoor86728@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, October 08, 2012 6:15 PM To: tmcdowell-bcw Subject: Martin Luther King Blvd What is the hurry concerning skipping normal procedures to get this issue shoved down the throat of taxpayers. My family has been living in Delaware since the 1600 hundreds and before that came over on the Mayflower. Left England to find freedom to create our own laws. City council members have made a grave mistake in trying to push this through as fast as they did, Martin Luther King Jr., was a great man and we have a national holiday in his honor. Name the new Library in his honor or the new south Dover connector. Name route 1 area that runs through Dover. I live on Forrest Ave and this has been home since 1980. Does anybody care what I think? Charles Moor 1

Kelsall, Melanie From: McDowell, Traci Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 3:31 PM To: Kelsall, Melanie Subject: FW: better tribute to Martin Luther King, Jr.? ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: Donald Sauter [mailto:donaldsauter@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 4:43 PM To: tmcdowell‐bcw Subject: better tribute to Martin Luther King, Jr.? Dear Beverly, Rename Legislative Avenue to MLK Avenue, short and sweet. Isn't that far more appropriate and far less disruptive? Donald Sauter 1

Kelsall, Melanie From: McDowell, Traci Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 3:34 PM To: Kelsall, Melanie Subject: FW: Re-Naming Division Street From: McDowell, Traci Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2012 11:40 AM To: Williams, Beverly C. Subject: FW: Re-Naming Division Street From: Ellison Carey [mailto:emclewes@comcast.net] Sent: Monday, October 08, 2012 6:39 PM To: tmcdowell-bcw Subject: Re-Naming Division Street Bev, I am opposed to the re‐naming of Division Street. I hope you will oppose it tonight. The expense to all, the aggravation to homeowners and business’ alike is not a good idea in today’s economic times. We are also changing Dover’s history. I would like to explore George “Jody” Sweeney’s idea by naming the West Dover highway. Perhaps there are other ideas. Martin Luther King can be honored in Dover, but not in this way. Thank you. Ellison Carey 734 Bicentennial Dover DE 19904 734 0398 1

Kelsall, Melanie From: McDowell, Traci Sent: Monday, November 05, 2012 1:50 PM To: Kelsall, Melanie Subject: FW: MLK Honor Compromise From: Jim Stewart [mailto:storemanageramcm@comcast.net] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 11:56 AM To: c.carey@dover.de.us; Anderson, David; Leary, Thomas J.; Hutchison, James L.; tmcdowell-bcw; Hare, Bill; Perza, Adam; Bonar, David L; Lynn, Sean M. Subject: MLK Honor Compromise Hello this is Jim Stewart . I am emailing from work. I would like to offer a potential solution to the honoring of MLK/Division St. issue. Go to Channel 6 Philadelphia WPVI and type in Cottman Avenue and Wednesday October 17. They just honored a slain police officer by dedicating a portion of Cottman Ave in his honor. They did so with signage. There was no actual changing of the street name so there was no impact on the people living or doing business on that street or on the City having to change records etc. . I know other cities have done similar things in the past. The only cost to the City is the cost of the signs and their installation. The only discussion would be the design, number and placement of the signs. You could have one per block going East and West if so desired. If you look at the street naming pattern in Dover you notice that the main north‐south streets being Governors and State are not named after any individual. The main downtown East/West Streets being Water and Division are also not named after individuals. Loockerman Street is named after the family and they owned the land on that the street and northwards. On the perimeter the streets are named after land owning families being Walker, McKee and Saulsbury. When (if?) the Dover bypass that would connect to Saulsbury is built it would be a natural to name for MLK but I get the sense that the group pushing this agenda feels a sense of urgency for reasons that are not clear to me. You have one other option and that is Federal Street. Again signage would be the path of least resistance as opposed to actually renaming the street with all the issues involved for the City and those on the street. The biggest impact would be on the Court and the Biggs Museum . I am not sure how the Health Department is addressed. Let me know what you think. Jim 1

Kelsall, Melanie From: McDowell, Traci Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 3:32 PM To: Kelsall, Melanie Subject: FW: AGAINST RENAMING DIVISION STREET From: Pat Brice [mailto:Pat.Brice@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 2:10 PM To: Hutchison, James L.; Carey Sr., Carleton; tmcdowell-bcw Subject: AGAINST RENAMING DIVISION STREET From: Pat Brice [mailto:Pat.Brice@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 1:59 PM To: 'jlhutch9595@yahoo.com'; 'ccarey@dover.de.us'; 'tmcdowell-bcw@dover.de.us' I am sending an email to state that I am totally against renaming Division Street. There are new streets being build all the time name a new street Martin Luther King. Do Not rename a main downtown historical street. Patricia Brice 106 Stoney Drive Dover, De. 19904 302-734-4150 1

Kelsall, Melanie From: McDowell, Traci Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 3:31 PM To: Kelsall, Melanie Subject: FW: Division Street From: Carey Sr., Carleton Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 4:29 PM To: Shelley Brocklehurst Cc: City Council; City Clerks Office Subject: RE: Division Street Ms. Brocklehurst: Thank You for your E‐Mail with your concerns and recommendation! I will forward your E‐Mail to City Council for their consideration. Best Regards, Carleton E. Carey Sr. Mayor City of Dover 302‐736‐7004 From: Shelley Brocklehurst [mailto:shelley.brocklehurst@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 4:02 PM To: Carey Sr., Carleton Subject: Dear Mr. Mayor, I would like to take a moment of your time to express my concern for changing the name of Division Street to Martin Luther King Boulevard. In my opinion Division Street has been part of Dover for many years and is a landmark in itself. To change the name isn’t only taking away a part of our history, it puts a financial burden on the citizens of Dover during a time when budgets are stretch beyond their means. This is one of the most obscure request I have heard in a very long time. The suggestions about using a street that has yet to be named makes the most sense or renaming the current park on Division Street would be considered a valid request. Thank you for your time, Shelley Brocklehurst 410 Ann Moore Street Dover, DE 19901 1

Kelsall, Melanie From: McDowell, Traci Sent: Monday, November 05, 2012 1:49 PM To: Kelsall, Melanie Subject: FW: Street name changes From: dewey742home@comcast.net [mailto:dewey742home@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 11:20 PM To: c.carey@dover.de.us; davlevianderson@gmail.com; Leary, Thomas J.; Hutchison, James L.; tmcdowell-bcw; Hare, Bill; Perza, Adam; Bonar, David L; slynn@thedelawarelawyer.com Subject: Fwd: Street name changes Ladies and Gentlemen I just received this from the City of Philadelphia. Almost 20 years ago they adopted policy to accomodate honoring people by dedicating stretches of streets without changing the actual mailing/ official address due to the impact on residents and businesses. Its time for Dover to approach the MLK effort with a similiar approach. Every body wins. Jim From: "Jim Stewart" <storemanageramcm@comcast.net> To: dewey742home@comcast.net Sent: Thursday, November 1, 2012 9:59:34 AM Subject: FW: Fw: Street name changes From: Charles.Denny@phila.gov [mailto:Charles.Denny@phila.gov] Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 5:59 PM To: Jim Stewart Cc: Richard.Montanez@phila.gov Subject: Re: Fw: Street name changes The City of Philadelphia about two decades ago started the practice of using AKA signs instead of renaming a street. There is significant expenses and effort required for residents and businesses to change there addresses on letter heads and return addresses as well as the expense of changing street Name Signs. We allow the AKA to be added to a block by a resolution of City Council. Our Street Names are 6 inch white letters on a green background. For AKA signs we use a larger plate and on the bottom of the sign we add the AKA name with 4 inch white letters on a Red background. Charles J. Denny P. E. Assistant Chief Traffic Engineer Philadelphia Streets Department Room 980 MSB 1401 J.F. Kennedy Blvd Philadelphia. PA 19102 Phone 215-686-5521 Fax 215-686-5067 Streets Department Customer Service To Richard Montanez/STREETS/Phila@Phila, Charles Denny/STREETS/Phila@Phila Sent by: csstreets@phila.gov cc 1

Subject Fw: Street name changes 10/11/2012 12:11 PM Please respond to csstreets@phila.gov Please advise. Thank you. D. Barraclough The Customer Service Team at the Streets Department http://www.philadelphiastreets.com http:// PhillyRecyclingPAYS.com For faster service and more information please use our Customer Service web page: http://potholes.phila.gov/streetscustomerservice ----- Forwarded by CSStreets on 10/11/2012 10:40 AM ----- "Jim Stewart" <storemanageramcm@comcast.net> To <csstreets@phila.gov> cc 10/10/2012 03:43 PM Subject Street name changes Hello my name is Jim Stewart and I live in Dover, Delaware. Currently a group of citizens wants to honor Martin Luther King by changing the name of a major street in town and there is a lot of debate due to the impact on businesses and the residents re change of address issues etc. I remember seeing streets or section there of being marked in honor of someone but not actually changing the street name for business purposes. The honorific name being added to the street sign. Has that been done in Philadelphia? I know I have seen it and thought it was in Philly. Can you help me? In Dover the argument isn’t about should we honor Dr. King but how. One option is a new road being put in that will be a major road. I have run for city council before and am seeking a compromise solution. Jim Stewart 2

Attachment #3 LF&A Committee Meeting November 13, 2012

Attachment #4 LF&A Committee Meeting November 13, 2012