CCW Packet

CITY OF DOVER, DELAWARE COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING Tuesday, June 25, 2024 at 6:00 PM City Hall Council Chambers, 15 Loockerman Plaza, Dover, Delaware AGENDA Public comments are welcomed on any item and will be permitted at the appropriate time. When possible, please notify the City Clerk (302-736-7008 or email at cityclerk@dover.de.us) should you wish to be recognized. VIRTUAL MEETING NOTICE This meeting will be held in City Hall Council Chambers with electronic access via WebEx. Public participation information is as follows: Dial: 1-650-479-3208 Link: https://rb.gy/0nkboc Event number: 2531 295 8893 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. CALL COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING TO ORDER UTILITY COMMITTEE ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA 1. Annual Review and Approval of Governing Policy for Energy Commodity Risk Management (David S. Hugg, III, City Manager, and Paul Waddell, Electric Director) (Staff Recommendation: Approve as presented.) ADJOURNMENT OF THE UTILITY COMMITTEE MEETING 1

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING - June 25, 2024 PAGE 2 LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA 1. Proposed Ordinance #2024-27 – Amending Appendix F – Fees and Fines: Chapter 82 – Planning, Appendix A – Subdivisions, and Appendix B – Zoning (David S. Hugg, III, City Manager, and Dawn Melson-Williams, Principal Planner) (Staff Recommendation: Approval of Proposed Ordinance #2024-27) 2. Discussion - Update on Joint Use Agreement with Dover Air Force Base (DAFB) (David S. Hugg, III, City Manager) (Committee Action Not Required) ADJOURNMENT OF THE LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING ADJOURNMENT OF THE COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE 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 2

Item 1. City of Dover, Delaware Governing Policy For Energy Commodity Risk Management Effective: TBD Upon Council Approval Approved by: City of Dover Council (Last Revision January 23, 2023) 3

Item 1. TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE OF THE RISK MANAGEMENT POLICY ..................................................................4 A. Introduction ....................................................................................................................4 B. Scope of Policy ................................................................................................................4 C. Objectives and Risk Philosophy ...................................................................................5 D. Policy Administration....................................................................................................6 DISCUSSION OF RISKS ...............................................................................................................6 MANAGEMENT AND CONTROLS .............................................................................................7 A. Utility Committee of The City Council .......................................................................7 B. Executive Risk Management Committee ....................................................................8 1. City Manager ................................................................................................................. 9 2. Director of the Utility .................................................................................................. 10 3. Controller...................................................................................................................... 10 4. TEA Client Services Manager .................................................................................... 10 MARKETING AND TRADING PRACTICES ............................................................................11 A. Standards of Conduct ..................................................................................................11 B. Products, Activities and Limitations .........................................................................12 C. Contract Documentation and Confirmations...........................................................13 D. Training..........................................................................................................................13 E. New Product Protocol .................................................................................................13 RISK LIMITS AND RISK MEASUREMENTS ...........................................................................14 A. Limits..............................................................................................................................14 1. Delegation Authority .................................................................................................. 14 2. Volume Limits ............................................................................................................. 14 3. Locational Limits ......................................................................................................... 14 B. Stress Testing and Back Testing .................................................................................14 C. Instances of Exceeding Risk Limits............................................................................15 CREDIT POLICY ..........................................................................................................................15 A. Measuring Credit Risk .................................................................................................15 B. Analysis and Extension of Credit Limits ..................................................................15 C. Instances of Exceeding Credit Limits ........................................................................16 REPORTING .................................................................................................................................16 A. Risk Reporting ..............................................................................................................16 B. Credit Reporting ...........................................................................................................18 C. Hedge Effectiveness Reporting ..................................................................................18 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS ............................................................................18 2 4

Item 1. POLICY DISTRIBUTION AND COUNSEL ...............................................................................18 A. Distribution Outside The City ....................................................................................18 B. Designated Counsel .....................................................................................................19 APPENDIX A – Approved Products .............................................................................................20 APPENDIX B – Approved Counterparties and Threshold Tables ................................................21 APPENDIX C – Business Risks ....................................................................................................26 APPENDIX D – Glossary ..............................................................................................................28 APPENDIX E – Swap Transaction Representative .......................................................................30 3 5

Item 1. PURPOSE OF THE RISK MANAGEMENT POLICY A. Introduction The City of Dover (“City”) and its customers are routinely exposed to commodity risk, counterparty risk, process risk, budget risk, and regulatory risk – herein referred to collectively as Energy Commodity Risk - in the normal conduct of serving its electric load requirements. Volatility of energy commodity prices and volumetric uncertainty (either supply/generation or load obligations) impose a substantial and direct risk to the City’s financial and operating performance. By authority of its charter, the City has responsibility for overseeing the City’s electricity operations, including the management of its cost of serving Dover’s customers with primary operational management authority vested in the City Manager (Dover City Charter §40). By agreement (the “EMA”) dated May 6, 2011 and approved by the City, the City has engaged The Energy Authority, Inc. (“TEA”) to assist the City with Asset Management and Strategic Planning Services, Risk Management Services, and Energy Management Services. This Policy for Energy Commodity Risk Management (“Policy”) is established the explicit understanding that the City has retained and delegated responsibilities to TEA to provide Risk Management Services. Additionally, the City has issued this Policy for dealing with the philosophy, framework and delegation of responsibilities necessary to govern activities related to Dover’s energy commodity risk management. As set forth herein, the City has established an organizational structure, delegated responsibility and established internal controls and procedures to ensure that all transactional and oversight activities are conducted in compliance with this Policy and in accordance with the City’s normal reporting, legal, financing and regulatory requirements relating to energy assets and transactions. B. Scope of Policy This Policy covers all transactions entered into by the City of Dover designed to meet the City’s electric load requirement and the management of risk related to these transactions. In the event of conflict between this Policy and the EMA, the more restrictive document shall control. 4 6

Item 1. This Policy is separate and distinct from enterprise risk management policies and procedures addressing the City’s safe operation of its generating stations and energy infrastructure, insurance requirements, permit compliance, employee matters regulatory compliance with laws and regulations of the State of Delaware and Federal Agencies such as EPA, FERC, NERC and CFTC or other potential risks to the City beyond the purchase and sale of fuel and electric power and its ancillary products. Unless otherwise explicitly stated in this Policy, or other policies approved by the Utility Committee, this Policy applies to all power and fuel procurement and related business activities that may impact the energy market risk profile of the City. This policy documents the framework by which management and staff will:  Identify and quantify risk  Develop and execute procurement strategies  Create a framework of controls and oversight  Monitor, measure, and report on the effectiveness of the risk management C. Objectives and Risk Philosophy The objectives of the Policy are to identify Energy Commodity price and credit risk exposures and give the City a framework for the quantification and management of these exposures. The Policy will identify the reports needed to convey how the identified risk exposures can potentially impact the City’s overall cost of providing electricity service to its customers and report on the risk management of the transactions associated with City’s electric load requirements. Under the Policy, risk management activities will be conducted consistent with the City’s overall objective of appropriate risk management. There are several objectives of the Policy which, when taken and executed together, serve to manage the City’s energy commodity price exposures. Specifically, the Policy:  Establishes framework for developing credit limits for counterparties and quantifies and manages the credit exposures related to potential counterparty abrogation  Quantifies the impact of the energy commodity price and credit risk exposures on City’s financial results  Manages the impact of the above exposures in line with the City’s identified level of risk tolerance  Provides clear delineation of responsibilities and authority, outlines a separation of duties, and ensures reporting of risk is timely and accurate.  Ensures that the impact of any action affecting the City’s position is consistently quantified, monitored and authorized. 5 7

Item 1. The City’s risk management activities will be conducted consistent with its overall objective of appropriate risk mitigation and never for purposes of speculation. D. Policy Administration This Policy has been approved by the Executive Risk Management Committee and The Utility Committee of the Dover City Council Committee of the Whole. The Utility Committee must approve modifications to the Policy, with the exception of the appendix information which can be modified with the approval of the Executive Risk Management Committee. DISCUSSION OF RISKS This Policy covers the management of all material energy market risks faced by the City. A comprehensive list of risks that are or could be relevant to the City is shown in Appendix C of the Policy. Among the most critical of these risks are commodity risk, counterparty risk, process risk, volume risk, and budget risk. These risks are measured by the limit structure and controls outlined in the Policy. Commodity risk represents the potential adverse impacts to the value of the City’s portfolio due to changes in the market or government policy. Commodity risk encompasses volatility risk, forward price risk, basis risk, correlation risk and liquidity risk. Volatility risk is incurred by sudden changes to the cost and value of market instruments. Forward Price Risk is the impact of future prices differing from historical prices as well as the potential for changing prices to result in mark-to-market exposure. Basis risk is incurred whenever prices differ between procurement and consumption location for power or fuel products. Correlation Risk is a reflection that multiple assets may experience varying degrees of similar movement which may change over time. Liquidity Risk is experienced when a commodity may be less available to buy or sell due to counterparties being unable or unwilling to transact a commodity in a normal timeframe without altering the pricing of that commodity. Counterparty risk represents the potential losses the City could incur due to delivery risk and receivable risk. Delivery risk stems from a supplier or trading counterparty that is unable or unwilling to perform on its commitments including but not limited to delivery or receipt of commodities which would require the City to procure alternative supply at market prices. Receivable Risk includes the City’s risk associated with a counterparty’s timeliness of payment for services rendered. Process risk represents the risks associated with process problems including, but not limited to, inaccurate data capture, untimely trade execution or incorrect settlement. 6 8

Item 1. Controls over process risks are embedded in the organizational structure of TEA through the design processes and operating procedures. Volume Risk represents the potential for unforeseen changes from projections of excess or shortfall of capacity or energy from the actual needs. When variances are large coupled with large costs to transact and adverse moves in market prices this risk could be realized. In management of this risk, the City must be aware of the fact that unexpected variations in volume are often highly correlated with price movements compounding the impact of volume in a phenomenon known as Covariance Risk. Budget Risk represents the potential to deviate outside of tolerable bounds of the City’s budget. Deviations from budget can be caused by forecast error or unforeseeable adverse changes in market prices. Regulatory Risk arises from participation in regulated markets. With the Independent System Operator (ISO) implementation of Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Order 741, the City faces increasing regulatory risk when participating in wholesale energy markets. The TEA Compliance department works in conjunction with the TEA Risk Control department to help the City manage regulatory risk. Regulatory risk is managed by:  Annual Compliance Training for all employees participating in regulated markets;  Integration of the appropriate compliance culture within the Trading department through ongoing interaction between Compliance and Trading;  An independent monitoring and exposure measurement on transactions that could trigger an increase in regulatory risk. MANAGEMENT AND CONTROLS This Policy articulates the management and organization of the City and TEA to serve as a control framework outlining delegation of duties and responsibilities. A. Utility Committee of The City Council The Utility Committee of The City Council Committee of the Whole (The Committee) has a responsibility to provide approval of this Policy. With this approval, The Committee also assumes additional duties. The Committee will understand the risks the City is and could be exposed to due to their energy commodity risk management activities. In this role, the Committee will have a responsibility to also understand the City’s policies and procedures, internal controls and systems which are used to help manage the City’s energy commodity risks. 7 9

Item 1. The Committee will approve any amendments to the Policy or limits within. The Executive Risk Management Committee will update the Committee periodically regarding the Policy and its functions. It will be the Committee’s responsibility to:  Discuss guidelines and strategic policies that govern the process by which the Energy Risk Management Committee assesses and manages risks  Review and approve the Policy at least annually  Approve new members of the Executive Risk Management Committee  Acknowledge the risk inherent in transactions covered under this Policy B. Executive Risk Management Committee An Executive Risk Management Committee (“ERMC”) has been formed to provide executive management oversight for the City’s energy commodity risk management activities. The ERMC is charged with the creation, amendment and administration of this Policy, including acquiring any approvals required by the Committee, and will ensure that all energy commodity risk management activities of the City are performed consistent with this Policy. The ERMC will meet at least monthly to review compliance and conduct its business as described in this Policy. The ERMC shall be comprised of the following voting members: The City Manager, The Electric Director, The City’s Controller and TEA’s Client Service Manager. When the City Council or City Manager has appointed an interim for any of the EMA’s position, they shall immediately become the new representative on the ERMC. The City’s ERMC will make decisions following the process outlined in this Policy. TEA’s Client Services Manager may include representatives from other areas within TEA in the monthly ERMC meetings who will attend in person or by conference call, Internet, or other electronic means, as non-voting advisors. Other City employees and TEA staff may also be asked to attend meetings from time-to-time, as the ERMC deems necessary. The responsibilities of the ERMC shall include:  Establish scope and frequency for management reporting to the Utility Committee based on agreement between the Utility Committee and ERMC.  No less than annually, review the City’s Energy Commodity Policies and Procedures for correctness and completeness.  Review and approve any new risk report or change to an existing risk report provided by TEA to monitor risks outlined in this Policy.  Understand and approve any models, methodologies, and assumptions used for measuring risks such as volume risk, process risk, counterparty risk and commodity risk. 8 10

Item 1.  Monitor the City’s risks and ensure they are within the limits and are being managed according to what is indicated within the City’s Policy and associated procedures  Understand the City’s risk management objectives and risk tolerances.  Review and approve the risk management and trading strategy programs and associated risk. Each program should be reviewed to ensure alignment with Policy objectives and compliance with risk limits within this Policy.  Periodically review any risk management program approved in light of recent market changes, and ensure continued compliance with its established guidelines  Review and approve new products, markets, trading counterparties and credit limits  Review all violations and exceptions to this Policy and report such to the Committee.  Approve the individuals or companies that engage in the City’s commodity transactions and are subject to the limits within this Policy.  Ensure that the individuals or companies authorized to transact on behalf of the City as well as manage its risks, are appropriately trained and qualified.  Ensure independence and segregation of duties between front, middle and back office at TEA.  Recommend changes to this Policy to the City’s Utility Committee for approval and ensure the Utility Committee understands the City’s overall compliance with this Policy and associated procedures.  The ERMC will meet at least monthly to review risks identified and reported on by the Policy, this meeting shall be chaired by The City Manager. Minutes of each meeting of the ERMC shall be recorded and reflect any decisions and follow-up action items to be performed. These minutes will be reviewed and approved by the members of the ERMC in a timely manner. Each member of the ERMC has a unique role as defined below: 1. City Manager The City Manager is independent of all commercial functions and carries the responsibility of establishment and maintenance of risk management for the City. The City Manager will be a voting member of the ERMC and act as a chair of the ERMC. Other responsibilities include:  Ensure this Policy is maintained.  Oversee reviews of the City’s energy commodity risks, limits, risk measurement methodologies and models, and programs and recommend changes to the ERMC.  Ensure potential transactions and their impacts on the City’s risks and limits defined within this Policy. 9 11

Item 1.  Develop and monitor the implementation of the Policy, and oversee other risk management processes and procedures established by this Policy or otherwise by the ERMC.  The City Manager shall name an alternate to be approved by The Committee. 2. Electric Director The Electric Director has oversight for all trading, hedging, pricing, structuring, and market and operational risk management activities associated with the City. The Electric Director will be a voting member of the ERMC. Other responsibilities include:  Review the effectiveness of transaction processing systems and procedures relating to risk measurement.  Recommend operational risk and business risk assessment guidelines.  The Electric Director shall nominate an alternate to be approved by The Committee. 3. Controller The Controller is independent of all commercial functions and carries the oversight responsibilities associated with the City’s accounting practices. The Controller will be a voting member on the ERMC. Other responsibilities include:  Perform financial accounting including accounting for hedging and derivatives activities.  Comply with tax rules and make appropriate tax elections.  Record realized and unrealized gains and losses.  Reconcile general ledger, cash transactions and margin accounts.  Implement tax-hedge accounting policies and other regulatory tax requirements.  Develop and maintain documentation outlining standard procedures for conducting business.  Invoice counterparties and resolve billing disputes.  Perform daily/weekly/monthly transaction checkout with counterparties.  Develop and maintain documentation outlining standard procedures for conducting business.  The Controller shall nominate an alternate to be approved by the Committee. 4. TEA Client Services Manager The TEA Client Service Manager roles and responsibilities are defined Exhibit B of the EMA between the City and TEA. The TEA Client Service Manager will be a voting member on the ERMC. Other responsibilities include: 10 12

Item 1.  Monitor risk reports between ERMC meetings.  Report to the Committee and the ERMC on the City’s adherence to all limits and functions within this policy.  Engage the ERMC in discussions regarding events or developments that could expose the company to potential losses.  Recommend to the ERMC specific risk limits consistent with the City’s risk management objectives, risk tolerance, and risk management policy.  Coordinate and distribute independent market fundamental analysis.  Provide advisory support and recommendations as specified in Article 5 of the EMA.  Update RMC on training of TEA employees.  TEA shall nominate an alternate to be approved by the Committee. Alternates may vote, but only in the absence of the voting member for whom they serve. A person may serve for an alternate for more than one official, but they can only cast one vote. A quorum for a meeting shall be any combination of three voting members and alternates. A simple majority of votes is necessary to approve any action of the ERMC, but at least two voting members must approve the action. Members and alternates may attend by electronic means and count as present for the purpose of quorum and for a majority for a decision. MARKETING AND TRADING PRACTICES A. Standards of Conduct Individuals authorized to transact for the City shall not misrepresent, conceal or withhold information regarding energy commodity trading and risk management transactions to any person responsible for the accurate recording and/or reporting of such transactions; participate in any such transaction or similar activity for the benefit of any party other than the City; or hold or be a beneficiary of any financial interest in any entity with which the employee is engaged in trading or other business activity (other than ownership of an interest in a mutual fund managed by another party). Further, no employee authorized to place or execute such transactions may engage in trading power or energy commodities derivative instruments for his or her personal account. It is the expressed intent of this Policy to prohibit the acquisition of risk beyond that encountered in the efficient optimization of the City’s generation and load portfolio and 11 13

Item 1. execution of procurement strategies. As such, speculative transactions are prohibited. In the course of developing operating plans and conducting management activities, the City recognizes that expertise must be employed by TEA staff, and it is not the intent of this Policy to restrain the legitimate application of analysis and market expertise in executing procurement strategies intended to minimize costs within the constraints of this Policy. If any questions arise as to whether a proposed transaction(s) constitutes speculation, TEA shall conduct an analysis of the transaction and the ERMC shall review the transaction(s) to determine whether the transaction(s) would constitute speculation and document its finding in the meeting minutes. B. Products, Activities and Limitations Pursuant to achieving the City’s core objectives for the purpose of energy commodity risk management, the following limitations shall apply.  Permissible instruments will be restricted to the products and instruments specified in Appendix A – Approved Products of the Policy; o All physical forward transactions shall be governed by the Edison Electrical Institutive (EEI), North American Energy Standards Board (NAESB), International Swap Dealers Association (ISDA), or similar agreements with counterparties approved by the City. o The City reserves the right to enter into financial hedge transactions to effectuate Policy objectives, but does not authorize TEA to enter into financial hedge transactions on its behalf. Any such financial transactions that the City may enter into shall be governed by ISDA agreements with counterparties as approved by the City.  The maturity for each permissible instrument will be restricted to the maturity limits specified in the risk limits section of the Policy.  Transaction volumes for each risk management transaction will be restricted to the amounts specified in the Risk Limits section of the Policy.  Risk management transactions will be outlined in the City of Dover Hedge Program which will be approved by the ERMC. Risk management transactions will include the following: o Managing the forward price of purchased power for delivery to the City as needed to meet its electric load requirements. o Managing the forward price of natural gas and fuels as needed to generate power to meet the City’s electric load or generation requirements. o Unwinding or modification of hedges to accommodate changes in expected load requirements, or for economic reasons subject to explicit constraints set by the ERMC. 12 14

Item 1. C. Contract Documentation and Confirmations No over-the-counter transaction may be executed until an EEI, NAESB, ISDA, or similar agreement has been authorized by the City, approved by the ERMC and fully executed by the parties. Written confirmations will be required from counterparties, as defined in the Master Service Agreement between the City and counterparty. Contemporaneous with any commitments and prior to receipt of written confirmations, verbal commitments shall be memorialized internally as to instrument structure, quantity, relevant time horizon, price and any other relevant terms; such internal documentation shall be time stamped and correlated to the ultimate written confirmation to or from the counterparty. Both the internal documentation as well as the written confirmation from the counterparty shall be provided to TEA’s Risk Control Group immediately upon receipt for verification. In the event that there is a material failure to provide timely documentation or confirmations, then at the City Manager’s sole discretion, the offending individual’s or counterparty’s authorization may be suspended. Similarly, if the failure to provide timely documentation or confirmations is due to the failure of counterparty, then at the discretion of the City Manager, a moratorium may be imposed on transactions with that counterparty. In such cases, the City Manager shall notify the ERMC of the issues leading to the suspension or moratorium. Nothing herein shall inhibit any ERMC Member from bringing control issues to the TEA’s Client Services Manager prior to a decision on materiality or the imposition of a suspension of trading privileges or counterparty moratorium. D. Training The ERMC will ensure that all City employees and/or TEA Staff that will execute transactions on behalf of the City will have appropriate training in the markets in which the transactions occur. E. New Product Protocol As required to manage the City’s energy commodity risk the ERMC shall approve new products provided the requirements of the New Product Approval Procedure are met. 13 15

Item 1. RISK LIMITS AND RISK MEASUREMENTS A. Limits The limit structure is designed to quantify the types of risk in the City’s energy commodity portfolio. The City will manage and report on its energy commodity market risk using Delegation of Authority Limit, a Volume Limit and a Locational Limit. 1. Delegation Authority The Utility Committee delegates the following approval authority limits to the Dover ERMC. The ERMC may not delegate these authorities to individuals authorized to commit Dover to financial obligations. Position Maturity Limit Term Limit Notional Value Limit Dover ERMC 5 years 5 years 40,000,000 TEA 1 month 1 month 1,000,000 This limit structure is not intended for use when transacting day-ahead and real time in the PJM market. 2. Volume Limits No transaction shall be executed that exceeds the City’s electric load requirements other than operation of generation consistent with PJM activities. If there is an adjustment to the City’s electric load requirements and the existing transactions greater than 100% of the adjusted electric load requirements the ERMC will review and approve the offsetting strategy deployed in sufficient proportion to mitigate the encroachment. 3. Locational Limits Transactions must support the requirement of one of the City’s generation units, native load, or transaction locations. B. Stress Testing and Back Testing The City’s positions shall be periodically stress tested and models shall be back tested. The processes around these tests are outlined in the Stress Testing and Back Testing Procedure. 14 16

Item 1. C. Instances of Exceeding Risk Limits Should the City or TEA enter into a transaction that causes the portfolio to exceed any above mentioned limits the ERMC shall notify the Chair of The Committee as soon as practicable and shall provide periodic reports to the Chair on the status the transactions for as long as the City is exceeding its limits. The ERMC will review and determine whether any liquidation or offsetting of transactions is warranted. The incident will be documented as a Policy Exception by the ERMC . CREDIT POLICY Credit Risk is the risk due to the uncertainty in a counterparty’s ability to meet its contractual obligations. The primary objective of this credit policy is to manage, to the extent commercially reasonable, the credit risks associated with transactions covered in this Policy while still allowing the City to achieve its objectives. A. Measuring Credit Risk The status of credit risk will be measured and reported through reports provided by TEA. The current credit exposure will be reported at the agreement level via a Counterparty Credit Report provided by TEA. This information will be made available to TEA trading personnel so that it can be checked prior to executing transactions for the City. Those responsible for risk oversight at the City and TEA will have access to this information no less frequently than once per day. The ERMC will monitor overall credit utilization and any credit exceptions at least monthly. When measuring the current credit risk, netting will be applied to the exposure if the City’s contract with a counterparty includes provisions for netting. B. Analysis and Extension of Credit Limits Physical and financial commodity transactions will be executed with counterparties approved by the ERMC with credit available to support the transactions. The creditworthiness of a counterparty will be determined by both qualitative and quantitative factors. Factors shall include, but not limited to:  A company’s debt credit ratings provided by the rating agencies.  Financial data such as an analysis of the income statement, balance sheet, and cash flow, as well as liquidity and capital structure.  Subjective factors such as company’s fuel diversity, overall size, risk management policy and internal controls, geographic diversity, and market intelligence. 15 17

Item 1. A credit limit is the amount of unsecured credit granted to a counterparty. Unsecured credit exposure includes amounts owed by the counterparty, whether billed or not, and the mark-to-market differences in value in excess of any collateral which the counterparty has provided the City. Any net exposure above the collateral threshold will require the posting of additional collateral by a counterparty or an exception from the ERMC. Further information on the City’s procedure for establishing credit is contained in the Counterparty & Credit Review Process. Collateral thresholds, term limitations and credit exposure limits will be subject to the maximums indicated in Appendix B, based upon the lower of the S&P and Moody’s credit ratings. At no time will the City incur a credit exposure with any counterparty greater than $60,000,000 other than PJM. C. Instances of Exceeding Credit Limits The City and TEA are restricted by the credit limits approved by the ERMC. The ERMC can suspend trading with a counterparty, if that counterparty’s credit limit has been reached or exceeded. The City or TEA traders shall not exceed the Counterparty Credit Limit by executing transactions with any counterparty without approval of the ERMC. The ERMC will determine when it’s appropriate to require additional collateral if a counterparty’s credit exposure exceeds its credit limit. Collateral includes standing letter of credit, cash, and prepayments. All credit exceptions will be documented and reported to the ERMC and the Committee as Policy Exceptions. REPORTING A. Risk Reporting Preparation of timely reports is critical to monitoring risk. TEA will furnish the required reports on a regular frequency for the City in a format acceptable to the ERMC. In addition, the ERMC and its designees will be provided access to the City’s risk reports as updated daily via TEA’s secure Web Portal. Reports required on a monthly basis and for periodic meetings of the ERMC include the following: 16 18

Item 1.  Profit and Loss Report The Profit and Loss (P&L) Report shows the daily realization of transactions at either the transaction price or the market price as transactions roll from unrealized to realized. This report should show volumes, transaction prices and market prices of realized physical and financial power and fuel transactions.  Mark to Market Report The Mark to Market (“MTM”) Report conveys the potential transaction exposure, of all existing forward transactions executed, if the energy commodity portfolio was liquidated at the most recent market settlement prices. This report should show volumes, transaction prices and market prices of unrealized physical and financial power and fuel transactions.  Daily Activity Report The Activity Report presents a summary of the day’s trades executed in the bilateral energy market.  Cost of Service Report The City’s exposure to energy price risk shall be monitored and reported on a Cost-of- Service basis. All calculations are at the wholesale level. The Cost-of-Service recognizes all prior (expired) months within the Power Year on the basis of actual (incurred) costs, and recognizes all forward (pending) months within the Power Year on the basis of expected forward power and fuel prices and expected forward load-following risks. As defined below, the Cost-of-Service is an aggregation of Forward Energy Commodity Portfolio Cost, the Load Following Cost Expectation and the City’s Budget Target for Purchase Power Expense. o The Net Purchased Power Cost shows the net cost of all physical and financial transactions related to the City’s anticipated commodity requirements for power and fuel and is based on the price of all hedge transactions plus the forward market price of all unhedged transactions valued at current forward prices for energy commodities, customer-level cost per MWH of all physical and financial transactions related to Dover’s actual plus anticipated energy. o The expected fixed costs defined as load-serving entity (LSE) capacity costs, transmission costs and TEA management fees. o The Expected Load-Following Cost for a specified power year is defined as the expected cost (or revenue) associated with intra-month load variations due to weather or other events affecting demand. The ERMC will update the Expected Load Following estimate while lack of necessary market information persists no less than annually. o The Budget Target for Purchase Power Expense represents the City’s view of expected purchase power expense. 17 19

Item 1. B. Credit Reporting  Counterparty Credit Report The Counterparty Credit Report conveys the exposure to all counterparties with which the City has credit exposure resulting from its energy commodity risk management activities.  CFTC Reporting The City understands that transacting over the counter (OTC) swaps carries an additional Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) reporting function. Once required by the CFTC, the City will report on how the City generally meets its financial obligations associated with entering into non-cleared swaps in a manner acceptable to the CFTC. C. Hedge Effectiveness Reporting If the City’s transactions require a hedge effectiveness test, those testing results will be reported to the ERMC no later than one month after the end of the financial reporting period. The report will include a summary of testing methodology, assumptions of the testing and the outcome of results with a pass or fail by transaction. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS TEA’s Middle Office will maintain a set of records for all transactions executed in association with City procurement activities. The records will be maintained in US Dollars and transactions will be separately recorded and categorized by type of transaction. The system of report shall be auditable. The following safeguards for data security and backup will be installed:  Transaction data stored in the system of record will be replicated daily to ensure data redundancy;  The TEA Energy Trading Risk Management database will be backed up at least daily. POLICY DISTRIBUTION AND COUNSEL A. Distribution Outside The City The City’s Policy is restricted to the use of the City and TEA organizations. It shall not be distributed outside these organizations without the consent the ERMC. 18 20

Item 1. B. Designated Counsel Questions about the interpretation of any matters of this Policy should be referred to ERMC. The ERMC will provide clarification and explanation on any updates to this Policy. All legal matters stemming from this Policy will be referred to the City’s Legal Counsel. 19 21

Item 1. APPENDIX A – Approved Products The following shall constitute a list of approved products to be utilized by TEA to manage the City’s energy commodity portfolio:  Physical Power  Physical Natural Gas  Physical Residual Fuel Oil (#2)  Physical Power Options  Environmental Products  Capacity  Financial Power  Financial Options  PJM Demand Bids and Generation Offers  PJM InSchedules  PJM Transmission Products o Financial Transmission Rights o Annual Auction Revenue Rights  PJM Tier 2 Synchronized Reserves 20 22

Item 1. APPENDIX B – Approved Counterparties and Threshold Tables This Appendix establishes approved counterparties and their Collateral thresholds. Collateral thresholds, term limitations and credit exposure limits that are subject to the following maximums based upon the lower of the S&P and Moody’s credit ratings: Credit Thresholds from Dover Extended to the Counterparty Exelon Generation Company, LLC Threshold S&P Moody's $ 60,000,000 AAA Aaa $ 50,000,000 A- to AA+ A3 to Aa1 $ 40,000,000 BBB+ Baa1 $ 30,000,000 BBB Baa2 $ 20,000,000 BBB- Baa3 $ - Below BBB- Below Baa3 AEP Energy Partners, Inc. Threshold S&P Moody's $ 10,000,000 BBB- and Above Baa3 and Above $ - Below BBB- Below Baa3 BP Energy Company Threshold S&P Moody's $ 60,000,000 AA- to AAA Aa3 to Aaa $ 45,000,000 A+ A1 $ 30,000,000 A A2 $ 15,000,000 BBB to A- Baa2 to A3 $ - Below BBB Below Baa2 Calpine Energy Services, L.P. Threshold S&P Moody's $ 25,000,000 AAA Aaa $ 15,000,000 AA- to AA+ Aa3 to Aa1 $ 10,000,000 A- to A+ A3 to A1 $ 5,000,000 BBB+ Baa1 $ 3,000,000 BBB- to BBB Baa3 to Baa2 $ - Below BBB- Below Baa3 21 23

Item 1. EDF Trading North America, LLC Threshold S&P Moody's $ 18,000,000 Fixed Fixed PSEG Energy Resources & Trade, LLC Threshold S&P Moody's $ 20,000,000 BBB- and Above Baa3 and Above $ - Below BBB- Below Baa3 Sequent Energy Management, L.P. Threshold S&P Moody's $ 5,000,000 Fixed Fixed Conectiv Threshold S&P Moody's Unspecified * Above BBB+ Above Baa3 $ - Below BBB- Below Baa3 * Conectiv does not have a defined credit threshold, so for planning purposes, a $10,000,000 threshold is imposed as a conservative limit Macquarie Energy, LLC Threshold S&P Moody's $ 25,000,000 AAA Aaa $ 20,000,000 AA- to AA+ Aa3 to Aa1 $ 15,000,000 A- to A+ A3 to A1 $ 10,000,000 BBB+ Baa1 $ 5,000,000 BBB Baa2 $ - BBB- or below Baa3 or below Morgan Stanley Capital Group Threshold S&P Moody's $ 25,000,000 AAA Aaa $ 20,000,000 AA- to AA+ Aa3 to Aa1 $ 15,000,000 A- to A+ A3 to A1 $ 10,000,000 BBB+ Baa1 $ 5,000,000 BBB Baa2 $ - BBB- or below Baa3 or below 22 24

Item 1. NextEra Energy Marketing, LLC Threshold S&P Moody's $ 30,000,000 AAA Aaa $ 25,000,000 AA- to AA+ Aa3 to Aa1 $ 20,000,000 A- to A+ A3 to A1 $ 15,000,000 BBB+ Baa1 $ 10,000,000 BBB Baa2 $ - BBB- or below Baa3 or below Deutsche Bank Threshold S&P Moody's $ 25,000,000 AAA Aaa $ 20,000,000 AA- to AA+ Aa3 to Aa1 $ 15,000,000 A- to A+ A3 to A1 $ 10,000,000 BBB+ Baa1 $ 5,000,000 BBB Baa2 $ - BBB- or below Baa3 or below Barclays Bank Threshold S&P Moody's $ 25,000,000 AAA Aaa $ 20,000,000 AA- to AA+ Aa3 to Aa1 $ 15,000,000 A- to A+ A3 to A1 $ 10,000,000 BBB+ Baa1 $ 5,000,000 BBB Baa2 $ - BBB- or below Baa3 or below Credit Thresholds from the Counterparty Extended to Dover AEP Energy Partners, Inc. Threshold S&P Moody's $ 10,000,000 BBB- and Above Baa3 and Above $ - Below BBB- Below Baa3 BP Energy Company 23 25

Item 1. Threshold S&P Moody's $ 30,000,000 AA to AAA Aa2 to Aaa $ 25,000,000 AA- Aa3 $ 20,000,000 A+ A1 $ 15,000,000 A A2 $ 5,000,000 BBB to A- Baa2 to A3 $ - Below BBB- Below Baa3 Calpine Energy Services, L.P. Threshold S&P Moody's $ 10,000,000 AA- to AAA Aa3 to Aaa $ 7,500,000 A- to A+ A3 to A1 $ 5,000,000 BBB+ Baa1 $ 3,000,000 BBB- to BBB Baa3 to Baa2 $ - Below BBB- Below Baa3 Exelon Generation Company, LLC Threshold Fitch Moody's $ 60,000,000 AAA Aaa $ 50,000,000 A- to AA+ A3 to Aa1 $ 40,000,000 BBB+ Baa1 $ 30,000,000 BBB Baa2 $ 20,000,000 BBB- Baa3 $ - Below BBB- Below Baa3 Conectiv Threshold Fitch Moody's Unspecified * Above BBB+ Above Baa3 $ - Below BBB- Below Baa3 *Conectiv does not have a defined credit threshold, so for planning purposes, a $10,000,000 threshold is imposed as a conservative limit PSEG Energy Resources & Trade, LLC Threshold S&P Moody's $ 12,000,000 * Fixed Fixed *Threshold is $12,000,000 as long as Dover maintains a Debt Service Coverage greater than 1.25% and Total Net Assets of at least $50,000,000 and Total Net Assets do not decline by more than 25% on a fiscal year end basis. Morgan Stanley Capital Group Threshold S&P Moody's 24 26

Item 1. $ 25,000,000 AAA Aaa $ 20,000,000 AA- to AA+ Aa3 to Aa1 $ 15,000,000 A- to A+ A3 to A1 $ 10,000,000 BBB+ Baa1 $ 5,000,000 BBB Baa2 $ - BBB- or below Baa3 or below Macquarie Energy, LLC Threshold Fitch Moody's $ 25,000,000 AAA Aaa $ 20,000,000 AA- to AA+ AA3 to Aa1 $ 15,000,000 A- to A+ A3 to A1 $ 10,000,000 BBB+ Baa1 $ 5,000,000 BBB Baa2 $ - BBB- or below Baa3 or below NextEra Energy Marketing, LLC Threshold Fitch Moody's $ 23,000,000 AAA Aaa $ 18,000,000 AA- to AA+ AA3 to Aa1 $ 13,000,000 A- to A+ A3 to A1 $ 8,000,000 BBB+ Baa1 $ 3,000,000 BBB Baa2 $ - BBB- or below Baa3 or below EDF Trading North America, LLC Threshold S&P Moody's $ 18,000,000 Fixed Fixed Deutsche Bank Threshold Fitch Moody's $ 25,000,000 AAA Aaa $ 20,000,000 AA- to AA+ AA3 to Aa1 $ 15,000,000 A- to A+ A3 to A1 $ 10,000,000 BBB+ Baa1 $ 5,000,000 BBB Baa2 25 27

Item 1. $ - BBB- or below Baa3 or below Barclays Bank Threshold Fitch Moody's $ 25,000,000 AAA Aaa $ 20,000,000 AA- to AA+ AA3 to Aa1 $ 15,000,000 A- to A+ A3 to A1 $ 10,000,000 BBB+ Baa1 $ 5,000,000 BBB Baa2 $ - BBB- or below Baa3 or below APPENDIX C – Business Risks Business Risks Topology Commodity Counterparty Process Volume Budget Regulatory Risk Risk Risk Risk Risk Risk Receivables Market Load Market Market Price Risk Risk Deadline Risk Uncertainty Uncertainty Uncertainty Performance Reporting Load Load Volume Risk Supply Risk Risk Risk Uncertainty Uncertainty M2M/Forward Generation Forecast Forecast Curve Risk Uncertainty Error Error Liquidity Risk Basis Risk Correlation Risk 26 28

Item 1. 27 29

Item 1. APPENDIX D – Glossary Back Office – That part of a trading organization which handles transaction accounting, confirmations, management reporting, and working capital management. Bilateral Transaction - Any physical or financial transaction between two counterparties, neither of whom is an Exchange or market entity (e.g. MISO). Capacity – The real power output rating of a generator or system, typically in megawatts, measured on an instantaneous basis. Commodity - A basic good used in commerce that is interchangeable with other commodities of the same type. Commodities are most often used as inputs in the production of other goods or services. The quality of a given commodity may differ slightly, but it is essentially uniform across producers. When they are traded on an exchange, commodities must also meet specified minimum standards, also known as a basis grade. Financial Bilateral Transaction – A Bilateral Transaction that is non-physical and is defined by a Source Point, Sink Point, and Delivery Point that may be any CP Nodes as specified by the Midwest ISO. Financial Forward – An agreement regarding a position in a specified commodity, a specified price, and a specified future settlement date, that does not result in physical delivery of the commodity. Rather one party in the agreement makes a payment to the other party on the basis of the commodity price at the future date. Front Office – That part of a trading organization which solicits customer business, services existing customers, executes trades and ensures the physical delivery of commodities. Hedging Transaction - A transaction designed to reduce the exposure of a specific outstanding position or portfolio; “fully hedged” equates to complete elimination of the targeted risk and “partially hedged” implies a risk reduction of less than 100%. Mark-to-Market Value – A measure of the current value of unrealized positions; includes both Open Positions and Closed Positions. Maturity – The time between the date on which a transaction is executed to the last date that power or gas will flow (in the case of physical transactions) or be settled financially (in the case of financial transactions). For products such as RECs which may be 28 30

Item 1. delivered independent of energy flow, the maturity shall be defined as the vintage period plus any additional time it may take to deliver the RECs, which may extend beyond / past the vintage period Middle Office – That part of a trading organization that measures and reports on market risks, develops risk management policies and monitors compliance with those policies, manages contract administration and credit, and keeps management and the Board informed on risk management issues. Policy – Dover’s Governing Policy for Energy Commodity Risk, as amended and approved by The Utility Committee. Portfolio – A collection of transactions. Realized Gains/(Losses) – The amount earned (or lost) from a transaction, considered to be realized once the time for performance has lapsed (e.g. delivery of power in the case of physical transactions or expiration of an option in the case of financial transactions). Term – The total duration of a contract, defined as the number of days between the beginning flow date and ending flow date, inclusive.- Unrealized Gains/ (Losses) – The amount expected to earn (lose) on a specific transaction(s); however, the time for performance has not lapsed. The total value of Unrealized Gains/ (Losses) is the Mark-to-Market value. 29 31

Item 1. APPENDIX E – Swap Transaction Representative Purpose: To ensure that the City of Dover, a Special Entity under the Dodd-Frank Financial Reform Act, selects a qualified representative (“Representative”) to provide advice and guidance when entering into swap transactions with Swap Dealers or Major Swap Participants. Definitions: Special Entity: As defined in 7 U.S.C. 6s(h)(2)(C) and further interpreted in 17 C.F.R. 23.401(c). The City of Dover is a Special Entity as defined by 17 C.F.R. 23.401(c)(2). Swap Dealer: As defined in 7 U.S.C. 1a(49) and further interpreted in 17 C.F.R. 1.3(ggg) Major Swap Participant: As defined in 7 U.S.C. 1a(33) and further interpreted in 17 C.F.R. 1.3(hhh) Representative: As defined in this policy and 17 C.F.R. 23.450 Policy: Selection: The City of Dover shall endeavor to seek and employ an individual or entity that will voluntarily act as a Representative for all energy commodity swap transactions between XXXX and any Swap Dealer or Major Swap Participant. The Representative must meet the following qualifications identified in 17 C.F.R. 23.450(b): (i) Has sufficient knowledge to evaluate the transaction and risks; (ii) Is not subject to a statutory disqualification; (iii) Is independent of the swap dealer or major swap participant; (iv) Undertakes a duty to act in the best interests of the Special Entity it represents; (v) Makes appropriate and timely disclosures to the Special Entity; (vi) Evaluates, consistent with any guidelines provided by the Special Entity, fair pricing and the appropriateness of the swap; and (vii) In the case of a Special Entity as defined in § 23.401(c)(2) or (4), is subject to restrictions on certain political contributions imposed by the Commission, the Securities and Exchange Commission, or a self-regulatory organization subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission or the Securities and Exchange Commission; provided however, that this paragraph (b)(1)(vii) of this section shall not apply if the representative is an employee of the Special Entity. The Representative and the City of Dover shall enter into a legal agreement that binds the Representative to comply with items (i) through (vii) in this policy. At no longer than any 12 month interval, the City of Dover shall review the performance of the Representative to ensure compliance with items (i) through (vii) in this policy. 30 32

Item 2. CITY OF DOVER, DELAWARE ACTION FORM MEETING: Council Committee of the Whole – Legislative, Finance & Administration Committee MEETING DATE: June 25, 2024 Meeting DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN: Planning, Inspections and Community Development PREPARED BY: Dawn Melson-Williams, Principal Planner and City Manager’s Office SUBMITTED: June 19, 2024 SUBJECT: Proposed Ordinance #2024-27 – Amending Appendix F – Fees and Fines: Chapter 82 – Planning, Appendix A – Subdivisions, and Appendix B – Zoning for application fees associated with the Planning Office, and Boards and Commissions REFERENCES: Dover Code of Ordinances, Appendix F – Fees and Fines associated with Chapter 82 – Planning (pertaining to Zoning Verification Letters) Appendix A - Subdivisions (pertaining to Application fees for Subdivision Plans and Minor Lot Line Adjustments) Appendix B – Zoning (pertaining to Application fees to the Planning Office, Board of Adjustment, Historic District Commission, and Planning Commission for Conditional Uses, Site Development Plans, the Planned Neighborhood Design Option, the TND (Traditional Neighborhood Design Zone), Comprehensive Sign Plans, Rezonings, Variances, and Architectural Review Certification EXHIBITS: • Draft Proposed Ordinance #2024-27 - Amending Appendix F – Fees and Fines, Chapter 82 – Planning, Appendix A – Subdivisions, and Appendix B – Zoning TIMETABLE: • Presentation of Draft Proposed Ordinance at CCOW- LF&A on June 25, 2024 with recommendation to move it forward to Ordinance review process • First Reading of Proposed Ordinance at City Council on July 8, 2024 • Final Reading and Action on Proposed Ordinance at City Council on July 22, 2024 • With Adoption to set the Effective Date of Revised Schedule of Fees for September 1, 2024 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: • Recommendation of Approval of Proposed Ordinance #2024-27. Recommend the Review of and forwarding the Proposed Ordinance #2024-27 to City Council for First Reading including its review for proper formatting and for legal review by the City Solicitor as necessary. 33

CCOW-LF&A Meeting June 25, 2024 Item 2. Action Form Proposed Ordinance #2024-27 Amending Appendix F – Application Fees to Planning Office and Boards and Commissions Page 2 of 4 BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS This is a proposal for updates to the Schedule of Application Fees for applications reviewed by the Planning Commission, Board of Adjustment, Historic District Commission, and Planning Staff for administrative reviews. Here are some key aspects: • Most of the fees currently in place became effective on January 1, 2016 (as adopted December 14, 2015 by Ordinance #2015-22) or earlier. • Permit and Application Fees related to Wireless Communication Facilities (WCF) were established on November 9, 2020 by Ordinance #2020-13. (found in Zoning Ordinance, Article 5 Section 23 and Appendix F). No changes are proposed related to those WCF application fees due to limitations in federal regulations and its fairly recent adoption. WCF related fees are not listed here. • Planning Staff did look at fees in other jurisdictions such as Kent County, DE and nearby municipalities; this information is on file in the Planning Office. Direct comparisons can be difficult as many jurisdictions utilize consultant review services rather than professional planning staff to complete reviews. • It is noted that Dover does not require a fee for a Pre-Application Meeting with Planning Staff in order to file an Application; some jurisdictions do have this requirement. These meetings are an opportunity to educate the applicant on our processes and codes. • The Proposed Fees offered (as listed in the following chart) were developed by generally looking at a 3% change, comparables, ease of calculations, and fee reasonableness as related to staff involvement. Several Fees were not recommended for changes based on infrequency of use, the staff involvement level, and/or the fairness of the current rate to the applicant/customer. • The application process and procedures are outlined in the Land Subdivision Regulations and the Zoning Ordinance, and the fees are established in Dover Code of Ordinances, Appendix F: Fees and Fines. Application Type Fee (Current) Proposed Fee Conceptual (Pre-Application) $200 $225 Subdivision Plan Preliminary Subdivision Plan $325 $350 Final Subdivision Plat $200 plus supplemental fee $225 plus supplemental per acre: fee per acre: $85 per acre for the first 10 $85 per acre for the first acres, $60 per acre for the 10 acres, $60 per acre for next 10 acres, and $45 per the next 10 acres, and $45 acre for acre thereafter per acre for acre thereafter Minor Lot Line Adjustment Plan $150 $200 Minor Subdivision Plan $150 plus $15 per lot $200 plus $20 per lot Architectural Review $250 $250 Certification (at HDC) 34

CCOW-LF&A Meeting June 25, 2024 Item 2. Action Form Proposed Ordinance #2024-27 Amending Appendix F – Application Fees to Planning Office and Boards and Commissions Page 3 of 4 Application Type Fee (Current) Proposed Fee Board of Adjustment Variance (Residential Use) Variance (Residential $300 Use) $325 Variance (Non-residential Variance (Non-residential Use) $600 Use) $625 Appeals $300 Appeals $300 Comprehensive Signage Plan $200 $250 Conditional Use Plan $425 plus $25 per acre $450 plus $25 per acre Planned Neighborhood Design PND Review Process for PND Review Process for (PND) General Sketch Plan $100 General Sketch Plan $150 PND Conditional Use Plan PND Conditional Use $200 plus $10 per acre Plan $250 plus $20 per acre PND Site Development/ PND Site Development/ Preliminary Subdivision Plan Preliminary Subdivision $325 plus $20 per acre Plan $350 plus $25 per acre PND Final Subdivision Plat PND Final Subdivision $250 Plat $300 Rezoning $425 plus supplemental fee per acre based on $450 plus supplemental zoning requested: fee per acre based on One-Family Residence Zones (R-8, R-10, R-15, R-20) $25 zoning requested: per acre One-Family Residence Zones General Residence Zones, Medium Density Residence (R-8, R-10, R-15, R-20) $25 Zones, and Mobile Home Park Zones (RGO, RG-1, RG-2, per acre RG-3, RG-5, RM-1, RM-2, MHP) $50 per acre General Residence Zones, Commercial and Office zones (C-1, C-1A, C-2, C-2A, C-3, Medium Density Residence C-4, CPO, RC, IO) $70 per acre Zones, and Manufactured Shopping Center development (SC-1, SC-2, SC-3) $75 per Housing Zones (RGO, RG-1, acre RG-2, RG-3, RG-5, RM-1, Industrial zones (M, IPM, IPM-2) $75 per acre RM-2, MH) $50 per acre Commercial and Office zones (C-1, C-1A, C-2, C-2A, C-3, C- 4, CPO, RC, IO) $75 per acre Shopping Center development (SC-1, SC-2, SC-3) $75 per acre Industrial zones (M, IPM, IPM- 2, IPM-3) $75 per acre Site Development Plan $425 plus $25 per acre $450 plus $25 per acre Administrative Site $300 $325 Development Plan Traditional Neighborhood TND Rezoning & General TND Rezoning & General Design (TND) Overall Master Plan $325 Overall Master Plan $350 TND Implementation Plan TND Implementation Plan $325 plus $10 per acre $350 plus $10 per acre TND Site Development Plan or TND Site Development Subdivision Plat $250 Plan or Subdivision Plat $300 35

CCOW-LF&A Meeting June 25, 2024 Item 2. Action Form Proposed Ordinance #2024-27 Amending Appendix F – Application Fees to Planning Office and Boards and Commissions Page 4 of 4 Application Type Fee (Current) Proposed Fee Annexations No application fee No application fee Other Planning Fees Zoning Verification Letter $50 $60 This Proposal Chart (above) for 2024 Updates to the Schedule of Application Fees was utilized to draft the necessary Text Amendments to the Dover Code of Ordinances, Appendix F. Proposed Ordinance #2024-27 is attached. As to the process to implement this 2024 Updates to the Schedule of Application Fees, Planning Staff is recommending Approval of the Schedule of Application Fees and recommending an Effective Date of September 1, 2024. The Revised Schedule of Application Fees would apply to any Application filed after September 1, 2024 and any Application filed to meet an application filing deadline after September 1, 2024. This also allows Planning Staff the time to update the Schedule of Application Fees as presented in application documents and forms and to update the software processing systems (H.T.E./Naviline) with the revised fees. 36

Item 2. DRAFT CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2024-27 1 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN 2 COUNCIL MET: 3 4 That Appendix F – FEES AND FINES, Chapter 82. – Planning be amended by inserting the text 5 indicated in bold, blue font and deleting the text indicated in red strikeout as follows: 6 7 APPENDIX F – FEES AND FINES 8 Chapter 82. – Planning 9 Chapter 82. Planning Fees and Fines Sec. 82-3. Planning services (a) Zoning verification letters/administrative $50.00 per letter/interpretation interpretations $60.00 per letter/interpretation 10 11 12 BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED: 13 14 That Appendix F – FEES AND FINES, APPENDIX A. – Subdivisions amended by inserting the 15 text indicated in bold, blue font and deleting the text indicated in red strikeout as follows: 16 17 APPENDIX F – FEES AND FINES 18 Appendix A. – Subdivisions 19 Appendix A. Subdivisions Fees and Fines Article IV. Subdivision—Procedure Subsec. A.2. Preapplication; $200.00 filing fee $225.00 Subsec. B.2. Preliminary $325.00 layout; filing fee $350.00 Subsec. C.3. Plat; review fee $200.00, $225.00, plus $85.00 per acre for the first ten acres, $60.00 per acre for the next ten acres and $45.00 per acre for each acre thereafter 37

Item 2. Draft Proposed Ordinance #2024-27 – Amending Dover Code of Ordinances, Appendix F- Fees and Fines, Chapter 82 - Planning, Appendix A – Subdivisions, and Appendix B – Zoning for application fees associated with the Planning Office, and Boards and Commissions Page 2 of 6 Appendix A. Subdivisions Fees and Fines Subsec. C.3. Plat; review fee— Plats for minor lot line adjustments shall require a review fee Minor lot line adjustment of $150.00 $200.00 Subsec. C.3. Plat; review fee— Plats for minor subdivisions shall require a review fee of Minor subdivision $150.00 plus $15.00 per lot $200 plus $20 per lot 20 21 22 BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED: 23 24 That Appendix F – FEES AND FINES, APPENDIX B. – Zoning amended by inserting the text 25 indicated in bold, blue font and deleting the text indicated in red strikeout as follows: 26 27 APPENDIX F – FEES AND FINES 28 Appendix B. – Zoning 29 Appendix B. Zoning Fees and Fines Article 3. District Regulations Sec. 24. Planned Neighborhood Design option (PND) Subsec. 24.2. Review process—General sketch plan $100.00 $150.00 review fee, each application Subsec. 24.8. Conditional use plan approval Subsec. 24.81. Plan approval fee, each application $200.00, plus $10.00 per acre $250.00, plus $20.00 per acre Subsec. 24.9. Site development preliminary subdivision plan review Subsec. 24.91. Preliminary plan approval fee; each $325.00, plus $20.00 per acre application $350.00, plus $25.00 per acre Subsec. 24.10. Final subdivision plat approval 38

Item 2. Draft Proposed Ordinance #2024-27 – Amending Dover Code of Ordinances, Appendix F- Fees and Fines, Chapter 82 - Planning, Appendix A – Subdivisions, and Appendix B – Zoning for application fees associated with the Planning Office, and Boards and Commissions Page 3 of 6 Appendix B. Zoning Fees and Fines Subsec. 24.101. Final subdivision plat approval; each $250.00 $300.00 application Sec. 28. Traditional Neighborhood Design Zone (TND) Subsec. 28.4. Procedure; application for rezoning of a land area to a TND zone Subsec. 28.411. Minimum fee; each rezoning petition $325.00 $350.00 Subsec. 28.422. Implementation plan approval; each $325.00, plus $10.00 per acre application $350.00, plus $10.00 per acre Subsec. 28.434. Site development plan or subdivision $250.00 $300.00 plat; each application Article 5. Supplementary Regulations Section 4. Supplementary sign regulations Subsec. 4.8. Unified campuses and complexes Subsec. D.4. Submission requirements; application fee $200.00, due at time of application $250.00 Subsec. 4.9. Supplementary sign provisions Subsec. D.1. Temporary signs; permit $50.00 Article 9. Board of Adjustment Sec. 3. Procedure Subsec. 3.4. All variance requests and appeals from an order, requirement, decision or determination made by an administrative official, board or agency of the city shall be accompanied by a fee 39

Item 2. Draft Proposed Ordinance #2024-27 – Amending Dover Code of Ordinances, Appendix F- Fees and Fines, Chapter 82 - Planning, Appendix A – Subdivisions, and Appendix B – Zoning for application fees associated with the Planning Office, and Boards and Commissions Page 4 of 6 Appendix B. Zoning Fees and Fines All variance requests for residential uses $300.00 $325.00 All variance requests for nonresidential uses $600.00 $625.00 All appeals from an order, requirement, decision or $300.00 determination made by an administrative official, board or agency of the city The board of adjustment may, in its discretion, return to the applicant part or all of the fee paid by him in the event that his appeal under section 2.1 (interpretation) hereof is partially or wholly successful. The fees filed in connection with applications under section 2.2 (variances) shall not be returnable, regardless of disposition of the case by the board Article 10. Planning Commission Sec. 1. Approval of conditional uses Subsec. 1.52. Application procedure; conditional use $425.00, $450.00 plus $25.00 per permit; each application acre of the area or multiple thereof involved in the application Sec. 2. Site development plan approval Subsec. 2.42. Fees—Application for administrative site $300.00 $325.00 plans Subsec. 2.43. Fees—Application for site development $425.00 plus $25 per acre plan approval $450.00 plus $25.00 per acre Sec. 3. Historic district commission and architectural review Subsec. 3.26. Procedures for an architectural review by the historic district commission or planning commission 40

Item 2. Draft Proposed Ordinance #2024-27 – Amending Dover Code of Ordinances, Appendix F- Fees and Fines, Chapter 82 - Planning, Appendix A – Subdivisions, and Appendix B – Zoning for application fees associated with the Planning Office, and Boards and Commissions Page 5 of 6 Appendix B. Zoning Fees and Fines Subsec. (b) Application and fee for an architectural $250.00 review certificate Sec. 5. Amendments Subsec. 5.32. Application. Each application for a zoning map amendment: Minimum fee, in addition to required district $425.00 $450.00 supplemental fee One-family residence zones (R-8, R-10, R-15, and R-20); $25.00 per acre supplemental fee General residence zones, Medium density residence $50.00 per acre zones, and Mobile home park zones (RG-0, RG-1, RG-2, RG-3, RG-5, RM-1, RM-2, and MHP MH); supplemental fee Commercial and office (C-1, C-1A, C-2, C-2A, C-3, C-4, $70.00 per acre CPO, RC and IO); supplemental fee $75.00 per acre Shopping center development (SC-1, SC-2 and SC-3); $75.00 per acre supplemental fee Industrial zones (M, IPM, and IPM2, IPM2, and IPM3); $75.00 per acre supplemental fee 30 31 BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED: 32 33 That the Effective Date of this schedule of application fees be established as September 1, 2024 34 and any application filed to meet an application filing deadline set for after September 1, 2024 be 35 subject to these new rates. 36 37 38 ADOPTED: * 39 EFFECTIVE DATE: September 1, 2024 40 41 SYNOPSIS 42 This is a series of text amendments to the application filing fees for applications to the Planning 41

Item 2. Draft Proposed Ordinance #2024-27 – Amending Dover Code of Ordinances, Appendix F- Fees and Fines, Chapter 82 - Planning, Appendix A – Subdivisions, and Appendix B – Zoning for application fees associated with the Planning Office, and Boards and Commissions Page 6 of 6 43 Office for administrative reviews and to the Board of Adjustment, Historic District Commission, 44 and Planning Commission. These are proposed to update the Schedule of Application Fees that 45 were last amended in December 2015 (Effective January 1, 2016). The application processes and 46 procedures are outlined in the Land Subdivision Regulations and the Zoning Ordinance (Dover 47 Code of Ordinances, Appendix A – Subdivisions and Appendix B – Zoning). (Planning Reference: 48 MI-24-07) 49 50 (SPONSORS: *) (INITIATION BY THE CITY MANAGER’S OFFICE AND PLANNING OFFICE) 51 52 53 Actions History: 54 6/25/2024 - Introduced at Council Committee of the Whole/Legislative Finance, and 55 Administration Committee 56 42