Regular City Council Packet - REVISED

CITY OF DOVER, DELAWARE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, October 09, 2023, at 6:30 PM City Hall Council Chambers, 15 Loockerman Plaza, Dover, Delaware AGENDA THIS AGENDA AND PAPERLESS PACKET HAVE BEEN REVISED TO ADD ITEM #19 RECONSIDERATION - VIOLATIONS OF DANGEROUS BUILDINGS ORDINANCE - B. PROPERTY LOCATED AT 207 NORTH WEST STREET (COUNCILMAN DAVID ANDERSON AND COUNCILMAN ROY SUDLER, JR.) VIRTUAL MEETING NOTICE This meeting will be held in the City Hall Council Chambers with electronic access via WebEx. Public participation information is as follows: Dial: 1-650-479-3208 Link: https://rb.gy/jvfaz Event number: 2539 816 7653 Event password: DOVER (if needed) If you are new to WebEx, get the app now at www.webex.com/ to be ready when the meeting starts. The meeting can also be viewed on Comcast Channel 14, Verizon Channel 20, and on the City's Streaming Player located at www.cityofdover.com under "Quick Links". OPEN FORUM - 15 Minutes Prior to Official Meeting (6:15 p.m.) The “Open Forum” segment is provided to extend the opportunity to the general public to share their questions, thoughts, comments, concerns, and complaints. Discussion of any item appearing on the agenda as a public hearing is prohibited during the Open Forum as an opportunity will be provided during consideration of that item. Citizen comments are limited to three (3) minutes. Council is prohibited from taking action since they are not in official session; however, they may schedule such items as regular agenda items and act upon them in the future. INVOCATION - Elder Ellis B. Louden PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Council President Hare ADOPTION OF AGENDA ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA Page 1

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - October 09, 2023 PAGE 2 All Consent Agenda items are considered routine and non-controversial and will be acted upon by a single roll call vote of the Council. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a member of Council so requests, in which event the matter shall be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered a separate item. PROCLAMATIONS 1. Indigenous Peoples’ Day PRESENTATIONS 2. Certificate of Recognition - Ms. Lolita Lopez - Westside Family Healthcare RESOLUTIONS 3. PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 2023-15 - STATE OF DELAWARE COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL POLICE AND FIREFIGHTERS' PENSION PLAN (David Carey, Dover Fire Chief) (Staff Recommendation: Council approval of Resolution No. 2023-15) CONSENT AGENDA ADOPTION OF MINUTES 4. Regular City Council Meeting of September 25, 2023 COMMITTEE REPORTS 5. Council Committee of the Whole Report of September 26, 2023 Utility Committee 6. Customer Advance Agreement for Supply of Natural Gas Services at Garrison Oak Business Park (David S. Hugg III, City Manager) (Committee Recommendation: Authorize the City Manager to complete negotiations and execute the Customer Advance Agreement to facilitate the timely installation of gas services throughout the park.) Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee 7. Disposal of Fifteen Excess Properties (David S. Hugg III, City Manager) (Committee Recommendation: Approval of disposition of properties as outlined.) 8. FY23 Edward Byrne Justice Assistance Grant Program – Joint Grant with Smyrna Police Department and Kent County (Thomas Johnson, Dover Police Chief) (Committee Recommendation: Approve the grant application for the items listed below.) Page 2

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - October 09, 2023 PAGE 3 9. Discussion and Next Steps of Delaware House Bill 2 - Delaware Marijuana Control Act (David S. Hugg III, City Manager, and Mary Ellen Gray, Planning and Community Development Director) (Committee Action Not Required) MONTHLY REPORTS - August 2023 10. City Assessor's Report 11. City Council’s Community Enhancement Fund Report 12. City Manager’s Report 13. City Planner's Report 14. Controller/Treasurer's Budget Report 15. Fire Chief's Report 16. Police Chief's Report APPOINTMENTS/REAPPOINTMENTS RECOMMENDED BY MAYOR CHRISTIANSEN 17. Board of Adjustment - Three-Year Term to Expire July 2026 A. Clarence Cobaugh Wagner, II ITEMS NOT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA 18. Holiday Schedule Discussion (William Hare, Council President) (Council Action Not Required) 19. Reconsideration - Violations of Dangerous Buildings Ordinance - B. Property Located at 207 North West Street (Councilman David Anderson and Councilman Roy Sudler, Jr.) (Staff recommendation: 1) Declaring these buildings and all accessory structures on these properties dangerous; 2) Ordering the properties demolished by November 2, 2023, by the owners or equity owners at their own risk; 3) Ordering the Building Inspector to cause the demolition of the structures if not completed by the owners within 10 days of the date established by City Council; and 4) Ordering the City Manager, with the assistance of the City Solicitor, to cause the cost of demolition to be charged against the lands on which the buildings exist as municipal liens or cause such costs to be added to the tax duplicate as assessments, or to be levied as a special tax, or to be recovered in a suit at law against the owners.) (Motion made during Special City Council Meeting of October 3, 2023: Mr. Neil moved to follow staff recommendations in terms of the dangerous building ordinance to have the property demolished. The motion was carried by a roll call vote of 6-2, with Mr. Sudler and Mr. Lewis voting no.) (Arndt absent) Page 3

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - October 09, 2023 PAGE 4 (Recommendation: Reconsideration of the property located at 207 North West Street due to the owner having technical issues during the Special City Council Meeting of October 3, 2023.) ORDINANCES FIRST READING - The First Reading is offered on the Proposed Ordinance. Final action by Council will take place during the Second Reading on October 23, 2023. The ordinance is available at the entrance of the Council Chambers, on the City's website at www.cityofdover.com under "Government," or by contacting the City Clerk's Office at 302-736-7008 or cityclerk@dover.de.us. 20. Proposed Ordinance #2023-10 - Amending Chapter 114 - Vegetation, Article II - Weeds (Mary Ellen Gray, Planning and Community Development Director) (Staff Recommendation: Amend code as requested) FINAL READING - The First Reading of the Proposed Ordinance was accomplished during the Council Meeting of September 25, 2023. The ordinance is available at the entrance of the Council Chambers and on the City's website at www.cityofdover.com under "Government." 21. Proposed Ordinance #2023-09 - Project Carry-Forward Budget Balances - Budget Amendments(Lori Peddicord, Controller/Treasurer) (Staff Recommendation: Approval of the proposed budget amendments totaling $37,845,241 for Fiscal Year 2024 and adoption of Proposed Ordinance #2023-09.) CITY MANAGER’S ANNOUNCEMENTS MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS COUNCIL MEMBERS’ ANNOUNCEMENTS ADJOURNMENT 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 Page 4

Item #1. PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, The Lenni-Lenape Native Americans originally lived in a huge territory that included what is now New Jersey, Pennsylvania, New York, and Delaware. The Lenni-Lenape, whose name Lenni means "Original", and Lenape meaning "People" are indigenous to the Delaware Valley that includes the City of Dover; and WHEREAS, before the first cobblestone was laid by European colonists, the lands on Delmarva that would become Kent County were occupied by Native Americans, particularly the Lenni-Lenape. The Lenni-Lenape Tribe was the first to encounter the Europeans (Dutch, English, and Swedish) in 1524. The English settlers gave them the name Delaware Indians because they lived along the Delaware River, and the river in turn was named after the governor of the Jamestown colony, Lord de la Warr; and WHEREAS, the peace-loving Lenni-Lenape were called the "grandfathers" or "ancient ones" by many other tribes and were considered to be among the most ancient of the Northeastern Nations. They were known as warriors and diplomats, often keeping peace and mediating disputes between the neighboring Native Nations, and were admired by European colonists for their hospitality and mediation skills; and WHEREAS, in celebrating the traditions, cultures, and accomplishments of the Lenni-Lenape Tribe, we also acknowledge our city's history of colonialism that has inflicted discrimination, deprivation, and genocide upon indigenous people. NOW, THEREFORE, I, ROBIN R. CHRISTIANSEN, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF DOVER, DELAWARE, do hereby proclaim October 9,2023, as Indigenous Peoples' Day in the City of Dover and for all citizens to join in celebrating Indigenous Peoples' Day and continue to promote the rich heritage and history of the First People of the First State. Page 5

--- ----------- Item #2. CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION Presented to Lolita Lopez It is with sincere appreciation and celebration that we honor your retirement from Westside Family Healthcare. The city appreciates your 33 years of dedicated service and devotion to providing affordable healthcare to our citizens. May you continue to serve others with compassion even in retirement. The City of Dover extends its sincere congratulations on this special milestone and wishes you all the best in all your future endeavors as you enjoy your retirement years. October 9, 2023 Mayor Page 6

ACTION FORM Item #3. PROCEEDING: City Council DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN: Fire/Robbins Hose DATE SUBMITTED: October 5, 2023 PREPARED BY: David Carey, Fire Chief SUBJECT: 20 Year Firefighter/Police Pension REFERENCE: Fire Department budget RELATED PROJECT: N/A REVIEWED BY: EXHIBITS: EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: Included in current budget FINANCING/LEGAL COST ESTIMATED: AMOUNT BUDGETED: Included in current budget FUNDING SOURCE (Dept./Page in CIP & Budget): Fire Department Budget TIMETABLE: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: City Manager and City Council Approval BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS The Fire Chief is requesting City Council approval of a Resolution to allow Fire Department employees that are assigned firefighting duties as outlined in State of Delaware Law the ability to be enrolled into the 20-year State of Delaware Municiple Firefighter/Police pension plan. During FY 24 budget hearings, Chief Carey requested an Administrative Fire Service Manager position for the fire department, which was approved by the City Council. This position will be the fire department administrator and supervisor of all current and future City employees assigned to the fire department to include scheduling of staff, managing and submitting payroll, maintain fire department personnel files, administer employee corrective action and perform quality assurance on fire reporting. This position will assist with the administrative duties of the fire department to include accounts payable for the fire department. This position oversees duty crew incentive program and scheduling of volunteers staffing fire stations. This position will ride and operate fire apparatus in any position on an as needed basis and will have the authority of a fire line officer, when a Fire Officer is not present. This position will be directly supervised by the Fire Chief, as Department Head of the fire department. This new position meets the requirements of the State of Delaware 20-year Municipal Police/Firefighter pension plan. Several Fire Departments throughout the State of Delaware are enrolled in this plan which assists with recruitment and retention of employees for these positions. The City of Dover is currently enrolled in this plan for the Police Department which occurred in 1984. This resolution is to include the fire department with this newly developed and future positions within the fire department the ability to enroll into this plan provided by the State of Delaware. The calculations for the pension plan were included in the job description package when it was submitted to the City Manager's office for this position. Page 8

Item #3. City of Dover MAYOR AND COUNCIL PROPOSED COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2023-15 1 A RESOLUTION TO PERMIT THE CITY OF DOVER TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT 2 WITH THE STATE BOARD OF PENSION TRUSTEES TO ALLOW THE CITY TO 3 PARTICIPATE IN THE STATE OF DELAWARE COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL POLICE 4 AND FIREFIGHTERS’ PENSION PLAN 5 6 WHEREAS, the City of Dover wishes to provide its employees with a pension benefit through the 7 Delaware Public Employee’s Retirement System; and 8 9 WHEREAS, the General Assembly of the State of Delaware has passed Legislation providing for 10 a uniform Pension Plan for Counties and Municipalities in the State of Delaware which legislation 11 has been designated in the Delaware County and Municipal Police/Firefighter Pension Plan 11 12 Del. C. § 8805); 13 14 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY the Mayor and Council of the City of Dover, 15 Delaware, the governing body of City of Dover, as follows: 16 17 1. That the Council hereby elects to participate in the County and Municipal Police and 18 Firefighters’ Pension Plan on or after October 09, 2023, if approved by the Board of 19 Pension Trustees of said Plan; which said election shall cover all certified active 20 employees; 21 22 2. That the City Manager is hereby directed to forward this Resolution to the State of 23 Delaware, Board of Pension Trustees and do other things necessary to implement said 24 election. The City Manager is also authorized to take necessary action to execute such 25 documents that may be required to terminate, transfer, or assign the prior pension or 26 retirement plans. 27 28 ADOPTED: 29 30 31 ________________________________ ______________________________ 32 ROBIN R. CHRISTIANSEN WILLIAM F. HARE 33 MAYOR COUNCIL PRESIDENT 34 35 Actions History 36 10/09/2023 – City Council Meeting P. O. Box 475 Dover, DE 19903 Page 7 Community Excellence Through Quality Service

Item #4. REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING The Regular City Council Meeting was held on September 25, 2023, at 6:31 p.m., with Council President Hare presiding. Council members present were Mr. Anderson, Mr. Boggerty, Dr. Pillsbury, Ms. Arndt, Mr. Rocha, Mr. Sudler, and Mr. Lewis. Mr. Neil was absent. Staff members present were Police Chief Johnson, Ms. Peddicord, Mr. Hugg, Ms. Gray, Fire Chief David Carey, Mr. Rodriguez, and Ms. Bennett. Mayor Christiansen was also present. OPEN FORUM The Open Forum was held at 6:21 p.m., prior to the commencement of the Official Council Meeting. Council President Hare declared the Open Forum in session and reminded those present that Council was not in official session and could not take formal action. There were no members of the public that wished to speak during the Open Forum. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Elder Ellis Louden PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilman Sudler. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Mr. Sudler moved for adoption of the agenda, seconded by Ms. Arndt, and unanimously carried. ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA All Consent Agenda items are considered routine and non-controversial and will be acted upon by a single roll call vote of the Council. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a member of Council requests, in which event the matter shall be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered a separate item. Mr. Rocha moved for adoption of the consent agenda, seconded by Mr. Sudler, and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. PROCLAMATION - CYBERSECURITY AWARENESS MONTH The City Clerk read the following Proclamation into the record: WHEREAS, with recent global breaches and geopolitical cyber-attacks on the rise, Governor John Carney declared October as Cybersecurity Awareness Month to highlight the importance of education for citizens and businesses in Delaware. With our current physical world intertwined with the digital world, basic cyber awareness is no longer an option to fight off bad actors. The disruption of access to financial, utility, or consumer services is no longer simply an inconvenience, but a risk for an individual’s privacy to be exposed and identities stolen. As the City of Dover, we must all be vigilant to protect our own and each other’s digital information; and WHEREAS, the National Cyber Security Alliance’s 2023 Cybersecurity Awareness Month theme is, “It’s Easy to Stay Safe Online” which encourages a risk-based approach and focuses on the Page 9

Item #4. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25, 2023 _____ PAGE 2 behaviors that are most important to the person and organization; and WHEREAS, STOP. THINK. CONNECT is a global online safety awareness campaign to help all digital citizens stay safer and more secure online. STOP: Lock down your login by making sure you have security measures in place. Information about you, such as your purchase history or location, has value just like money. Be thoughtful about who gets that information and how it’s collected through apps and websites. THINK: Own your online presence and think about the consequences of your online actions by thinking before posting about yourself or others. Consider what a post reveals, who might see it, and how it could be perceived now and in the future. CONNECT: Keep a clean machine and enjoy the internet. Set the privacy and security settings on web services and devices to your comfort level for information sharing; and WHEREAS, Delaware’s DigiKnow Campaign is aimed at increasing the understanding of cyber threats and empowering the public to be safer and more secure online. Awareness of computer security essentials will improve the security of the City of Dover's information infrastructure and economy. NOW, THEREFORE, I, ROBIN R. CHRISTIANSEN, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF DOVER, DELAWARE do hereby proclaim October 2023 as Cybersecurity Awareness Month in the City of Dover and urge all citizens to learn about cybersecurity and put that knowledge into practice. On behalf of the Mayor and Council, Mayor Christiansen presented the proclamation to Mr. Larry Josefowski, IT Director. PROCLAMATION - FIRE PREVENTION WEEK The City Clerk read the following Proclamation into the record: WHEREAS, the City of Dover is committed to ensuring the safety and security of all those living in and visiting our city, and fire is a serious public safety concern both locally and nationally. The National Fire Protection Association’s 2023 Fire Prevention Week theme is, “Cooking safety starts with YOU! Pay attention to fire prevention”. The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) has been the official sponsor of Fire Prevention Week for more than 101 years. Fire Prevention Week is the longest-running US public health observance on record; and WHEREAS, this year’s focus is on cooking safety and educating the public about simple but important steps that they can make to help reduce the risk of fire when cooking at home and keeping themselves and those around them safe; and WHEREAS, according to the NFPA, cooking is the leading cause of house fires, with nearly half (49%) of all house fires involving cooking equipment; cooking is also the leading cause of injuries occurring in house fires. Unattended cooking is the leading cause of cooking fires and related deaths. In addition, NFPA data shows that cooking is the only major cause of fire that resulted in more fires and fire deaths in 2014-2018 than in 1980-1984. These numbers tell us that more public awareness is needed around when and where cooking hazards exist, along with ways to prevent them. This year’s Fire Prevention Week campaign will work to promote tips, guidelines, and recommendations that can help significantly reduce the risk of having a kitchen fire; and WHEREAS, always keep a close eye on what you’re cooking. For foods with longer cooking times, such as those that are simmering or baking, set a timer to help monitor them carefully. Clear the cooking area of combustible items and keep anything away that can burn, such as dish towels, Page 10

Item #4. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25, 2023 _____ PAGE 3 oven mitts, food packaging, and paper towels. Turn the pot handles toward the back of the stove. Keep a lid nearby when cooking. If a small grease fire starts, slide the lid over the pan and turn off the burner. Create a “kid and pet-free zone” of at least three feet (one meter) around the cooking area and anywhere else hot food or drink is prepared or carried. NOW, THEREFORE, I, ROBIN R. CHRISTIANSEN, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF DOVER, DELAWARE do hereby proclaim October 2023 as Cybersecurity Awareness Month in the City of Dover and urge all citizens to learn about cybersecurity and put that knowledge into practice. On behalf of the Mayor and Council, Mayor Christiansen presented the proclamation to Fire Chief David Carey. PROCLAMATION - COMMUNITY PLANNING MONTH The City Clerk read the following Proclamation into the record: WHEREAS, the City of Dover Planning and Inspection Department works to improve the well- being of all people living in our community by taking a comprehensive perspective. This approach leads to safer, more resilient, more equitable, and more prosperous communities. We celebrate the role that Planning and Inspections play in creating a great community each October with National Community Planning Month; and WHEREAS, the City of Dover Planning and Inspection Department is more important than ever as our community continues to navigate the disruptive changes brought about by the pandemic. From economic development and transportation planning to reinventing what Dover looks like post-COVID-19, this October shares how Planning and Inspections is leading the way forward for our community; and WHEREAS, the goal of Planning and Inspections is to maximize the health, safety, and economic well-being of all people living in the City of Dover. This involves thinking about how we can move around our community, how we can attract and retain thriving businesses, where we want to live, and opportunities for recreation. Planning and Inspections help create communities of lasting value. NOW, THEREFORE, I, ROBIN R. CHRISTIANSEN, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF DOVER, DELAWARE, do hereby proclaim October 2023 as Community Planning Month in the City of Dover and encourage all citizens to join me in recognizing the participation and dedication of the staff of the City of Dover Department of Planning and Inspections, members of the City of Dover Planning Commission, the valuable contributions made by other community and regional planners and our partner agencies at the State and County levels. We extend our heartfelt thanks for the continued commitment to public service by these professional and private citizens. On behalf of the Mayor and Council, Mayor Christiansen presented the proclamation to Mrs. Mary Ellen Gray, Director of Planning and Community Development, Councilperson Tricia K. Arndt, and members of the planning department staff. PROCLAMATION - HALLOWEEN TRICK-OR-TREAT The City Clerk read the following Proclamation into the record: WHEREAS, the children of the City of Dover enjoy the fun and festivities associated with the observance of the Halloween Trick-or-Treat custom of emerging from their homes as ghosts, Page 11

Item #4. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25, 2023 _____ PAGE 4 witches, princesses, cartoon characters, caped crusaders, or action heroes and traveling with friends and family door to door throughout the neighborhood to gather treats; and WHEREAS, Children ages 12 and under may participate in Trick-or-Treating in small groups, ages will be strictly enforced. Parents must accompany their children throughout their journeys in celebrating Halloween Trick-or-Treat. Motorists are urged to drive with extra caution and to be ever watchful of our youngsters making their rounds; and WHEREAS, it is requested that residents indicate their willingness to welcome children by keeping their porch or exterior lights on and that youngsters call only on homes that are lit. NOW, THEREFORE, I, ROBIN R. CHRISTIANSEN, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF DOVER, DELAWARE do hereby proclaim that the Halloween Trick or Treat observance be held on Tuesday, the 31st day of October 2023, between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. in the City of Dover and urge all residents, both young and old, to make this a happy and safe occasion for our children. On behalf of the Mayor and Council, Mayor Christiansen presented the proclamation to Miss Liliana Burgos. PROCLAMATION – PUBLIC POWER WEEK The City Clerk read the following Proclamation into the record: WHEREAS, we, the citizens of the City of Dover, place a high value on local choices over community services and therefore have chosen to operate a community-owned, not-for-profit electric utility and, as customers and owners of our electric utility, have a direct say in utility operations and policies; and WHEREAS, the City of Dover Electric provides our homes, businesses, schools, social services, and local government agencies with reliable, efficient, and safe electricity employing sound business practices designed to ensure the best possible service at not-for-profit rates; and WHEREAS, the City of Dover Electric is a valuable community asset that contributes to the well- being of local citizens through energy efficiency, customer service, environmental protection, economic development, safety awareness; and WHEREAS, the City of Dover Electric is a dependable and trustworthy institution whose local operations provide many consumer protections and continue to make our community a better place to live, work, and play; and WHEREAS, the City of Dover Electric will continue to work to bring low-cost, safe, reliable, and sustainable electricity to community homes and businesses just as it has since 1899, the year when the utility was created to serve all the citizens of the City of Dover, DE. WHEREAS, the week of Oct. 1-7, be designated Public Power Week to recognize the people behind public power at the City of Dover Electric for their contributions to the community and to educate customer owners, policymakers, and employees on the benefits of public power. NOW, THEREFORE, I, ROBIN R. CHRISTIANSEN, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF DOVER, Page 12

Item #4. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25, 2023 _____ PAGE 5 st th DELAWARE do hereby proclaim October 1 -7 , 2023, as Public Power Week in the City of Dover and urge all residents to express their heartfelt appreciation to all the men and women who so diligently serve to ensure that electrical power continues to flow to the homes and business of this city. On behalf of the Mayor and Council, Mayor Christiansen presented the proclamation to Electric Director, Paul Waddell, Shawn Burgett, and Chris Vinson. PROCLAMATION – GFWC DELAWARE STEP-UP TO END HUNGER DAY OF SERVICE The City Clerk read the following Proclamation into the record: WHEREAS, the General Federation of Women’s Club Delaware is a 126-year-old, 1,000-member strong volunteer community service organization with 21 clubs in Delaware communities and is a member of the state organization of the General Federation of Women’s Club (GFWC). GFWC Delaware has long partnered with food insecurity organizations throughout Delaware to provide meals, non-perishable food, and food kits for those with food insecurities, including veterans and their families, the homeless, fire victims, transient citizens, and school students; and WHEREAS, the GFWC is an international organization that has designated Saturday, September 30, 2023, as the GFWC National Day of Service for the state organizations and club members to create awareness of the critical issue of food insecurities, hunger, and food safety within the United States; and WHEREAS, the GFWC’s Dover Century Club and Blue Hen Chicks share a mission “to enhance the lives of others through volunteer services”; and WHEREAS, the GFWC’s Dover Century Club and Blue Hen Chicks are sponsoring a food drive to benefit The Salvation Army and the Disabled American Veterans. NOW, THEREFORE, I, ROBIN R. CHRISTIANSEN, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF DOVER, DELAWARE do hereby proclaim September 30, 2023, as GFWC Delaware Step Up to End Hunger Day of Service in the City of Dover and urge all citizens to participate by donating non- perishable food items on September 30, 2023, at 40 The Green, Dover, from 9 a.m. to 2 p.m. On behalf of the Mayor and Council, Mayor Christiansen presented the proclamation to Dr. Pillsbury, Jerry Traver, Phyllis Milano, and Trish Rodriguez. PROCLAMATION – NATIONAL HISPANIC AMERICAN HERITAGE MONTH The City Clerk read the following Proclamation into the record: WHEREAS, during National Hispanic Heritage Month, the U.S. government celebrates the countless contributions of more than 60 million Hispanic Americans, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. This makes up 18.9% of the total population. Hispanic Americans are the largest minority group in the United States today, and generations of Hispanic Americans have consistently helped make our country strong and prosperous. Hispanic Americans embody the best of our American values, including commitment to faith, family, and country. The Hispanic American community has left an indelible mark on our government, culture, and economy; and WHEREAS, Latinas and Latinos have always held significant roles throughout the City of Dover's Page 13

Item #4. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25, 2023 _____ PAGE 6 history, dating all the way back to the American Revolution. Representation matters. The Hispanic/Latino community continues to shape our city as business owners, activists, artists, public servants, leaders, educators, laborers, colleagues, friends, and much more in our community. From serving in the U.S. military at the Dover Air Force Base, the City of Dover's Hispanic community brings a rich cultural heritage representing many countries, ethnicities, and religious traditions with contribute to the City of Dover's future; and WHEREAS, the 2023 National Hispanic Heritage Month theme, “Driving Prosperity, Power, and Progress in America” pays tribute to the immense economic and political strides Hispanics have made in the City of Dover. Hispanic Heritage Month is an opportunity to shine a spotlight on the unique voices and experiences of Hispanic/Latin City of Dover citizens and recognize their history, journeys, and achievements. NOW, THEREFORE, I, ROBIN R. CHRISTIANSEN, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF DOVER, DELAWARE do hereby proclaim September 15 through October 15, 2023, as Hispanic Heritage Month in the City of Dover and urge all citizens to be part of the celebration. Dive Deep into the stories, save the flavors, and dance to the rhythms all month long. On behalf of the Mayor and Council, Mayor Christiansen presented the proclamation to Anthony Velazquez. PUBLIC HEARING – SALE AND DISPOSITION OF EXCESS REAL PROPERTY – 55 LOOCKERMAN STREET PLAZA During their Regular meeting of August 14, 2023, members of Council approved the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee’s recommendation of July 25, 2023, with regard to 55 Loockerman Street Plaza, as follows: 1. Determine that the property is excess property; 2. Authorize the City Manager to convey the excess property in accordance with Chapter 2, Section 2-422 d – Standard Method of Disposition unless requested by the City Council to dispose in accordance with Chapter 2, Section e – Exception to Standard Method of Disposition; and 3. Authorize the City Manager’s office to negotiate the final sale prices. Notice of the public hearing was properly advertised for this time and place. Mr. David S. Hugg, III, City Manager, updated members of council on the status of 55 Loockerman Street Plaza. Mr. Hugg explained that after the public hearing, they will consider the fourteen (14) proposals that have been received for the renovation and sale of the property at 55 Loockerman Street Plaza. Responding to Mr. Sudler. Mr. Hugg explained that the public hearing requirements are for the ad to be run at least once a week for two weeks in a local newspaper. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Hugg confirmed that there were fourteen (14) bids placed by individuals, firms, and businesses that toured the property, met with the broker, spoke to staff about zoning and other issues, and submitted everything from a letter of intent to an actual multi-page proposal. Mr. Hugg explained that the list has been narrowed down to three (3) or four (4) bids that best meet the needs of the city that will be brought back before council. Council President Hare declared the public hearing open. Mr. Ennio Emanuel, Walker Road, stated that he is glad that the city is disposing of the building, and it will be a great asset to the community. He further stated that he hopes that it is going to have Page 14

Item #4. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25, 2023 _____ PAGE 7 over 400 people every weekend. He stated that 400 people, on average, attend their church every Sunday. Mr. Ed Perez, 88 Dorothy Lane, stated that he attends Maranatha Church and used to work as part of the Economic Development team for the City of Dover. He stated that he knows the building and the area well. Mr. Perez stated he is in favor of the proposal as part of the redevelopment of the downtown. Ms. Sue Harris, 241 Pine Street, stated that she has concerns because the public is only going to have input on the three (3) that have been chosen out of fourteen (14). Mr. Sudler inquired about whether there has been a discrepancy or just some questions about the process and whether the public should be involved in the selection process in regard to the criteria used and whether it is standard or optional. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Mr. Hugg explained that the code provides several options for the disposal of surplus properties, one of which requires a public hearing to receive citizen input. Mr. Hugg further explained that this is not something that is typically done in the sense that they have requested proposals from a variety of people, there were no restrictions on who could ask to see the building, make a proposal, or talk to the broker of record. Mr. Hugg stated it was a totally open process for anybody who was interested, whether they lived in the city or not, whether they were a local business or not if they were interested. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Mr. Hugg explained that typically the sales of properties in the city are either relatively small parcels, like those on the CCW agenda tomorrow night, or there are parcels, such as in the Garrison Oak Business Park where we are working through a broker selling a property to someone for a specific purpose. Mr. Hugg stated that when he comes back to council, hopefully at the next council meeting, he will give a quick summary of all the proposals and then specifically focus on the proposal that they are recommending and the criteria that were used, including value, time, number of jobs, tax revenue, etc. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Mr. Hugg explained that this is an unusual opportunity for the city to sell a piece of property for redevelopment purposes and that there is no specific requirement in the code except if we choose to sell through public sale. Mr. Hugg explained it is difficult because some people will show up supporting a proposal they submitted as one of the applicants, and that can get complicated. Responding to Mr. Hare, Mr. Hugg explained that it is the pleasure of council whether there will be an opportunity for the public to speak at the next meeting. Mr. Hugg stated that there is nothing that states a public hearing is required, however, it will be a public presentation, and council can allow anyone to speak. Mr. Sudler moved to reaffirm the authorization given to the City Manager to convey the excess property in accordance with Chapter 2, Section 2-422 d – Standard Method of Disposition and to authorize the City Manager’s office to negotiate a final price. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lewis and carried unanimously. ADOPTION OF MINUTES - SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 23, 2023 The Minutes of the Special Council Meeting of August 23, 2023, were unanimously approved by motion of Mr. Rocha, seconded by Mr. Sudler, and bore the written approval of Mayor Page 15

Item #4. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25, 2023 _____ PAGE 8 Christiansen. ADOPTION OF MINUTES - SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 11, 2023 The Minutes of the Special Council Meeting of September 11, 2023, were unanimously approved by motion of Mr. Rocha, seconded by Mr. Sudler, and bore the written approval of Mayor Christiansen. ADOPTION OF MINUTES - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 11, 2023 The Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of September 11, 2023, were unanimously approved by motion of Mr. Rocha, seconded by Mr. Sudler, and bore the written approval of Mayor Christiansen. COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - SEPTEMBER 12, 2023 The Council Committee of the Whole met on September 12, 2023, at 6:07 p.m. with Council President Hare presiding. Members of Council present were Mr. Anderson, Ms. Arndt, Mr. Boggerty, Mr. Lewis, Mr. Neil, Dr. Pillsbury, Mr. Rocha, and Mr. Sudler (arrived at 6:10 p.m.). Mayor Christiansen was also present. Civilian members present for their Committee meetings were Mr. Iriowen (Utility), Mr. Shevock (via WebEx), and Ms. Smith (Legislative, Finance, and Administration). Mr. Pugh (Utility) was absent. UTILITY COMMITTEE The Utility Committee met with Chairman Rocha presiding. Adoption of Agenda Mr. Neil moved for adoption of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Boggerty, and unanimously carried. GIS Utility Network Wastewater Upgrade – Sole Source Vendor (Jason Lyon, Water/Wastewater Director) Mr. Jason Lyon, Director of Water and Wastewater reviewed the background and analysis of the GIS Utility Network Wastewater Upgrade. Staff recommended awarding the contract to Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc. (ESRI), for the GIS Utility Network Wastewater Upgrade, for the amount of $138,700.) Responding to Mr. Boggerty, Mr. Lyon stated that ESRI has proprietary rights over the infrastructure that is used for the GIS platform. The City of Dover has been working with ESRI for many years, but Mr. Lyon stated that he is not sure when the agreement with them started. Mr. Lyon stated that he could research when the initial agreement with ESRI may have started. Ms. Arndt stated that she has worked with ESRI in the past, and they are known as the go-to as far as GIS platforms. Dr. Iriowen stated that he uses the ESRI platform with his graduate students, and they are very good to work with. Page 16

Item #4. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25, 2023 _____ PAGE 9 Mr. Neil moved to recommend approval of the staff’s recommendation. The motion was seconded by Mr. Anderson and unanimously carried. By consent agenda, Mr. Rocha moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Sudler and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. Mr. Rocha moved for adjournment of the Utility Committee meeting, hearing no objections the meeting adjourned at 7:02 p.m. LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE The Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee met with Chairman Anderson presiding. Adoption of Agenda Mr. Neil moved for adoption of the agenda, seconded by Dr. Pillsbury, and unanimously carried. Authorization to Purchase – Replacement of Squad 2 (Chief David Carey, Dover Fire Department) Chief David Carey, Dover Fire Department, reviewed the background and analysis regarding the Authorization to Purchase – Replacement of Squad 2. Staff recommended approving the purchase of a Squad 2 replacement. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Ms. Peddicord stated that Chief Carey, the City Manager, and she had met to discuss the financing options. Ms. Peddicord stated that they are looking to save the city as much money as possible, while still getting the equipment that is needed. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Chief Carey stated that the current truck is put up for sale and sold to the highest bidder. The money collected from the sale is then used to equip the new truck. For example, Engine 1, was bought almost two years ago, and the equipment for it cost $97,000. The truck that it replaced was sold for $75,000, so $22,000 of the equipment money came from the fire company’s funds. Those funds are received through grants and aid from the state, county appropriation, and fund drives. Responding to Ms. Smith, Chief Carey stated that at the last meeting, it was approved to replace the truck that is on the current fiscal budget and would be delivered in 28 months. Chief Carey stated that the truck being presented now would be replaced in three years but by signing the contract now it will save the city $336,000. Responding to Ms. Arndt, Chief Carey stated that if the purchase of Squad 2 is approved the next truck would not be purchased until 2029. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Chief Carey stated that signing the contract only guarantees the price and does not affect the parts. Chief Carey stated that there will be a redesign in 2025 for emissions. There is a change in the engines and what the Page 17

Item #4. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25, 2023 _____ PAGE 10 EPA is requiring for emissions, however, the two trucks will fall into that so the price increase will not change the cost of the trucks. Mr. Sudler moved to recommend authorizing the purchase of Squad 2, as recommended by staff. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lewis and unanimously carried. By consent agenda, Mr. Rocha moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Sudler and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. Evaluation of Bids – Street Program FY2023C (Jason Lyon, Water/Wastewater Director) Mr. Jason Lyon, Director of Water and Wastewater reviewed the background and analysis of the Evaluation of Bids – Street Program FY2023C. Staff recommended awarding the contract to Grassbusters Landscaping Co., Inc. for the City of Dover FY2023C Street and Alley Program, Bid #23-0020PW, for the amount of $933,294. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Mr. Lyon stated that for clarification, Mr. Wolfgang is in the Central Services department, and they do the bids for the entire city. Mr. Lyon stated that on the website there is a big button called Purchasing. When you click on that you will see Open Bids/RFPS, and as a contractor or vendor, you can see what is available. Furthermore, you can click on the other button called Closed Bids/RFPS and see who was awarded the bid and who submitted bids on projects for the last three years. Ms. Smith stated that she would like to recommend that the city have an orientation for vendors to understand the process of bidding with the city. Ms. Smith stated that maybe that would help with getting the word out and understanding what the process is all about. Mr. Bobby Wilson, 32 West Loockerman Street, Suite 101D, stated that there needs to be a mandatory pre-bid meeting. Mr. Wilson stated that using the website will only provide information about the contractor who was selected. Mr. Wilson stated that by holding a mandatory pre-bid meeting, they can build relationships with the different contractors and keep the business in Dover. Mr. Wilson stated that the larger contractors can hire the smaller contractors and provide people in the city with employment. Responding to Ms. Smith, Mr. Anderson stated that she was correct and that it depends on whether the company has the capacity to handle the project themselves. Most contractors have a number of subcontractors because most companies in a larger contract do not handle everything alone. Mr. Anderson stated that Mr. Wilson is right and that there is a way to encourage looking at local employment for a percentage of that. Mr. Anderson stated that it is complicated because the taxpayer’s money must be safeguarded in the best deal on one side while looking at the local community and making sure that people get jobs and advance their small businesses on the other side. Page 18

Item #4. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25, 2023 _____ PAGE 11 Mr. Neil moved to recommend the use of Grassbusters Landscaping, as recommended by staff. The motion was seconded by Dr. Pillsbury and unanimously carried. By consent agenda, Mr. Rocha moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Sudler and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. Proposed Ordinance #2023-10 – Amending Chapter 114 – Vegetation, Article II – Weeds (Mary Ellen Gray, Planning and Community Development Director) Ms. Mary Ellen Gray, Director of Planning and Community Development reviewed the background and analysis of the Proposed Ordinance #2023-10. Staff recommended amending the code as requested. Responding to Mr. Rocha, Ms. Gray stated that if the ordinance was implemented then there would be an additional two-day grace period to the violation process. Ms. Gray stated that they would have two days to mow the grass and if they did not then the summons part of the ordinance would start and that would be a seven-day period. They would then have seven days to mow the grass and if they did not then the vendor would mow the grass. The City of Dover’s cost is based on the State of Delaware’s contracted vendor. Responding to Mr. Rocha, Eddie Kopp, Chief Code Enforcement Officer stated that the previous amount for grass-cutting services was $50 an hour. Responding to Mr. Rocha, Mr. Kopp stated that the vendor, due to the cost of everything going up, raised the fees earlier in the year to $65 an hour, and that vendor is Priority Services. Priority Services is the same vendor contracted through the State which is why code enforcement uses them. Responding to Mr. Rocha, Mr. Kopp stated that it is reflected in the new ordinance, the language used in Appendix F is a minimum of $50. Responding to Mr. Rocha, Mr. Kopp stated that it is trespassing if code enforcement were to walk onto a property for any reason to obtain a violation. Mr. Kopp stated with the new door hanger, is an eight-inch ruler which the constituent can use to measure their own grass and then contact code enforcement to challenge their decision. If that person contacts code enforcement, they can then go out and see what height the grass measures at without trespassing. Responding to Mr. Rocha, Mr. Kopp stated that code enforcement takes the violation picture from the public right of way. As long as code enforcement is posting the property and not obtaining any violation or any further violations, then they are not trespassing. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Mr. Kopp stated that the door hanger would be placed on the property’s door as the first warning, giving the owner 48 hours to cut the grass. If the grass is not cut in 48 hours, then the first citation will be sent via Page 19

Item #4. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25, 2023 _____ PAGE 12 certified mail. When the owner has failed to cut the grass and the final citations have been issued, code enforcement waits seven days from the green receipt of mailing that is stamped with the postmark from the United States Postal Service to schedule the grass to be cut. Mr. Sudler stated that he would like to see code enforcement send out a mailer with the electric bill giving constituents a 60-day notice of the ordinance change. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Mr. Kopp stated that the door hanger will have the date and time that the violation was observed as well as a follow-up date, time, and the inspector’s information. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Mr. Kopp stated that the contractor gives a set price at the beginning of the year for the entire year. The only time the rate would be higher would be in the event that a property is a few acres, and the contractor has to spend several hours cutting it. Then they may bill the city at the rate times how many hours spent cutting the property. Mr. Rocha recommended that it be included on the door hanger that if someone has an extenuating circumstance, they are to reach out to code enforcement and communicate with them. Ms. Arndt stated that by adding the verbiage that the cost be tied to the contracted rate, it might be considered to add a percentage of an administrative fee to cover the cost of distributing the door hanger, distributing the violation, and any of the other related paperwork. The administrative fee would allow the city to recoup some of the cost associated with the staff’s time as well as the fee to mow the lawn. Responding to Ms. Gray, Mayor Christiansen stated that the language should state the city’s contracted rate. Mr. Neil moved to replace the language to say, at the city’s contracted rate. The motion was seconded by Mr. Rocha. Responding to Ms. Arndt, Ms. Gray stated that she would have to review the code as well as check with the City Solicitor. Mr. Neil moved to recommend replacing the language at the city’s contracted rate. The motion was seconded by Mr. Rocha and unanimously carried. By consent agenda, Mr. Rocha moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Sudler and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. Mr. Sudler moved to give constituents a 60-day notice of the amendment to the ordinance via the electric bill and other means deemed appropriate by the City Manager. The motion was seconded by Mr. Rocha and carried with Ms. Arndt voting no. By consent agenda, Mr. Rocha moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Sudler and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. Page 20

Item #4. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25, 2023 _____ PAGE 13 Actuary Services Contract – Pension(s) and Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) (Lori Peddicord, Controller/Treasurer) Ms. Lori Peddicord, Controller/Treasure reviewed the background and analysis of the Actuary Services Contract. Staff recommended awarding a five-year contract, the first year of work is to occur beginning FY24, to Bolton for valuation services totaling $108,100 as quoted in their response to the City of Dover RFP#23-0017FN – Pension and Other Post- Employment Benefits (OPEB) Actuarial Services and Benefit Consulting.) Mr. Hare moved to recommend awarding the contract to Bolton, as recommended by staff. The motion was seconded by Mr. Sudler and unanimously carried. By consent agenda, Mr. Rocha moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Sudler and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. Proposed Ordinance #2023-09 – Project Carry-Forward Budget Balances/Proposed Budget Amendments (Lori Peddicord, Controller/Treasurer) Ms. Lori Peddicord, Controller/Treasure reviewed the background and analysis of the Proposed Ordinance #2023-09. Staff recommended approval of the proposed budget amendments totaling $37,845,241 for Fiscal Year 2024 and adoption of Proposed Ordinance #2023-09. Mr. Hare moved to recommend approval of the proposed budget amendments, as recommended by staff. The motion was seconded by Mr. Rocha and carried by a roll call vote of ten (10) yes and one (1) absent (Neil). By consent agenda, Mr. Rocha moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Sudler and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. Mr. Anderson moved for adjournment of the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee meeting, hearing no objection the meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m. Mr. Hare moved for adjournment of the Council Committee of the Whole meeting, hearing no objection the meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m. By consent agenda, Mr. Rocha moved for acceptance of the Council Committee of the Whole Report, seconded by Mr. Sudler and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. APPOINTMENTS/REAPPOINTMENTS – RECOMMENDED BY THE COUNCIL PRESIDENT HARE – DOVER HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION – THREE-YEAR TERMS TO EXPIRE FEBRUARY 2026 Paul Fleming – First District Page 21

Item #4. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25, 2023 _____ PAGE 14 Joseph C. Simmons – First District Alan Gaddis – Third District Wanda Mullen – Third District By consent agenda, Mr. Rocha moved for approval of the following reappointments to the Dover Human Relations Commission. The motion was seconded by Mr. Sudler and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. BUY-OUT OF GARRISON ENERGY CENTER LLC LEASE - LOT 7 GARRISON OAK Mr. Hugg, City Manager, reviewed the background regarding the buy-out of the Garrison Energy Center LLC lease. Mr. Hugg explained that it is complicated due to the nature of the original lease. Mr. Hugg stated that the city has been actively marketing the lots at the Garrison Oak Business Park. He further stated that they have sold and recorded lots # 11, 8, and 3 and hope to go to settlement next month. Mr. Hugg explained that back in August 2021, the City of Dover entered into a lease with Garrison Energy Center. The lease involves approximately 36 acres of land. Lot seven (7) is one of two very large lots at the back of the park that the city has retained the title to. The lease involves a base payment plus an indexed adjustment based on the cost of living, and an index adjustment based on what they call a convenience fee. Mr. Hugg explained that this generated a little over $40,000 in actual revenue over the last year. Mr. Anderson moved to authorize the City Manager to enter into buyout negotiations as part of the sale of Lots 5, 6, and 7. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lewis and carried unanimously. (Mr. Neil absent) FIRST READING - PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2023-09 Council President Hare reminded the public that copies of the proposed ordinance were at the entrance of the Council Chambers, on the City’s website at www.cityofdover.com under “Government” or by contacting the City Clerk’s Office at (302) 736-7008 or cityclerk@dover.de.us Final action by Council on the proposed ordinance will take place on the Council Meeting of October 9, 2023. In accordance with Section 1-9 of the Dover Code, Council acknowledged the First Reading of the proposed Ordinance as read by the City Clerk, by title only, as follows: ORDINANCE #2023-09 PROJECT CARRY-FORWARD BUDGET BALANCES/PROPOSED BUDGET AMENDMENTS FINAL READING - PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2023-06 The First Reading of the Proposed Ordinance was accomplished during the Council Meeting of September 11, 2023. Council President Hare reminded members of the public that copies of the proposed ordinance were available at the entrance of the Council Chambers or on the City’s website at www.cityofdover.com under “Government.” Ms. Arndt moved that the Final Reading of the proposed ordinance be acknowledged by title only, seconded by Mr. and unanimously carried. (The First Reading of the proposed ordinance was accomplished during the Council Meeting of September 11, 2023.) Page 22

Item #4. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25, 2023 _____ PAGE 15 By motion of Mr. Lewis, seconded by Mr. Rocha, Council, by a unanimous roll call vote (Neil absent), adopted Ordinance #2023-06, as follows: BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: That Chapter 106 – TRAFFIC AND VEHICLES, Article I – IN GENERAL, be amended by inserting the text indicated in bold, blue font and deleting the text indicated in red strikeout as follows: Section 106-17 – Truck routes. (a) Except as hereinafter provided, no commercial vehicle having three or more axles shall be operated on any street in the city except on a “truck route”. (b) The following roads are designated as “truck routes” within the city: (1) U.S. Route 13; (2) Bay Road; (3) Governors Avenue; (4) Saulsbury Road; (5) Dover-Kenton Road; (6) Persimmon Tree Lane; (7) Delaware Route 1; (8) Scarborough Road; (9) McKee Road; (10) South Little Creek Road; (11) Leipsic Road; (12) Denny’s Road (13) Delaware Route 8; (14) North Street (from Mifflin Road to South Governors Avenue); (15) POW/MIA Parkway; (16) White Oak Road; (17) Hazlettville Road; (c) This section shall not apply to any commercial vehicles with three or more axles: (1) Making a local delivery to or a pickup from a place in the city incapable of being directly accessed from a designated “truck route”. The driver must have available proof of intended place of delivery or pickup and: a. If entering the city limits, the driver shall use the most direct practical route from a designated truck route to and from the delivery or pickup, and b.If originating from within the city limits, the driver shall use the most direct practical route to and from the place of delivery or pickup within the city and/or the most direct practical route to a designated “truck route” if going outside the city limits. (2) Owned by or leased to the city or any volunteer fire company or emergency response organization when engaged in official business, including, by way of example, those vehicles of any fire department or any police department or agency, or to any town or state public works department or agency. (3) Owned by, leased to, or operated by any public utility company (or its subcontractor) while engaged in public utility operations. (4) Garbage and solid waste haulers in the course of their business operations. Page 23

Item #4. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25, 2023 _____ PAGE 16 (5) Operated on any city street officially designated as a detour route where such vehicle could otherwise be lawfully operated upon the street for which such detour is established. ADOPTED: September 25, 2023 FINAL READING - PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2023-07 The First Reading of the Proposed Ordinance was accomplished during the Council Meeting of September 11, 2023. Council President Hare reminded members of the public that copies of the proposed ordinance were available at the entrance of the Council Chambers or on the City’s website at www.cityofdover.com under “Government.” Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Anderson explained that for example with the Dover Human Relations Commission, council specifically decided in the code that it shall not be for compensation. Mr. Anderson stated that he is open to the discussion of paying all committee members, as that could help with recruitment. Mr. Anderson further explained that the other committees that are not compensated are those that don’t meet on a regular basis. Mr. Anderson stated if a committee meets quarterly or less, they are not compensated and if a committee meets more than quarterly, then the committee receives compensation. Mr. Anderson explained that the Construction and Property Board Maintenance Board of Appeals meets almost monthly and should be treated the same as the other monthly committees, such as Board of Adjustment, Planning Commission, and council committees. Mr. Anderson stated that he feels it should be discussed separately because part of the discussion is whether it should only meet quarterly, and they set it quarterly. He further explained that historically they have had a number of special meetings. Mr. Lewis explained that he cannot support this ordinance as proposed, due to the feeling that it is contradictory and prejudicial. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Anderson stated there is a difference in the code between the advisory committees and council/mayoral appointed committees and this amendment addresses a council appointed committee. Mr. Anderson explained that this ordinance is narrowly tailored to correct two oversights in the code. Mr. Rocha moved that the Final Reading of the proposed ordinance be acknowledged by title only, seconded by Mr. Boggerty, and unanimously carried. (The First Reading of the proposed ordinance was accomplished during the Council Meeting of September 11, 2023.) By motion of Mr. Anderson, seconded by Mr. Rocha, Council, by roll call vote of six (6) yes (Anderson, Boggerty, Pillsbury, Arndt, Rocha, and Hare), two (2) no (Sudler and Lewis), and one (1) absent (Neil), adopted Ordinance #2023-07, as follows: BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: That Chapter 2 – Administration, Article II - City Council, Section 2-201 - Compensation and expenses for mayor, council, and other elected or appointed officials be amended to read as follows: Page 24

Item #4. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25, 2023 _____ PAGE 17 Sec. 2-201. - Compensation and expenses for mayor, council, and other elected or appointed officials. (a) Fees established. In accordance with section 12 of the Charter, authorizing the council to establish compensation and expenses for the mayor, council members, and other elected or appointed officials, the following fees are hereby established: (1) Mayor. The mayor shall receive an annual salary of $52,000.00 (FY 2023). In addition, the mayor shall receive an expense allotment of up to $5,000.00, to be included in the city's annual budget for miscellaneous expenses, to be reimbursed upon submission of receipts or proper documentation. Expenses in excess of this amount shall only be permitted by council approval. The mayor shall be entitled to all benefits customary to an employee of the city, except pension benefits, and sick and vacation leave. (2) Council members generally. Each council member shall receive an annual salary of 18,000.00 (FY 2023). The council president shall receive an annual salary of $23,000.00 (FY 2023). Council members shall receive reimbursement for actual and necessary expenses incurred when on official business as prescribed by ordinance or policy. (3) Board of assessment appeals. Each appointed member of the board sitting to hear appeals from the municipal assessment shall receive $75.00 per diem reimbursement for expenses for the preparation and attendance at each meeting of the board of assessment appeals. (4) Nonemployee election officers. Each person, not a city employee, appointed to serve as an election judge for any municipal election shall receive an amount set by city council for per diem reimbursement for each election attended. Each person chosen to serve as a clerical assistant for any municipal election shall receive an amount set by city council for per diem reimbursement for each election attended. (5) Employee election officers. Employees of the city appointed to serve as election judges or officials for any municipal election shall receive an amount set by city council for per diem reimbursement for expenses for each municipal election attended in addition to their regular salary. (6) Appointee to council committee. Each appointed member to any city council committee, not serving an elected term to any city office, shall receive $75.00 for preparation and attendance at each committee meeting to which the member is appointed. (7) Employee on council committee. Any city employee appointed to a council committee shall receive $25.00 for reimbursement for expenses per diem for each meeting attended, which is held after 5:00 p.m. on a scheduled workday or at any time on a weekend or city-approved holiday. (8) Planning commission. Each appointed member of the planning commission shall receive $100.00 per diem reimbursement for expenses to be paid monthly for preparation and attendance at each meeting of the planning commission. Page 25

Item #4. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25, 2023 _____ PAGE 18 (9) Board of adjustment. Each appointed member of the board of adjustment shall receive $75.00 per diem reimbursement for expenses to be paid monthly for preparation and attendance at each meeting of the board of adjustment. (10) Construction and property maintenance code board of appeals. Each appointed member of the construction and property maintenance code board of appeals shall receive $75.00 per diem reimbursement for preparation and attendance at each meeting of the construction and property maintenance code board of appeals. (Code 1981, § 2-70; Ord. of 9-14-1987; Ord. of 8-27-1990; Ord. of 11-26-1990, § 1; Ord. of 1-11- 1993; 45 Ord. of 6-27-1994; Ord. of 2-24-1997(2); Ord. of 1-10-2000; Ord. of 10-9-2000; Ord. of 1-22-2001; Ord. 46 of 6-24-2002; Ord. of 6-25-2007; Ord. No. 2009-16, 7-27-2009; Ord. No. 2009-23, 10-26-2009; Ord. No. 47 2009-17, 11-9-2009; Ord. No. 2017-09, 8-14-2017; Ord. No. 2019-18, 9-9-2019) ADOPTED: September 25, 2023 CITY MANAGER'S ANNOUNCEMENTS City Manager Hugg announced that Mary Ellen Gray, Planning and Community Development Director, has submitted her resignation from the City of Dover. Mr. Hugg stated that he would never stand in the way of someone advancing their career. Mr. Hugg stated that he has known Ms. Gray for a lot of years. He further explained that she is an outstanding planner and a perfectionist, and she clearly understands her role. Mr. Hugg explained that she has accomplished a lot in her short time here, including working on making our ordinances modern, contemporary, and flexible so that when issues arise, the city is not bound by old language and old thinking. Mr. Hugg expressed his appreciation for Ms. Gray and let her know how much he is going to miss her. MAYOR’S ANNOUNCEMENTS No announcements. COUNCIL MEMBERS' ANNOUNCEMENTS Ms. Arndt stated that Ms. Gray has moved the planning profession forward not just in the City of Dover, but in the state. Ms. Arndt further stated that Ms. Gray is recognized as being one of the best planners, and she appreciates her service. Mr. Anderson thanked Ms. Gray for her service to the city and wished her the best. He explained that it has been good working with her, and he appreciates her innovation, and intellect, and stated that she is going to do well wherever she is. Mr. Anderson then stated that there has been a lot of contact regarding two (2) items on the September 26, 2023, Council Committee of the Whole agenda. The first item is property disposition, and the second are next steps with the Delaware Marijuana Control Act. Mr. Anderson further explained that members of the community can attend in person, or they can submit comments in writing to cityclerk@dover.de.us to become part of the permanent record. Council President Hare asked that members of council consider canceling the second meeting in November due to people going away for the holiday weekend. Mr. Hare stated that it will be decided at a later meeting. Mr. Hare also stated that you never realize how old you are until you realize that you were flying KC 135 missions in Vietnam when Councilman Sudler was born. He further explained that Councilman Sudler will turn fifty on Wednesday, September 28, 2023. Page 26

Item #4. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25, 2023 _____ PAGE 19 Mr. Lewis wished Mr. Sudler a happy birthday. Everyone sang Happy Birthday to Mr. Sudler. Mr. Hare moved for adjournment of the Regular Council meeting, hearing no objection, the meeting adjourned at 8:09 p.m. ANDRIA L. BENNETT CITY CLERK All ordinances, resolutions, motions, and orders adopted by City Council during their Regular Meeting of September 25, 2023, are hereby approved. ROBIN R. CHRISTIANSEN MAYOR /ALB Page 27

Item #5. COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE The Council Committee of the Whole met on September 26, 2023, at 6:30 p.m. with Council President Hare presiding. Members of Council present were Mr. Anderson, Ms. Arndt, Mr. Boggerty, Mr. Lewis, Mr. Neil, Dr. Pillsbury, Mr. Rocha, and Mr. Sudler (left at 7:58 p.m.). Mayor Christiansen was also present. Civilian members present for their Committee meetings were Mr. Iriowen, and Mr. Pugh (Utility), Mr. Shevock (via WebEx), Ms. Smith (via WebEx) (Legislative, Finance, and Administration). ADOPTION OF AGENDA Mr. Neil moved for adoption of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Sudler and unanimously carried. UTILITY COMMITTEE The Utility Committee met with Chairman Rocha presiding. Adoption of Agenda Mr. Sudler moved for adoption of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Neil and unanimously carried. Customer Advance Agreement for Supply of Natural Gas Services at Garrison Oak Business Park (David S. Hugg III, City Manager) Mr. David S. Hugg III, City Manager reviewed the background and analysis of the Customer Advance Agreement for Supply of Natural Gas services at Garrison Oak Business Park. Staff recommended authorizing the City Manager to complete negotiations and execute the Customer Advance Agreement to facilitate the timely installation of gas services throughout the park. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Mr. Hugg stated that the wholesale market for natural gas has stabilized, and the numbers presented are based on Chesapeake’s current costs. The project is estimated to be done in ninety days. Responding to Mr. Neil, Mr. Hugg stated that by the end of the year, only two lots should be available. Responding to Mr. Iriowen, Mr. Hugg stated that the city owned ten lots in the Garrison Oak Business Park. Three of the lots were sold, and settled and the city has received the funds for them. They are a bakery, a cold storage facility, and a recycling facility. The other lots, except four and nine, are still open for sale. With the proposed agreement, Chesapeake will build the natural gas system rather than wait for the lots to be developed, and as customers hook up to the system the city will get a refund based on their usage. Page 28

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING SEPTEMBER 26, 2023 PAGE 2 Item #5. Mr. Neil moved to recommend approval of the staff’s recommendation. The motion was seconded by Mr. Boggerty and unanimously carried. Mr. Rocha moved for adjournment of the Utility Committee meeting, hearing no objections the meeting adjourned at 6:39 p.m. LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE The Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee met with Chairman Anderson presiding. Adoption of Agenda Mr. Neil moved for adoption of the agenda, seconded by Dr. Pillsbury and unanimously carried. Disposal of Fifteen Excess Properties (David S. Hugg III, City Manager) Mr. David S. Hugg, III, City Manager, reviewed the background and analysis regarding the Disposal of Fifteen Excess Properties. Staff recommended approval of the disposition of the properties as outlined. Responding to Ms. Arndt, Mr. Hugg stated that all of the properties have gone through the various departments to make sure that there are no easements, or that the city has not acquired the property for some special reason. Mr. Hugg stated that he would confirm any restrictions before bringing the final packet back to council. Responding to Ms. Arndt, Mr. Hugg stated that his recommendation would be to put the properties out at fair market value and council set a minimum price. Ms. Arndt stated that for a property that could be developed, she would recommend that it be offered at fair market value for a better return for the city. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Mr. Hugg stated that many of the properties were obtained through a monition sale or sheriff’s sale, which transfers a fee simple deed, and the city does not go back and do a deed search. Also, the city is certifying that they can deliver a fee simple title, but the burden is on the buyer to satisfy a deed search if they wish to. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Mr. Hugg stated that he has spoken with a few folks associated with Code Purple and other organizations, and anyone who has an interest in any of the properties can contact him for more information. Mr. Hugg explained city council has the authority to gift the properties since they are city assets and if council made a motion, he could honor that, otherwise, they can bid in the open market. Responding to Mr. Shevock, Mr. Hugg stated that the only person who could gain access to the landlocked properties would be the person who acquired the property. Mr. Hugg also stated that Page 29

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING SEPTEMBER 26, 2023 PAGE 3 Item #5. the property on College Road is surplus that was acquired as part of a utility easement and there is no right of way. Ceci Hoffman, 101 S. New Street, Dover, stated that she was doing research for the Pastor of Holy Trinity Church, and they would like to obtain property behind and on the side of the church. Ms. Hoffman stated that they could use the property to build a fence because they had the utilities on the side of the building destroyed. Pastor Sheila Lomax, 101 S. New Street, Dover, stated that she is a new Pastor at Holy Trinity Church and the church used to own the property beside them but somehow, they lost it. Pastor Lomax asked since they are a nonprofit if there was a way that the city could help them obtain that property. Pastor Lomax also stated that they would like to do an outreach program for the homeless and the kids in the area. Mr. Boggerty stated that he had reached out to a pastor from the church several months earlier and was never able to get in contact with them. Mr. Boggerty stated that he wants to help but that no action has been taken by the church, and it continues to be a blighted area of the city. Mr. Boggerty stated that he would like to see the church address the present issues and explained that there are funding opportunities as a nonprofit that are available to help them. Mr. Boggerty stated he is willing to help them in any way that they see fit. Pastor Leroy Bradshaw, 101 S. New Street, Dover, stated that they are trying to build a relationship with the people and build up the community. Pastor Bradshaw asked that council reconsider their decision as they are trying to help people physically and spiritually. Mr. Sudler expressed his support for the Holy Trinity Church representatives and stated that he is available to assist them in any way he can. Mr. Sudler also stated that they must put forth the necessary steps to do their part so that he can advocate for them. Michael Pugh, 31 Ann Avenue, Dover, stated that he would like the opportunity to bid on some of the properties and he believes that the community should be allowed to bid on them as well. Sue Harris, 241 Pine Street, Dover, stated that Code Purple is interested in the properties and will be reaching out to see if any of them fit their mission. Ms. Harris also stated that as the director of The People’s Community Center at People’s Church, they need other facilities to help the homeless. Ms. Harris stated that they are the only church that provides hot meals, a clothing closet, and a food pantry. Ms. Harris also stated that they need facilities to provide housing solutions so that the cycle can be broken. Mr. Hugg stated that he would like to recommend that council invite nonprofits to officially request any properties they might be interested in. Mr. Neil moved to refer the Disposal of Fifteen Excess Properties back to staff to include that staff recommendations include inviting nonprofits to express interest in any properties that are going to be disposed of. The motion was seconded by Mr. Sudler and unanimously carried. Page 30

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING SEPTEMBER 26, 2023 PAGE 4 Item #5. FY23 Edward Byrne Justice Assistance Grant Program – Joint Grant with Smyrna Police Department and Kent County (Thomas Johnson, Dover Police Chief) Mr. Thomas Johnson, Dover Police Chief, reviewed the background and analysis regarding the FY23 Edward Byrne Justice Assistance Grant Program. Staff recommended approval of the grant application. Mr. Sudler moved to recommend approval of the staff’s recommendation. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hare and unanimously carried. Discussion and Next Steps of Delaware House Bill 2 – Delaware Marijuana Control Act (David S. Hugg III, City Manager, and Mary Ellen Gray, Planning and Community Development Director) Mr. David S. Hugg, III, City Manager, and Ms. Mary Ellen Gray, Planning and Community Development Director, reviewed the background and analysis regarding the Delaware House Bill 2 – Delaware Marijuana Control Act. Committee Action Not Required. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Gray stated that there is only one medical dispensary, and that is Best Buds on Jefferic Boulevard. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Gray stated that the medical marijuana facilities are regulated under a separate act and regulations that went into effect in 2001. She stated that it is her understanding that the bill states that a medical marijuana facility can apply for a retail license however, they would then have to comply with both sets of regulations. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Ms. Gray stated that in her conversations with other municipalities, there is a general consensus that they are going out of the state to conduct research on what other municipalities have done in regard to the Marijuana Control Act. The Marijuana Control Act has a fifteen percent tax that goes straight to the state, and the city has the ability to add an additional tax. The city can add an additional tax, much like the lodging tax, which would be her recommendation. Ms. Gray also stated that the only restrictions that she has seen so far are similar to those of adult entertainment. No facilities can be within a certain number of feet of schools or churches, and the Control Act prohibits hours during certain holidays. Responding to Mr. Neil, Chief Johnson stated that typical things that law enforcement has seen as a consequence of the industry is an uptick in traffic injuries and fatalities related to intoxication. Any DUI association can show research about how alcohol and marijuana, when used at the same time, can act like an accelerant for one another and it is showing up in crash statistics after legalization. Chief Johnson stated that the second thing seen is burglaries of the marijuana businesses by the illegal trade to get the same product offered for sale legally. Chief Johnson also stated that groups that import marijuana to an area will adjust their prices to be competitive against the lawful market. Page 31

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING SEPTEMBER 26, 2023 PAGE 5 Item #5. Ms. Smith stated that she feels the city must be responsible and make marijuana less accessible as it may lead to addiction and mental health problems. Ms. Smith stated that she agrees with Councilman Sudler and that there is a need for some statistical data to support the pros and cons of regulations. Responding to Mr. Boggerty, Ms. Gray stated that the state has not come up with their regulations and there may be some security measures that they will require, however, the city could require additional security measures as a condition. Mr. Sudler stated that he is in support of the retail dispensary because it would limit the use of marijuana, which then runs the risk of it being laced with fentanyl. Ms. Arndt asked Ms. Gray to please provide council with background information on what zones in the zoning code might be appropriate for the four types; growing, processing, testing, and selling, as well as a list of what conditions council may want to consider imposing on those uses. Dina Vendetti, CDCC President, 435 North Dupont Highway, read a letter of support for the ban of all recreational marijuana establishments (Attachment #1). Responding to Mr. Sudler, Ms. Vendetti stated that she agrees with him and that the decisions need to be data-driven, and things are very much in line with what the chief mentioned. Ms. Vendetti also stated that there are more conversations that need to happen, and there is research that needs to be done. Responding to Mr. Boggerty, Ms. Vendetti stated that their prohibition is not for the use of recreational marijuana, it is for the manufacturing and sale. Ms. Vendetti also stated that the beach towns recognized that there was a potential for revenue, however, they asked themselves at what cost. Zoe Patchell, 218 N. State Street, Dover, stated that she is in attendance as a Dover resident, and would like council to oppose the ban on legal cannabis businesses within city limits. Ms. Patchell asked that council enact responsible and reasonable zoning ordinances as education and regulation is the best approach to the issue of regulating cannabis. Ms. Patchell explained that allowing cannabis business in Dover will help keep Dover competitive and create economic development for the city. Ms. Patchell stated that allowing the businesses will create well-paying employment opportunities, decrease the unemployment rate, which is higher in Dover than the rest of the state, and promote public safety. Ms. Patchell explained that research does show the areas surrounding cannabis businesses are safer on average due to the businesses employing a higher degree of security and surveillance. Ms. Patchell stated that a Rutgers University study shows that there is an average of 1.6% home price increase in municipalities that have allowed cannabis-related businesses. Nicole Chick, Puffster, 115 W. Loockerman Street, Dover, expressed her opposition to the ban of all recreational marijuana establishments within the city. Ms. Chick stated that marijuana is an all- natural medicine and plant that should be available to everyone. Ms. Chick expressed that small businesses like Puffster would benefit from becoming retail marijuana stores. Page 32

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING SEPTEMBER 26, 2023 PAGE 6 Item #5. Lizzie Golob, 20476 Asheville Drive, Millsboro, expressed her opposition to the ban of all recreational marijuana establishments within the city. Ms. Golob stated that she was prescribed multiple opiate medications for chronic pain after a car accident, and because of the cannabis plant, she has now been opiate-free for seven years. Ms. Golob stated that cannabis has helped her with things such as fibromyalgia, PTSD, and anxiety. Ms. Golob expressed that the human body has an endocannabinoid system, and when cannabis is consumed it helps regulate several functions of the body. Amber Ember, Puffster, 115 W. Loockerman Street, Dover, expressed her opposition to the ban of all recreational marijuana establishments within the city. Ms. Ember stated that Delaware House Bill 2 allows only thirty licenses to be awarded statewide, and approximately ten per county. Ms. Ember stated that the application process is very strict, requires a down payment, and that there can only be one recreational store allowed within one mile of each other. Ms. Ember stated that they will be using a competitive scoring process ranking applicants’ safety, security, expertise, and work environment, and revoking any licenses from stores that are not meeting the standards. Ms. Ember stated that Puffsters is a clean store with friendly associates who support local artists in Dover. Ms. Ember also stated that Puffsters pays to test their hemp products to ensure customers are receiving a safe and quality product and that they would like the opportunity to become a recreational dispensary. Vonderlear Smack, ACLU Campaign Manager, 1001 Whiteoak Road, Dover, read a letter of opposition to the ban of all recreational marijuana establishments (Attachment #2). Ms. Smack also briefed council on the ACLU’s 2018 research report entitled “The Tale of Two Countries: Racially Targeted Arrests in the Era of Marijuana Reform” (Attachment #3). Jared Stalnaker, Wyoming, expressed his opposition to the ban of all recreational marijuana establishments within the city. Mr. Stalnaker stated that a large scope of Dover’s economic business comes from the Dover NASCAR races and Firefly Festival, and they do not bring in the revenue that they used to. Mr. Stalnaker stated that the Dover economy should not be dependent on outside businesses, and Dover needs economic independence and that this would be a step forward in that direction. Benita Rufus Gassi, 208 E. Sewell Street, Felton, expressed her opposition to the ban of all recreational marijuana establishments within the city. Ms. Gassi stated that cannabis helps people like herself handle adversity and anxiety and she hopes council votes to allow the establishments. Tom Donovan, 337 N. Bradford Street, Dover, expressed his opposition to the ban of all recreational marijuana establishments within the city. Mr. Donovan stated that he is a Delaware attorney as well as a founding member of DelawareCAN. Mr. Donovan stated that it is important that Dover has the conversation to consider good regulations and a good plan moving forward. Mr. Donovan expressed how important it is that adults are allowed to make responsible decisions. Mr. Donovan also stated that council needs to provide the regulations that provide business to the community and move forward and show everyone else how to do it. Page 33

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING SEPTEMBER 26, 2023 PAGE 7 Item #5. Heather Campbell expressed her opposition to the ban of all recreational marijuana establishments within the city. Ms. Campbell stated that fentanyl is a synthetic opioid that is similar to morphine, but much stronger and more potent. Fentanyl is approved for medical use as a painkiller but is also obtained illegally and sold as a street drug. Ms. Campbell stated that fentanyl-laced marijuana is a growing danger as it is untraceable. Ms. Campbell expressed that the number of fentanyl overdoses will continue to climb without recreational marijuana stores. Jene Duffy, 126 Starlight Drive, Milton, expressed her opposition to the ban of all recreational marijuana establishments within the city. Ms. Duffy stated that she is a cannabis nurse and consultant and that she educates clients on the benefits, use, and storage of cannabis. Ms. Duffy stated that many of her clients have expressed the benefits of cannabis usage, however, it is very expensive. Ms. Duffy stated that they should be able to obtain safe cannabis legally and the more available it is, the price will be driven down, and more jobs can be created. Adam Windett, 218 N. State Street, Dover, expressed his opposition to the ban of all recreational marijuana establishments within the city. Mr. Windett stated he has extensive knowledge of illicit drug markets due to his role as a criminal defense attorney. Mr. Windett expressed that without a doubt cannabis cultivation, production, and sales will occur in every town in Delaware when the markets open next November. Mr. Windett stated that localities that choose to regulate the marketplace will allow the transactions to take place in a safe market, and products will be tested to ensure that they are safe for consumption and free from contaminants. Laws will prevent sales to minors, market disputes will be decided in courts of law, and business owners will create good- paying jobs and contribute to local and state taxes. Mr. Windett stated that localities that choose to ban the industry will still have the transactions occur as they are today, in neighborhoods, on street corners, with no safeguards to protect consumers, no ID checks to prevent sales to minors, with untested and unregulated products, with the proceeds of sales flowing into some gangs and criminal organizations. Mr. Windett stated that Denver is a good example of an industry that has flourished from dispensaries. Zach Hosm expressed his opposition to the ban of all recreational marijuana establishments within the city. Mr. Hosm stated that alcohol is a far more addictive drug than marijuana and has greatly affected his family. Mr. Hosm stated that no matter how much marijuana someone smokes there have been no reports of a fatal overdose, unlike alcohol. Adam Rinaldi, 128 Carnation Drive, Magnolia, expressed his opposition to the ban of all recreational marijuana establishments within the city. Mr. Rinaldi stated that the ban will not solve the issues that people believe it will. Ruth Bertrand, 99 Central Church Road, Dover, expressed her opposition to the ban of all recreational marijuana establishments within the city. Crystal Hamilton, Felton, expressed her opposition to the ban of all recreational marijuana establishments within the city. Ms. Hamilton stated that she is a veteran who has sustained multiple head injuries and suffers from PTSD. Ms. Hamilton expressed how the use of marijuana has greatly impacted her life. Ms. Hamilton stated that many of the migraine medications prescribed by Page 34

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING SEPTEMBER 26, 2023 PAGE 8 Item #5. Veteran Affairs make you physically sick, you lose interest in eating, and can even suffer from suicidal ideation. Layla Fogerty expressed her opposition to the ban of all recreational marijuana establishments within the city. Ms. Fogerty stated that she suffers from chronic gastritis and anxiety. Ms. Fogerty stated that her chronic gastritis does not meet the requirements for a medical marijuana card, and it is very expensive to keep the medical cards up to date. Ms. Fogerty asked council to keep her and chronic pain sufferers in mind when making their decisions as she does not want to purchase unsafe cannabis. Caryn Rodriguez expressed her opposition to the ban of all recreational marijuana establishments within the city. Assistant City Clerk Rivera read Attachment #4 – Ellen Richardson – Email of Opposition. Makayla expressed her opposition to the ban of all recreational marijuana establishments within the city. Makayla stated that banning these establishments would cause a loss of revenue. Makayla stated that Dover should not consider the ban on these establishments but rather show support so that other cities will follow the lead and not consider senseless bans themselves. Mr. Anderson moved for adjournment of the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee meeting, hearing no objections the meeting adjourned at 9:03 p.m. Mr. Hare moved for adjournment of the Council Committee of the Whole meeting, hearing no objection the meeting adjourned at 9:03 p.m. William F. Hare Council President Attachments Attachment #1 - Dina Vendetti, CDCC President - Letter of Support Attachment #2 - Vonderlear Smack, ACLU Campaign Manager - Letter of Opposition Attachment #3 - ACLU’s 2018 Research Report “The Tale of Two Countries: Racially Targeted Arrests in the Era of Marijuana Reform” Attachment #4 - Ellen Richardson - Email of Opposition Page 35

ATTACHMENT #1 Council Committee of the Whole Meeting ofItem #5. 09/26/2023 tCdCCJ Central Delaware Chamber of Commerce Tuesday, September 26, 2023 Chair Dana F. Wattay First Vice Chair City Hall Konrad LaPrade 15 Loockerman Plaza Vice Chair Dover, DE 19901 Economic Development Javier Santana Vice Chair Attn.: Mayor Robin R. Christiansen and Members ofthe City Council Organizational Development Jesse C. Keleher Dear Mayor Christiansen and Members of the City Council, Vice Chair Community Affairs Dr. Cornelia Johnson I am writing to you today on behalf of the Central Delaware Chamber of Commerce to share Vice Chair Legislative Affairs C. Scott Kidner with you our grave concerns regarding the potential retail sale, distribution, manufacturing, Vice Chair Military Affairs and/or wholesale of marijuana within the city limits of Dover. Evans Armantrading, Jr. Treasurer We believe that it is a great privilege to be afforded the opportunity to live, work, and play here Richard A. Mohnk in the Capital City of America's First State. We are proud of our heritage, and we are excited Vice Chair Smyrna/Clayton about our future here in Central Delaware. Lincoln D. Willis Past Chair Brian J. Stetina The CDCC has been honored to partner with you, the Downtown Dover Partnership, and other entities to bring revitalization to our beloved Downtown. As you well know, this has been a Directors Kim I. Adams tremendous effort, but well worth it, knowing that small businesses and new residents will H. Scott Connell Denee J. Crumrine fr~'$fe, -:p'l-opeser and our Downtown will thrive in the wake of the plans and projects that are just Travis Frey beginning. Our Governor and members of his staff have also seen - and caught - the vision of Laura A. Garotoli Dean E. Holden what our Downtown can look like - and they have promised to provide significant support for a Timothy R. Horne re-imagined Capital City. Kevin D. Mills Nicholas J. Polcino, Jr. Charmaine A. Whyte We are working toward a walkable, safe, and exciting place for business, all supported by new Honorary Board Members Colonel William C. McDonald housing opportunities for young people and new families. Without people living and working in Hon. George Jody Sweeney our center core, the dynamism we are so aggressively seeking will not work. We are already beginning to see the negative effect that the legalization of marijuana has had on some of our President Dina C. Vendetti, Ed.D. Downtown businesses as the smell has prevented customers from coming and has actually invaded and affected merchandise inside some of the shops. We firmly believe that the sale of Staff Cleo D. Bell a recreational drug, coupled with the consumption of said drug will be as great a deterrent to Cristal R Brenneman, 10M Cindy A. Friese "walking" Downtown as our current homelessness and perceived parking issues. Martha L. Lehman Jenniter L. Sutter Our Chamber is well known as an avid supporter of all businesses, and we strive to create a regulatory and legal environment that benefits our members regardless of their line of work or profession. We work diligently to provide opportunities for competition and a dynamic business environment for our members and all citizens of Central Delaware. It is frankly unusual for us to speak against the opening of a business. But when we weigh the negative effect that a recreational marijuana business can have on the other businesses in the area and the overall culture of what we are trying to build, it is too heavy a burden to bear. "The (DCC - 7'1{L essf'l1/io/ reSOl/rce ./0 r / Ii e cIf' \. e /0 pili ell/ of bllsinesses ill C el1/rat De/wl'{lre" 435 N. Dupont Highway, Dover, Delaware 19901 Page 36 302.734.7513 info@cdcc.net

Item #5. Given the significant, and in our opinion, damaging impact that recreational marijuana has had on other urban centers of various sizes, we ask you to ban any businesses that operate within the recreational marijuana business space. The future for the Capital City of America's First State is very bright. We have worked together to change our direction in a way that makes us more inviting, livable, and safe. It is our job to eliminate the potential for Dover to experience what so many other cities have seen when they've opened their streets to the sale of recreational drugs. We implore you to follow the example of Rehoboth, Dewey, and Bethany and ban all recreational marijuana establishments. Thank you for your consideration of this matter and for making decisions that result in a cleaner, safer, more vibrant city. Dr. Dina Carol Vendetti President Page 37

ATTACHMENT #2 Council Committee of the Whole Meeting of Item #5. 09/26/2023 Good evening Council and Members of the committee. My name is Vonda Smack, Campaign Manager at the ACLU of Delaware. Banning legal cannabis businesses makes communities less safe. Data shows that bans of legal sales do not stop people from buying or using cannabis; it only moves sales from the carefully regulated, legal cannabis market into a less-safe illicit market. If Dover is concerned about the safety and well-being of its residents, it should embrace the economic opportunity offered by the state's new legal and safe cannabis industry. History shows - prohibition doesn't work. History also demonstrates the harm that cannabis laws inflicted upon Black and Brown people. These laws have unjustly criminalized our communities, wasted taxpayer money, and fueled the mass incarceration crisis. Today, Black people are still more likely to be arrested for cannabis possession than white people in every state, including those that have legalized marijuana. Did you know that Delaware was ranked 15th in the nation for largest racial disparities in arrests for cannabis possession? This issue is even greater in the Dover-area. ACLU's 2018 report entitled "The Tales of Two Countries" Racially Targeted Arrest in the Era of Marijuana Reform found thatKent County has the largest racial disparities in the state, with Black people 5.38x times more likely to be arrested for cannabis possession than their white neighbors. A ban on cannabis businesses will only exacerbate these disparities, moving us further away from racial justice instead of towards it. Now let's look at this from another angle: "Dover Strong" is the motto for this city, right? Legal cannabis businesses create a variety of well-paying employment opportunities in a host of fields, especially for local residents within city limits. These new jobs stimulate the local economy; more jobs in the city of Dover means more money being spent in Dover and fewer adverse collateral consequences associated with high unemployment. "Dover Strong" Lastly, cities that permit legal cannabis businesses will generate business licensing fees and property taxes for local municipalities and directly, financially benefit from these legal businesses. Towns that prohibit legal businesses send that revenue stream out of town or back to the illicit market. Let's not pass up on this opportunity to make Dover even stronger in both equity and economy. Thank you for your time. Page 38

ATTACHMENT #3 Item #5. Council Committe of the Whole Meeting of 09/26/2023 Page 39

Item #5. Page 40

Item #5. ACLU RESEARCH REPORT A Tale of Two Countries Racially Targeted Arrests in the Era of Marijuana Reform © 2020 AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION Page 41

Item #5. Acknowledgem nts The report has been a project of the American Civil r commendations, and Lucia Tian, Chief Analytics Liberties Union (ACLU). The report was developed Orcer, for her edits and strategic guidance on data by Ezekiel Edwards, Director, Criminal Law Reform a alysis and methods. We are also very grateful to Project; content was led by Brooke Madubuonwu, Jeff Robinson, Director, Trone Center for Justice and Director of Legal Analytics and Quantitative E uality; ReNika Moore, Director, Racial Justice Research; and the report was overseen and managed P oject; and Carl Takei, Senior Staff Attorney, Trone by Emily Greytak, Director of Research. Data enter for Justice and Equality, for their edits and collection, analysis, and visualization was conducted £ edback. by ACLU Analytics. T~e authors also thank Brandon Cox, The primary authors are Ezekiel Edwards, Director, dommunications Strategist, for his assistance. We Criminal Law Reform Project; Emily Greytak, a e grateful for the support from ACLU colleagues Director of Research; Brooke Madubuonwu, Director S ndra Goldschein, Deputy Director and Director of of Legal Analytics and Quantitative Research; ogram and Strategy of the Affiliate Support and Thania Sanchez, Senior Social Scientist; Sophie ationwide Initiatives Department; Danielle Silber, Beiers, Data Journalist; Charlotte Resing, Policy irector of Strategic Partnerships; and Leila Rafei, Analyst, National Political Advocacy Department; ontent Strategist. Paige Fernandez, Policing Policy Advisor, National he authors also thank ACLU affiliates for their Political Advocacy Department; and Sagiv Galai, invaluable feedback on the development of the Paralegal, Criminal Law Reform Project. r port. We extend specific thanks to Michael Perloff The authors thank Rebecca McCray, Editor, for ahd Scott Michelman at the ACLU of the District of her editorial assistance; Kadiesha Weise, Legal olumbia for their efforts to obtain data from the Administrative Assistant, for her assistance .C. Metropolitan Police Department; Daniel Tilley reviewing research; Alex Yurcaba, Data Analyst, for the ACLU of Florida for his efforts to obtain data his assistance analyzing data; interns Sarah Sakha, f om the Florida Department of Law Enforcement; Catherine Peng, Priya Pai, and Lindsey Feingold for d Michelle Shames at the New York Civil Liberties their assistance in research and analysis; and Neil nion for her help obtaining data from the New York Shovelin, Creative Director, for his guidance with I ity Police Department. visual design. Graphic design for this report was provided by I We appreciate Udi Ofer, Director, Justice Division, .atrick Moroney. for his edits and strategic guidance on content and Page 42

Item #5. Contents Executive Summary.. . . . 4 Key Findings 7 Introduction 10 Methodology and Limitations . . 15 Marijuana Arrests .. .... 21 The National Landscape .21 State and County Landscape 22 States That Legalized or Decriminalized Marijuana Possession 23 Racial Disparities in Marijuana Arrests 28 The National Landscape ............................................................... 29 State and County Landscape............ . .. 30 States That Legalized or Decriminalized Marijuana Possession . . 34 Conclusion . . 37 Recommendations . . 39 Federal, State, and Local Governments 40 Law Enforcement Agencies .......................................................................................... 43 State Profiles ................48 Appendices . ......98 Endnotes 102 Page 43

Item #5. Executive Sum ary In 2013, the ACLU published an INDING#1 unprecedented national report on marijuana he War on Marijuana Rages on: possession arrests, The War on Marijuana arijuana Arrests Still Widespread cross the U.S. in Black and White, 1 analyzing data from an 50 states (and the District of Columbia) between 2001 and 2010. Over that time INDING#2 period, law enforcement made millions of xtreme Racial Disparities in marijuana arrests, the vast majority of which arijuana Possession Arrests were for possession, and Black people2 were ~ersist Throughout the Country, nd Have Not Improved Since 2010 much more likely to be arrested than white people for marijuana possession despite comparable usage rates. This report updates INDING#3 our previous findings through an analysis of arijuana Arrests Decreased after marijuana possession arrests and attendant egalization or Decriminalization racial disparities from 2010 to 2018, and provides specific analysis on states that have INDING#4 approved legalization and decriminalization acial Disparities in Arrests Persist laws. The report relies on the Federal Bureau ven in States That Legalized or of Investigation's Uniform Crime Reporting ecriminalized Marijuana Program (UCR), supplementary data from jurisdictions not included in UCR, and the United States Census' annual county INDING#5 population estimates to document arrest ata Collection Failures Block a uller Understanding of Racial rates per 100,000 for marijuana possession, isparities in Marijuana Arrests by race, at the state and county level. 3 4 ACLU Research Report Page 44

Item #5. Disturbingly, too much has remained unchanged legalized and went down modestly in states that had in the past decade despite several states having decriminalized. Consistent with our previous report, reformed marijuana policy. While marijuana the majority of marijuana arrests - nine out of every arrests were down by 18%overall since 2010, law 10- were for possession. enforcement still made more than 6.1 million such Equally as troubling, this report finds that stark arrests over the past eight years. In 2018, there were racial disparities in marijuana possession arrests almost 700,000 marijuana arrests, which accounted for more than 43%of all drug arrests. In fact, in have remained unchanged nationwide. On average, a 2018, police made more marijuana arrests than Black person is 3.64 times more likely to be arrested for all violent crimes combined, according to the for marijuana possession than a white person, even FBI. Further, it is not clear that marijuana arrests though Black and white people use marijuana at are trending down-they have actually risen in the similar rates. Just as before, such racial disparities past few years, with almost 100,000 more arrests in marijuana possession arrests exist across the in 2018 than 2015. This rise in marijuana arrests country, in every state, in counties large and small, has been driven by states in which marijuana is still urban and rural, wealthy and poor, and with large illegal, whereas between 2010 and 2018, marijuana and small Black populations. Indeed, in every arrests were significantly lower in states that had state and in over 95%of counties with more than Recommendations at a Glance For Federal, State, and Local For Law Enforcement Agencies Governments • End the enforcement of marijuana · Legalize marijuana use and possession possession and distribution • Do not replace marijuana prohibition • End racial profiling by police with a system of fines, fees, and arrests · Eliminate consent searches • Grant clemency to or resentence anyone incarcerated on a marijuana conviction • End the practice of using raw numbers of and expunge all marijuana convictions stops, citations, summons, and arrests as a metric to measure productivity and efficacy • Eliminate collateral consequences that result from marijuana arrests or · Develop systems for the routine collection of convictions accurate data on a range of police practices • Ensure new legal markets benefit and are • Invest in nonpunitive programs and accessible to communities most harmed community-based services and divest from by the War on Drugs law enforcement Ensure marijuana possession and · Develop, secure, and implement strong, other low-level offense arrests are not independent, and effective oversight included in performance measures for mechanisms for local law enforcement federal funding A Tale of Two Countries: RaCially Targeted Arrests in the Era of Marijuana Reform 5 Page 45

Item #5. 30,000 people in which at least 1%of the residents im.migration status. This report provides a detailed are Black, Black people are arrested at higher r lad map for ending the War on Marijuana and rates than white people for marijuana possession. e suring legalization efforts center racial justice as Although, on average, states that legalized marijuana tJey address the widespread collateral damage. through taxation and regulation had lower rates of racial disparities in marijuana possession arrests T}e ACLU reaffirms its recommendation that fe eral and state governments legalize marijuana (1. 7x) than states where marijuana has not been fo persons 21 or older through a system of taxation, legalized (3.2x), a distressing pattern continues- racial disparities persist in every state that has rolled liienSing, and regulation, and urges that legalization r pair the harms that prohibition has wreaked on back marijuana prohibition - and in some cases, c mmunities of color. disparities have worsened.4 This report should be the final nail in the coffin for the inane War on Marijuana, and sound yet another abolition knell for this country's 45-year drug prohibition charade. The question no longer is whether the U.S. should legalize marijuana - it should - or whether marijuana legalization is about racial equity - it is. It is also no longer about whether all levels of government should redirect resources away from prosecution of marijuana and toward public health investments and community collaborations - they should. Rather, the question is: When states legalize, how can they do so through a racial justice lens to address the panoply of harms that have been selectively aimed at Black and Latinx communities for decades? These harms include not only arrests, incarceration, and lifelong criminal convictions, but also the loss of jobs, housing, financial aid eligibility, child custody, and I n every state, Black people are arrested at higher rates than white people for marijuana . possession. 6 ACLU Research Report Page 46

Item #5. Key Findings FINDING#1 Rates of Black and White Marijuana Possession Arrests per 100k People The War on Marijuana Rages on: Marijuana Arrests Still Widespread 600 Across the U.S. 400 • Although marijuana arrests have decreased by 18%since 2010, that trend slowed to a halt in the 200 White--- arrest .••• rate middle ofthe decade. There were more marijuana arrests in 2018 than in 2015, despite the fact that eight states legalized marijuana for recreational 0 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 use or decriminalized marijuana possession in that timeframe. Source: FBI/Uniform Crime Report,ng Program Dlta Note: FlOrida ;..jnc!Washington, D.C. dId 110tprovld~ d·ita. • In general, states that have legalized or decriminalized marijuana possession have seen FINDING#2 a decline in marijuana possession arrests, but in many other states, arrest rates have increased or Extreme Racial Disparities in remain unchanged. Marijuana Possession Arrests Persist Throughout the Country and Have • Marijuana arrests made up 43% of all drug arrests Not Improved Since 2010. in 2018, more than any other drug category. While that percentage has dropped from just over 50% • Black people are 3.64 times more likely than in 2010, this is due in part to a steady increase in white people to be arrested for marijuana arrests in other drug categories. possession, notwithstanding comparable usage rates. The increasing number of states legalizing • The overwhelming majority of marijuana arrests- or decriminalizing marijuana has not reduced 89.6% - are for possession only. national trends in racial disparities, which remain unchanged since 2010. • While national arrest rates for marijuana possession were lower in 2018 than in 2010 for both Black and white individuals, racial disparities in those arrests have not improved, and in some jurisdictions, they have worsened. A Tale of Two Countries: Racially Targeted Arrests in the Era of Marijuana Reform 7 Page 47

Item #5. • In every single state, Black people were more likely arrest rates also dropped in decriminalized states, to be arrested for marijuana possession, and in though to a lesser degree (33.6%). some states, Black people were up to six, eight, or almost 10 times more likely to be arrested. In 31 states, racial disparities were actually larger in FI DING#4 2018 than they were in 2010. R cial Disparities in Arrests Persist • Montana, Kentucky, Illinois, West Virginia, E en in States That Legalized or and Iowa were the states with the highest racial D criminalized Marijuana. disparities in marijuana possession arrest rates • . though the total number of people arrested (9.62,9.36,7.51,7.31, and 7.26 respectively). lor marijuana possession, and rates of arrests, ave decreased in all legalized states and most ecriminalized states for both Black and white FINDING #3 people, the racial disparities in arrest rates in Marijuana Arrests Decreased After hese states remain. Specifically, in every state Legalization or Decriminalization, hat has legalized or decriminalized marijuana But There Was Significant Eossession, Black people are still more likely to be Variability Across States That Only rrrested for possession than white people. Decriminalized. • n some legalized states, such as Maine and • Arrests for marijuana possession decreased I assachusetts, the racial disparities in marijuana over time (from 2010-2018) in all states that ossession arrests were larger in 2018 than in legalized recreational marijuana possession. 010. In other legalized states, such as California In some states, these decreases clearly began and Nevada, the disparities narrowed, although after legalization (Colorado, Maine, Nevada). In lack people were still more likely to be arrested other legalized states, decreases continued on a or marijuana possession than white people. downward trend that had begun pre-legalization • On average, states that have legalized marijuana (Alaska, Oregon, Washington). In two states possession had lower racial disparities in (California, Massachusetts), though there was possession arrests in 2018 compared both to a decline in arrests from 2010-2018, there was states that have only decriminalized and states little change after legalization. In these states, the where marijuana remains illegal. However, it is not decrease in arrests occurred prior to legalization clear that this difference is a result of legalization and remained low, perhaps due to earlier these states also had lower racial disparities in decriminalization. 2010, before any states had legalized. • Overall, arrests for marijuana possession also fell slightly between 2010-2018 in states that had decriminalized but not legalized recreational F NDING#5 marijuana. However, there is significant D ta Collection Failures Block a variability across states. Marijuana possession Flier Understanding of Racial arrest rates were approximately eight times higher isparities in Marijuana Arrests. in decriminalized states than in legalized states, although lower than in states where marijuana • Although a great body of evidence establishes that possession remained illegal. Latinx individuals face racial bias in policing and discrimination in the criminal legal system writ • In legalized states, arrests for marijuana sales also large, we were not able to compare marijuana decreased greatly from 2010 to 2018 (81.3%). Sales arrest rates for Latinx individuals in this report. B ACLU Research Report Page 48

Item #5. • The FBI's Uniform Crime Reporting arrest data is the most up-to-date and comprehensive data on arrests nationally, by state, and by county. However, similar to many federal data collection efforts, UCR data fails to disaggregate between Latinx individuals of different races, making it impossible to distinguish between Latinx and non-Latinx individuals in the Black and white populations. Because UCR data does not identify Latinx populations as a distinct racial group, potential disparities in arrest rates for Latinx populations cannot be examined. Arrests of Latinx individuals coded as white in the data likely artificially inflate the number of white arrests, leading to an underestimate of the disparity between Black and white arrest rates. 5 • In addition to their impact on Black and Latinx populations, other racial or ethnic groups may be affected by bias in policing and marijuana enforcement. Future research using UCR data is warranted to examine disparities for Native and Indigenous populations, and Asian and Pacific Islander populations, particularly in jurisdictions with large enough samples of these populations. However, disparities for bi- or multiracial people cannot be examined with UCR data because the UCR Program employs a "check one" approach to race, and does not allow for an individual to be coded as more than one race. Furthermore, disparities for Arab and Middle Eastern people cannot be examined with UCR data as they are not identified by the UCR Program at all. • The variation in reporting quality across years, agencies, and geographies also leaves some gaps in some constituents' ability to quantify racial disparities at the local level. A Tale of Two Countries: Racially Targeted Arrests in the Era of Marijuana Reform 9 Page 49

Item #5. Introduction The criminalization of marijuana and the "War on I rugs" more broadly has been a misinformed and racist government campaign tha continues to result in the criminalization of millions of Americans. 6 Pursued under the guise of public safety and reducing marijuana consumption, this decades-long debacle has been a abject failure - it has harmed I communities, needlessly derailed lives, and waste1_taxpayers' valuable dollars. Both public opinion and sage public policy have called for an enf. to marijuana prohibition_ In response, several states have legalized or decriminalized majijuana use in recent years. As of March 2020, 11 states and Washington, D.C. , have legali ed the recreational consumption of 7 marijuana, and in 2019, Hawai'i became the 15th st· te to reduce the criminal consequences of marijuana-related offenses.8 A growing body of research has sought to explore the T e War on Marijuana impact of these reforms, finding that these reforms led to a reduction in marijuana-related arrests and In ur 2013 report The War on Marijuana in Black the myriad harmful consequences associated with an White, we documented the national scope of our a criminal conviction. 9 However, research suggests co ntry's decades-long, multibillion-dollar, racist war that racial disparities in marijuana arrests persist ag inst people who use marijuana. We found that, in in several of those states, remaining as sharp a 20 0, despite the fact that Black and white peoplel3 thorn in the nation's side as they were a decade ago.IO us marijuana at similar rates, Black people were Moreover, according to the FBI, after an overall dip in ar ested at over three times the rate of white people, the number of marijuana arrests between 2010-2014, aIljdup to eight times as often in some states. Further, such arrests began to increase again, and there were suth racial disparities increased between 2001 and roughly 100,000 more marijuana arrests in 2018 than 20 0, as did marijuana possession arrests overall. in 2015Y This report seeks to build on this existing S ch wasteful and race-driven enforcement of research - as well as our 2013 report The War on m rijuana laws did not occur overnight. Since Marijuana in Black and Whitel2-to document the th early decades of the 20th century, the national, state, and local landscape; to assess our crlminalization of marijuana has been a pretext progress; and to examine the potential promise of fo I the criminalization of Black and Brown people. 14 reforms. As this report will demonstrate, much of this T king advantage of several decades of Reefel' country has yet to start on the road toward equitable, M dness propaganda, in 1970, President Richard smart, reparative marijuana policy, and for those N on signed the Controlled Substances Act and that have, the journey is not complete. 10 ACLU Research Report Page 50

Item #5. classified marijuana under Schedule I - reserved for the most dangerous class of drugs with the highest potential for abuse and little to no Much of this medical value, a designation shared by drugs like heroin, methamphetamines, and PCP. But such cou ntry has yet to classification -like the drug war generally - had start on the road nothing to do with marijuana or science, and everything to do with criminalizing and controlling toward equitable, certain communities. As John Ehrlichman, counsel to Nixon and assistant to the president for domestic smart, reparative affairs, said over two decades later: marijuana policy. "We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be against the war (Vietnam) or Black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with Making matters worse, the Trump administration marijuana and the Blacks with heroin, and has sought to abandon the Obama administration's then criminalizing both heavily, we could more sensible approach to marijuana policy disrupt those communities. We could arrest by resurrecting the saber-rattling of bygone their leaders, raid their homes, break up their anti-marijuana crusaders. Under the Obama meetings, and vilify them night after night on administration, local jurisdictions enjoyed the evening news. Did we know we were lying substantial deference with regard to setting about the drugs? Of course we did. "15 marijuana policy. In 2013, Deputy Attorney This war on people who use drugs has since been General James Cole issued a guideline ("The declared a failure by countless public health Cole Memorandum") significantly limiting the officials and advocacy organizations, the World enforcement of federal marijuana laws in states that Health Organization, and the United Nations.I6 In had legalized.I9 Such deference to states that were response, certain countries have pursued nationwide experimenting with legalization was crucial for the legalization of marijuana, while many jurisdictions vitality of the newly legalized markets. Consumers across the U.S. have decriminalized or legalized needed to feel safe participating in marijuana marijuana for both recreational and medicinal use.I? activities, and entrepreneurs needed to know that Despite the often bipartisan groundswell to legalize the federal government was not about to shut down marijuana use, and the fact that two in every three their ventures or prosecute them for engaging in Americans support legalizing marijuana,I8 marijuana business that was legal in their state. The Obama remains illegal in a majority of states. administration's approach reassured states that the federal government would not interfere with states' legalization efforts as long as those efforts did not implicate federal enforcement priorities, such as Inconsistency at the interstate drug trafficking and drug cartels. 20 Federal Level Rather than respecting the will of the voters in states At the federal level, marijuana remains a Schedule I that legalized marijuana, the Trump administration substance, subjecting people involved in marijuana and its first attorney general, Jeff Sessions (who, activities to harsh penalties and preventing a range when he was a U.S. Senator, famously proclaimed, of scientific research that could upend decades of "Good people don't smoke marijuana"), promptly propagandized misinformation driven by racism rescinded this policy. The same week that California and fear. began selling and taxing marijuana for recreational A Tale of Two Countries: Racially Targeted Arrests in the Era of Marijuana Reform 11 Page 51

Item #5. use21 and Vermont's legislature called for a formal pe pIe of color from participating in, leading, and I vote on its own legalization bill,22the Department bu'l ding wealth from the marijuana industry, and the of Justice announced that the Cole Memorandum fa' ure to repair the harms done to communities of was no longer in effect. Instead, Attorney General Sessions, echoing discredited alarmists of yesterday, asserted that "marijuana is a dangerous drug and that marijuana activity is a serious crime"23 and ntering Racial Justice instructed federal prosecutors "to use previously established prosecutorial principles that provide M rijuana legalization has always been a racial them all the necessary tools to disrupt criminal jus, ice issue. 27 Whereas marijuana use by white organizations, tackle the growing drug crisis, and pe pIe has been de facto legal in much of the country, I thwart violent crime across our country." in :f3lackand Brown communities, police have roJ.tinely stopped people, particularly youth - at Notwithstanding Sessions' peddling of prohibitionist, th~ park, on the street, in the train, on the bus, at time-worn rhetoric, most Americans support sc,ool, near school, by the community center, on the legalizing marijuana. Furthermore, state-level porch, or while driving - searching (usually in vain) efforts to get smart on marijuana continue, and fo something illegal, and, if they found marijuana, federal marijuana prosecutions are declining.24 ar esting and hauling people to jail.28 Such police Even Sessions' replacement, Attorney General harassment not only criminalizes people of color for William Barr, recently communicated to members engaging in an activity that white people participate of Congress that he would support a carve-out in kth relative impunity, it is a means of surveillance exemption that would protect states from federal ar¥ social controF9 counterproductive to public prosecution ifthey legalized recreational marijuana safety and community health. Indeed, repeated police consumption.25 enbounters prove traumatic and dehumanizing for th se who endure them. 30 In spite ofthis ongoing sea change, law enforcement in the U.S. continues to make hundreds of thousands Sirply put, marijuana is used at similar rates by of marijuana arrests every year, and Black people Bl ck and white people across America,31 yet Black continue to bear the disproportionate brunt of those a d Brown people are disproportionately targeted arrests. Marijuana legalization should be - and fo and harmed by its criminalization, subjected to indeed is - a racial justice issue. But thus far, racial st ps, frisks, arrests, and convictions of marijuana- justice has largely been a peripheral or incidental re ated offenses because of their race. This is true goal oflegalization, resulting in continued racist fo drug enforcement generally (see crack versus enforcement of marijuana laws, the exclusion of caine enforcement and sentencing) but perhaps o more starkly than when it comes to marijuana inforcement.32 Thus far, racial While some states that have legalized marijuana uilt expungement, resentencing, and justice has largely ~classification mechanisms into their reforms been a peripheral tb ensure that people previously convicted of *arijUana violations benefit retroactively from or incidental goal of rarijuana's legal status, their effectiveness in educing the disparate harm on people of color legalization. Jemains unclear. Furthermore, other states ave not centered racial equity in their reforms, 12 ACLU Research Report Page 52

Item #5. and much more can be done to guarantee that Of course, progressive policies toward marijuana drug reform laws repair the harms suffered by enforcement can only be effective if they are part communities of color as a result of racially biased of a broader effort by prosecutors and police to end enforcement and criminalization. Precisely because selective enforcement of all criminal laws against of this history, racial justice remains a critical Black and Brown people. After all, marijuana prism through which drug reform policies should be prohibition is simply one tool in governments' evaluated.33 criminal law arsenal- albeit a very effective and ubiquitous one - to marginalize and dis empower people of color. Reforms Beyond Legislation: Criminal consequences is not the only harm The Role of Prosecutors and of marijuana prohibition. There is a range of Police potentially debilitating collateral consequences as well, many of which persist even after marijuana is To be sure, while legalization is the most powerful decriminalized or even legalized. These can further step toward reducing the damage of marijuana erode people's civil rights by impacting housing criminalization, there are other steps that can rights, parental rights, the administration of public be taken in the meantime. For example, local benefits, access to education, and immigration prosecutors have the power to end prosecution for status. For example, families who live in federally marijuana violations. Cyrus Vance, the district subsidized public housing face eviction or family attorney for Manhattan, instituted a Decline-to- separation if someone is accused of using marijuana Prosecute policy on marijuana possession and on their premises. Parents may lose their children consumption cases, reportedly resulting in a in family court proceedings if accused of using substantial reduction of such cases in the first 90 days marijuana. Disabled and poor recipients of public of the policy taking effect.34District Attorney Larry benefits still face the threat oflosing their benefits Krasner of Philadelphia, State's Attorney Marilyn for marijuana use. Immigrants can face deportation Mosby of Baltimore, Fairfax County Commonwealth for marijuana use. Because of the race-driven way in Attorney Steve Descano of Virginia, Cook County which marijuana criminal laws have been enforced, State's Attorney Kim Foxx of Illinois, and a growing each of these potentially life-altering consequences of list of prosecutors have launched similar efforts in criminalization has been borne disproportionately by order to discontinue the harmful approaches of their communities of color. predecessors on marijuana policy. While they ameliorate the harm of criminal prosecutions, such approaches cannot be successful Conclusion in reducing the harm caused to individuals subject to marijuana arrests if police departments are not In 2020, we enter a decade marked by confusion partners in the prosecutors' efforts. For example, and contradictions when it comes to marijuana after the Austin, Texas, City Council passed a policies. Today, marijuana is still categorized by resolution to reduce arrests for low-level marijuana the federal government among the most dangerous violations, the local police chief quickly rebuffed drugs with no medicinal value, and yet 37 states legislators and vowed to continue to enforce the police have rolled back prohibitionist laws (11 states and department's policy of arresting or issuing citations the District of Columbia have legalized recreational for marijuana violations. 35 Conversely, in Seattle, the use, 15 other states have decriminalized use, and police department played a critical role in minimizing 11 additional states have legalized it for medical the harms of marijuana criminalization.36 use only).37People in neighboring states, such as A Tale of Two Countries: Racially Targeted Arrests in the Era of Marijuana Reform 13 Page 53

Item #5. Illinois and Wisconsin, enjoy markedly different rights given the conflicting legal status of marijuana across their borders.38 Traveling from Illinois to This report Wisconsin, someone who uses marijuana goes from being a casual consumer protected by local law to provides a new, a potential target of criminal laws subject to life- unprecedented altering prosecution. And the injustice of the past is a harbinger for today' s marijuana market. While examination of the corporations, entrepreneurs, and governments in some jurisdictions are making millions of dollars state of marijuana in profits and revenues in the legal marijuana enforcement in industry, poor people in other jurisdictions are stuck in handcuffs or jail cells, or with lifelong criminal the U.S. records for possessing or selling miniscule fractions of what these powerful companies move daily. In some states, there are even people serving sentences de riminalization policies have had on such arrests oflife without parole for marijuana convictions. 39 anf racial disparities. Clearly, there iB a long way to go to end the harms of marijuana prohibition and ensure that racial Infeed, while there is some existing research equity guides the implementation oflegalization and examining the potential fiscal and public safety decriminalization efforts. imtacts of marijuana law reforms in select states or urisdictions, there is considerably less empirical As we begin a new decade, it is time to assess the re earch on the impact of these reforms on people progress and failures of this country's marijuana of olor. The scope of this report not only allows policies at the state and county level with regard fo an examination ofthe national, state, and to racial justice. This report provides a new, 10 allandscapes, it will provide new information unprecedented examination of the state of marijuana o the success - or failure - ofthese current laws enforcement in the U.S. and the ramifications of to ddress the racial inequities perpetuated by decriminalization and legalization efforts - on overall m rijuana prohibitions. As such, these findings offer arrests, and specifically on the racial inequities ditection for policymakers, criminal justice leaders, perpetuated by this war. Using data on marijuana a d advocates who seek not only to end the war on arrests that local police departments provide the m rijuana, but to ensure that we do so in reparative FBI under the Uniform Crime Reporting Program, w ys that allow us to confront the racial injustice alongside supplemented data obtained directly from of he past by building a path forward with and for unreported jurisdictions, this report examines th people and communities most deeply harmed by nationwide and state trends in both arrests and m rijuana prohibition. Black/white racial disparities. Keenly aware of the consequential policy decisions made at local levels, this report also examines how different counties behave with respect to marijuana arrests and racial disparities in such arrests. And as the number of states implementing reforms in marijuana laws has increased since our last report, we are able to examine the potential impact legalization or 14 ACLU Research Report Page 54

Item #5. Methodology and Limitations To document the incidence of marijuana and other drug arrests, this report uses data from the FBI's Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program, supplemented by data obtained directly from states, when necessary (i.e., Illinois, New York). The data is used descriptively to better understand marijuana arrest patterns over time. In this section we describe our data sources, usage, and limitations. Data • Uniform Crime Reporting Data [United States]: Summarized Agency Data, 2017- 2018. These data sets are publicly available Sources through the FBI's Crime Data API. The marijuana possession arrest data presented In addition, population estimates for each county for in this report was obtained from the FBI's Uniform each year were obtained from: Crime Reporting Program (VCR) Program. For the • U.S. Census Bureau, "Annual County years 2010-2016, the data was obtained through the Resident Population Estimates by Age, Sex, National Archive of Criminal Justice Data (NACJD). Race, and Hispanic Origin," April 1, 2010, We downloaded tables of data that included monthly to July 1, 2018. This data was released in counts of each offense type for each agency that June 2019 by the population division of the U.S. reports to the UCR Program, for each racial group. Census Bureau. Raw data is available in CSV For the years 2017 and 2018, data was not available format here, and a data dictionary describing the . through NACJD at the time of analysis. For these variable definitions is available here. This dataset years, we used the FBI's Automated Programming estimates the population of each racial group of Interface (API) to retrieve the data. Data for each county on July 1 of the corresponding year. years 2017 and 2018 was last retrieved via API on While most states report to the UCR Program, some November 22,2019. do not, and thus data for Illinois and New York City • Uniform Crime Reporting Data [United were obtained separately. We obtained arrest data for States]: Arrests by Age, Sex, and Race New York City from "NYPD Arrests Data" (Historic), [Alternative Title: ASR], 2011-2016. These published by the New York Police Department online datasets are publicly available through the NACJD at NYC OpenData. This data was last updated on and stored at the Inter-university Consortium for May 16, 2019. Data for Illinois was obtained through Political and Social Research at the University of a Freedom ofInformation Act, 5 ILCS 140 ("FOIA") Michigan. request submitted to the Illinois Department of A Tale of Two Countries: Racially Targeted Arrests in the Era of Marijuana Reform 15 Page 55

Item #5. State Police, which acts as the central repository and Th arrest for marijuana possession would not be custodian for crime statistics from every policing rep rted in this situation. Additionally, if a person is body in Illinois. arr sted for multiple Part II offenses, the reporting ag~ncy determines which offense is the most serious We also submitted FOIA requests to Washington, and. scores only that arrest. Thus, any marijuana D.C.'s Metropolitan Police Department (MPD), poJsession arrest recorded in the VCR data is an as well as to the Florida Department of Law arrl st in which marijuana possession is the highest Enforcement, in November 2019. In December 2019, Ch;ge for which that individual was arrested during Washington, D.C.'s Mayor's Office of Legal Counsel th police interaction. Any racial disparity observed ruled in favor of a legal appeal submitted by the ACLV in arijuana arrests recorded in VCR data is thus not and ordered MPD to begin producing responsive a PrOduct of differential arrest rates for Part I crimes records within five business days. Nevertheless, or rimes that agencies deem more serious than I the District of Columbia did not provide data in an m ijuana possession. According to the FBI, more appropriate, timely manner for analysis in this report, thI 85% of all arrests are for a single offense. and Florida refused to provide any data at all. It s ould be noted that for data obtained from New Yo k City, the New York Police Department publishes Counting and Classifying Marijuana Arrests a d ta footnote that states, "Only valid arrests are inQ~udedin this release. Arrests that were voided The data used in this report (both VCR data and wfn further investigation reveals person did not supplementary state data) count one arrest for each cOjmit offense or it is determined no offense has separate instance in which a person is arrested, bef~ committed are excluded from the data set." As cited, or summoned for an offense. Because a person sueh, NYC data may not be directly comparable to may be arrested more than once in a year, the arrest ot er agencies that include arrests that were not numbers used in this report do not reflect the actual ex luded from the dataset. Individual nuances in the number of individuals who have been arrested; rather, WBi police departments categorize arrests, due to the arrest data shows the total number of times di erences in state law, enforcement priorities, and that persons have been arrested, as reported by law re~orting capacity, are inherent in any interpretation enforcement agencies to the VCR Program. of PCR data, and will be discussed more in the When someone is arrested for multiple crimes arising Ii itations section below. from a single police interaction, the VCR Program calls it a "multiple-offense situation." As a general rule, a multiple-offense situation requires classifying each of the offenses committed into "Part I" and "non-Part I" offenses. Part I offenses are the following: e VCR Arrests by Age, Sex, and Race dataset and Murder, Rape, Robbery, Aggravated Assault, th Summarized Agency Data from the VCR API Burglary, Larceny (theft), Motor Vehicle Theft, and in lude variables that indicate the population covered Arson (fire). Marijuana possession is defined as a non- b a particular agency. The FBI also provides an Part I offense, as are all drug offenses. The Hierarchy "A enc Crosswalk file" which shows which agencies Rule, as described in the FBI/VCR Handbook, co respond to each county. To find each county total, requires that in a multiple-offense situation involving w~summarized the total number of arrests and both Part I (e.g., Robbery - Other Dangerous th total population within each county. We then Weapon) and non-Part I offenses (e.g., Marijuana- c pared the population of all the agencies reporting Possession), only the Part I offense, Robbery - Other d ta in a particular county to the total population of Dangerous Weapon, is classified and reported. th t county to identify a coverage indicator. 16 ACLU Research Report Page 56

Item #5. The coverage indicator is a measure of how reporting 12 full months is submitted as-is. Second, completely the agencies within a given county have data for an agency reporting three to 11 months is reported their arrests to the VCR Program. For multiplied by a weight of [l21months reported]. For each agency, we multiply the population covered by example, if an agency reports 50 arrests over six that agency by the number of months reported, and months of data, 50 is multiplied by 12/6 (or 2) to divide by 12. For example, if an agency that covered estimate that 100 arrests would have occurred over 50,000 people reported data for 12 out of 12 months, a similar 12-month period. For agencies reporting the "reported population" of that agency is 50,000 .• zero to two months, data is too sparse to be reliable. 12/12, or 50,000. However, ifthat same agency only These are first set to zero, and then data is estimated reported data for 10 out of 12 months of the year, its using rates calculated from fully reporting agencies reported population is 50,000 .•10/ 12, or 41,667. located in the missing agency's state and geographic stratum. More about defining the geographic strata Participation in the VCR Program varies widely. is described by the NACJD, but, briefly, if an agency Many counties have full participation, with all covering a population of 15,000 fails to report data local enforcement agencies in the county reporting to the VCR, then the arrest total for that agency is to the VCR Program, but some agencies within imputed using the average number of arrests among some counties do not report data, or do not report similarly sized agencies in the same state and year. every month, due at times to budget and capacity constraints. If an agency reports data for fewer than Finally, that agency-level data is aggregated to 12 months, we used the FBI's methodology, described the county level using the crosswalk file. The total below, to impute the missing arrest counts. county-level reported population is aggregated and divided by the county-level total population, including We impute data at the agency level, and summarize nonreporting agencies, to arrive at the county-level coverage at the county level to get a coverage coverage indicator. Throughout this analysis, when indicator, or a measure of the countywide data highlighting individual counties, we exclude counties quality. While many counties have a coverage with a coverage of less than 50% - that is, counties indicator of 100%, some counties have missing where arrests were imputed for more than 50% of data, and the more data a county is missing, the less the population covered in that county. For example, confidence we can have in our estimates. If a county is in 2018, 12.6% (381) of counties had less than 50% less than 50% covered, meaning that more than half coverage and were thus excluded from these analyses. of its data is imputed, we do not report its individual arrest counts or arrest rate estimates. Though analysis of raw data undercounts the total arrest counts because of agencies that do not report, the results on the impacts of racial disparities do not substantially vary from the results using Imputation the methodology from our 2013 report. Thus, The National Archive of Criminal Justice Data for consistency with NACJD, we use the VCR's (NACJD), part of the Inter-university Consortium imputation methodology for this report. for Political and Social Research, imputes data for missing agencies to aggregate to the county leveL We use the same procedure but also aggregate by Calculating Rate Ratios race to be able to examine racial disparities. Their imputation procedure is described in full here, but Racial disparities in policing and enforcement of in brief, the following steps are used to estimate the marijuana possession laws can be quantified by number of arrests for agencies with various types comparing arrest rates in the Black population to of reporting procedures. First, data for any agency arrest rates in the white population. By dividing the A Tale of Two Countries: Racially Targeted Arrests in the Era of Marijuana Reform 17 Page 57

Item #5. rate in the Black population by the rate in the white Ealh state profile includes a county-level map. population, we can estimate if Black people are more On hat map, counties for which we received no likely than white people to be arrested for marijuana da la(roughly 50 counties across all 49 states) are possession, and, if so, how much more likely. Below is in~cated by stripes. In addition, there were five the formula used to calculate the rate ratio: co nties that arrested multiple Black people for mar ijuana possession and zero white people. The RR=Ba/Bp/Wa/Wp me sure of racial disparities in these counties is Where RR is the Black-to-white rate ratio of arrests mathematically infinite, so while we do not report for marijuana possession; Ba/Bp is the rate of arrest nuteriC rate ratios for these counties, they are in the Black population, and Wa/Wp is the rate of col red in red in the county-level maps, indicating arrest in the white population. ra .al disparities above the national average. Sil.ilarly, the counties that reported zero Black and whIte possession arrests (roughly 125 counties) are coli red in grey, indicating racial disparities below the State Profi les na ional average. We used the following additional methods for the 49 state profile sheets included at the end ofthis report. Limitations and Considerations When identifying the top counties with the largest racial disparities per state, we generally only included Thts report, which analyzes data from 2010-2018, counties with: a population of at least 30,000, a Black in jombination with our previous report assessing population of at least 1%,a data coverage ratio of da a from 2000-2010, offers an unprecedented at least 50%, and at least 25 arrests for marijuana lot at the national, state, and county landscape possession. We applied this inclusion criteria to offarijUana enforcement over the past nearly two avoid highlighting counties with outlier rates due de ades. However, as with all research, there are to very small populations and numbers of arrests. so e limitations to the data. Here we present those I Because states vary widely in their demographics, it limitations, along with a few key areas to consider was imperative to modify the inclusion criteria in w n interpreting the findings of this report. select cases, which are also noted in each state profile sheet. For states with less than a 1%Black population overall, we included counties for the ranking if they L~.liI1itationsof Missing Data met all criteria outside of the Black population T ambition ofthe FBI's Uniform Crime Reporting criterion. We extended this rule to Hawai'i, where Pr gram in attempting to harmonize arrest data we only obtained data for two counties. In Vermont, from more than 18,000 agencies across the country very few counties made more than 25 marijuana mhes it the most comprehensive data source for possession arrests in 2018, so we lowered that cutoff u erstanding arrests in the U. S., but gaps remain. to 10 marijuana possession arrests. Additionally, is section describes our attempts to deal with because Alaska is less densely populated, we th se gaps, their comparability to UCR data, and the broadened the population criteria to include counties ex ensibility of this analysis to previous work. in Alaska with a population of at least 20,000 and at least 10 marijuana possession arrests. Those As mentioned previously, not every agency reports counties were excluded from consideration when da,a for each month. The imputation method identifying the top counties per state with largest de cribed previously is used by the FBI to fill in racial disparities, but were included in other aspects ga s in county-level crime data, but these methods of analyses for the state profiles and the entire report. ar simple and do not account for fundamental 18 ACLU Research Report Page 58

Item #5. differences between reporting agencies and different values than in our previous report. For the nonreporting agencies. Though a majority of the purposes of examining trends between 2000 and 2018, FBI's agencies and an even larger majority of the these two reports can go hand-in-hand, but it is not a agencies covering large populations like cities goal for our 2010 estimates of racial disparities in this had 100%coverage in the years we analyzed, we report to perfectly match those used with a different were unable to determine whether systematic imputation methodology. Rather, the consistent biases existed between reporting agencies and overall findings between the two reports, despite nonreporting agencies with regard to population the slight variations in methodology, are a signal demographics. The lowest unit of measurement at that these findings are robust to multiple different which demographic data by race was available was imputation methods. the county level, not the agency level. It is conceivable Despite our repeated attempts (as detailed that the demographics of agencies with full UCR previously) to obtain data from every jurisdiction for reporting are different from those with little or no this report, including those that do not report to the UCR reporting. If arrest rates in populations in FBI's UCR program, we were unable to do so. The these nonreporting agencies differ systematically District of Columbia refused to provide data in an from arrest rates in reporting agencies, it is likely appropriate, timely manner for analysis in this report, that our estimates are imprecise. Systematic and Florida refused to provide any data at all. Thus, differences could bias the results of our analysis in findings from this report are limited to 49 of the 50 either direction. However, given the consistency U.S. states. of the racial disparities in every state and nearly every county in the nation, we feel that despite this Race and Ethnicity Data Limitations variation in agency reporting, additional data is unlikely to change the direction of the findings - that Although nationwide the criminalization of is, to remove the measured effect of racial disparities. marijuana has been largely targeted at Black and Nevertheless, we do not report estimates for counties Latinx individuals, UCR data only allows for an in which less than 50% of the population is covered by exploration of disparities between Black and white a reporting agency. people, and not between Latinx and white people. Similar to many federal data collection efforts, We use a different imputation methodology in this UCR data does not identify Latinx individuals as a report than was used in our previous report, which distinct racial group, but as an ethnicity. "Ethnicity" was published in 2013. Our imputation procedure variables are available in UCR data codebooks, follows the FBI's procedure exactly, while the ostensibly to distinguish between Hispanic and non- previous study used a weighting procedure at the Hispanic individuals of each race, but these variables county level rather than imputation at the agency are missing so frequently that we were unable level to account for missing data. The outcomes do to employ them in this analysis. As such, Latinx not change substantially whether one uses county- individuals of all races are likely miscoded in various level weighting or agency-level imputation, so we ways. While Afro-Latinx people are likely to be coded selected the better-known procedure for this report as Black in policing data and treated as Black by to ensure our methodology is more transparent and police, non-Black Latinx people may often be counted replicable. For the same reasons, we provide access as white by reporting agencies. This miscoding to the data and code with this updated report. This likely leads to an underestimation of the true rate report's methodology differs only in minor ways from of racial disparities experienced by people of color those of the earlier report, but we present 2010 data at the hands of police. Arrests of Latinx individuals here for comparison in the states and counties where coded as white in the data likely artificially the methodology implemented here results in slightly inflate the number of white arrests, leading to an A Tale of Two Countries: Racially Targeted Arrests in the Era of Marijuana Reform 19 Page 59

Item #5. underestimation of the disparity between Black and arr st rates. Further research, both quantitative and white arrest rates. qu litative, is warranted to more clearly understand document the effects of marijuana reforms, and We are mindful that in addition to Black and Latinx be best done at the individual state and/or groups, racial bias in policing and drug enforcement ty level. may negatively affect other racial or ethnic groups, such as Native and Indigenous populations, Arab and Middle Eastern populations, Asian populations, siderations about Timeframe Pacific Islander populations, and those with multiple report examines arrest rates from 2010 racial/ethnic identities (e.g., biracial), among others. thr ugh 2018. Although 2018 was the most recent The VCR data classifies individuals' race as "Black" yea in which data was available, it still did not "white," "Asian," "American Indian or Alaska Nati~e " all w for an examination ofthe present state of "Native Hawaiian," or "unknown." As such, future ' marijUana enforcement. Inevitably, data analyses research using VCR data could examine racial an reporting must always lag somewhat behind, disparities beyond just Black and white populations, pre enting any research from being as current as and such analysis might be particularly warranted de ired; as such, the findings provided in this report in jurisdictions with significantly large populations ca only reflect practices as of 2018. In 2018 and of those who have experienced racially biased 20 9, three states (Vermont, Michigan, and IllinoiB) policing - for example, examination of disparities in legfliZ~,~ marijuana possession, a~d three others arrest rates between Native Americans and whites (H wall, New York, and New MeXICO)decriminalized in Montana. Disparities for bi- or multiracial people po session. As data is made available for 2019 and cannot be examined with VCR data, however. The su sequent years, future analysis is warranted to VCR Program employs a "check one" approach ex lore the potential effects of the more recent laws to race, and does not allow for an individual to be as ell as the longer-term impacts ofpre-2018 laws. coded as more than one race. Furthermore ,Arab and Middle Eastern people are not identified by the VCR Program. Thus, researchers must turn to other data sources in order to examine arrest rates for multiracial and Arab or Middle Eastern individuals. Considerations about Causality This report presents descriptive statistics, providing information about numbers of arrests, rates of arrests, and racial disparities in those rates. Though we provide this information for states that have legalized and decriminalized marijuana - both before and after these reforms were enacted - we have not performed the requisite statistical controls that would be required to establish a causal link between these laws and the subsequent changes in arrest rates and racial disparities. Indeed, in many states and counties, arrest rates dropped between 2010 and 2018 despite the fact that marijuana possession remained illegal in these localities, demonstrating that many other factors besides legalization drive 20 ACLU Research Report Page 60

Item #5. Marijuana Arrests Despite an increasing number of states legalizing or decriminalizing marijuana, law enforcement made well over half a million marijuana arrests in 2018, more than for any other drug, and more than for all violent crimes combined as reported by the FBI.40 As expected, states that have legalized or decriminalized marijuana possession have seen a decline in marijuana possession arrests. However, as of 2018, the national downward trend appears to have leveled off, even as the number of states that have legalized or decriminalized marijuana has increased. FIGURE 1 The National Landscape National Arrests for Marijuana and All Other Ehugs (2010-2018) As indicated in Figure 1, between 2010 and 2018, marijuana arrests in the U.S. trended weakly downward, with rebounds in 2013, 2016, and 800,000 2017. By 2018, arrest rates were higher than in 2015, despite additional states having legalized and decriminalized during that timeframe. In 700,000 no year did they drop below 500,000. In 2018 alone, there were an estimated 692,965 marijuana arrests - the vast majority of which (89.6%) were 600,000 for possession (see Figure 2). As shown in Figure Source: FBI/Uniform Cnmp Reporting Progr::trn Data 3, marijuana possession arrest rates have dropped Note: Flnnrl"1 anrl W~.~hlnJfon D.C cirri not prl)vu'i~ rlata by approximately 15%from 2010 to 2018, resulting FIGURE 2 in a decrease in the national arrest possession National Arrests for Marijuana Possession and rate, from 250.52 per 100,000 in 2010 to 203.88 per Sales (2010-2018) 100,000 people in 2018. 600,000 As shown in Figure 4, marijuana arrests still account for more drug arrests in the U.S. than 400,000 any other drug class. 41 Marijuana arrests also accounts for more arrests than for all violent crime 200,000 combined.42 In 2018, 43.2% of all drug arrests were Marijuana sales for marijuana offenses (see Table 1). 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 Source: FBI Jndorm Cr fI1e Reportll ., Program Oat;) Note: Flom..!", )r)d W)~l1lr~ton DC ctd not prov de iota A Tale of Two Countries: Racially Targeted Arrests in the Era of Marijuana Reform 21 Page 61

Item #5. FIGURE 3 S ate and County Landscape Marijuana Possession Arrest Rate per 100k People (2010-2018) Si ce most drug law enforcement occurs at the state 400 an~ local level, it is crucial that an examination of mdrijuana possession arrests focus on state and 300 COilnty data. 200 St tes 100 Noitsurprisingly, arrest rates vary greatly between o st tes. Here, we provide a comparative assessment; 2012 2014 2016 2018 2010 cific profile sheets for every state are available in Source: FBI, Uniform Crtme RelJort'f'lg Pro~ram Data and U S. Censu3 Data Note: I=IOtida ()nd \Nasrlngtul D.: d ,1rot nr Jvde data th State Profiles section ofthis reportY T~E national marijuana possession arrest rate in FIGURE 4 Number of Arrests by Drug Type (2000-2016) 20i8 was 203.88 per 100,000. State arrest rates 1.000.000 rayged from 707.34 arrests per 100,000, in South D~ota, to 4.52 arrests per 100,000 people, in 750.000 Massachusetts (see Appendix, Table A for data for all st tes). Not only did South Dakota have the highest 500.000 ar est rate in 2018 (see Figure 5), it also had the grjatest growth, with a 176%increase in marijuana 250.000 Synthetic Narcotics porsession arrests from 2010. Although nationally o there was a decline in marijuana possession arrests, 2000 2005 2010 2015 artest rates actually increased in 17 states (see Table Source: FBI/UnllOtin Crllnt! Rt.!pol tlng PfOgf rl1 Datuj 2). Note: Thl, grdph e"cludes d,]ld from tJt~WYOlk Cit .lIlInot<; Florld.1. ;Ind W1~hl1l5ton DC. ,uhleh Ncrt! not 3vildable .1t tlmt..: )1 thh dl Jh I:; In iterms of total raw numbers of arrests, Texas had th highest total number of marijuana possession TABLE 1 ar ests, with an estimated 70,017 arrests in the year National Arrests for Marijuana and All Drugs 20f8 alone (see Appendix, Table B). In 12 states, % All Drug m .rijuana arrests accounted for more than half Total Arrests That of 11drug arrests in 2018, with Wyoming having Marijuana All Drug Were for th highest percent of all drug arrests that were Year Arrests Arrests Marijuana for marijuana possession, at 58.6% (see Appendix, 2010 831,849 1,556,916 53.4% T llbleB for total number of all drug arrests and total 2011 768,390 1,488,628 51.6% n mber of marijuana possession arrests by state). 2012 734,019 1,469,273 50.0% 2013 856,263 1,702,249 50.3% Counties 2014 679,188 1,453,543 46.7% Ndt only do states vary widely in marijuana 2015 595,127 1,369,543 43.5% e orcement, but even within states there remains 2016 611,026 1,445,215 42.3% a ange in how marijuana offenses are treated at 2017 702,778 1,613,926 43.5% th county level. Individual district attorneys and 2018 692,965 1,603,316 43.2% po ice departments have a substantial amount of Source: FBIIU',lfullll C. In R 'P')ltr \~ PIO~;rJfT Da[,J di cretion in deciding who gets arrested, charged, 22 ACLU Research Report Page 62

Item #5. FIGURE 5 States With Highest Marijuana Possession Arrest Rates per 100k (2018) South Dakota South Carolina Wyoming West Virginia Georgia Louisiana Nebraska New Jersey Tennessee Utah Missouri North Dakota Idaho Wisconsin Arkansas o 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 and convicted for drug possession. In some cases, TABLE 2 municipalities have passed their own ordinances States With Increases in Marijuana Possession related to marijuana use and enforcement. Arrest Rates (2010-2018) Table 3 lists the 20 counties with the highest % Change marijuana possession arrest rates in 2018. Four Total Arrest Total Arrest in Total of the top five counties are in South Carolina, the State Rate (2010) Rate (2018) Arrest Rate state with the second highest arrest rates for 256.17 707.34 176.1% South Dakota marijuana possession. Less predictably, three Utah 150.64 343.37 127.9% Maryland counties are represented in the top 10, North Dakota 180.64 332.52 84.1% even though Maryland decriminalized certain Wyoming 384.56 592.89 54.2% amounts of possession in 2014. Although these counties had the highest arrest rates in 2018, South Carolina 440.57 673.26 52.8% other counties have had greater increases in Arkansas 215.85 322.12 49.2% their rates over time, such as Prince George and West Virginia 299.85 447.32 49.2% Charlottesville City in Virginia and Franklin, Idaho 225.02 332.16 47.6% North Carolina. See Table 4 for a list of the 20 New Jersey 253.75 369.54 45.6% counties with the greatest increases since 2010. Ohio 184.03 248.68 35.1% New Mexico 168.15 225.71 34.2% Virginia 236.12 314.33 33.1% States That Legalized or Pennsylvania 180.45 226.52 25.5% Decriminalized Marijuana Tennessee 283.50 343.94 21.3% Possession Georgia 361.87 428.81 18.5% Louisiana 349.32 412.48 18.1% Since our last report in 2013, several states have Wisconsin 289.37 324.37 12.1% legalized or decriminalized marijuana offenses. Source: FBI Ur)rfOHn Crime RepoltlllC PrOer •.HT, DiJtJ Jlld IJ S Cen U'~ Ddt •..• Although these laws vary in their specific elements and implementation, we examine if - and how A Tale of Two Countries: Racially Targeted Arrests in the Era of Marijuana Reform 23 Page 63

Item #5. - these laws have affected arrest rates and, in a leg 1status of marijuana possession for all states and subsequent section, racial disparities in arrests. D. . as of March 2020 in the Appendix (Table C). As of March 2020, 11 states and Washington, D.C. had legalized marijuana possession and an Leralized States additional 15 states had decriminalized marijuana In r018, on average, legalized states had the lowest possession (see Appendix, Table C). At the time of this report, however, the most current data arEst rates for marijuana possession compared available was from 2018, and thus, for the following to ther states.45 Although legalized states also analyses, we considered only states that legalized or ha' lower rates of possession arrests even before decriminalized before 2018. See Table 5 for the listing leg ization, the over-time trends make it clear that of such states.44 We also provide a full listing of the leg1lization has made a difference overall. Figure TABLE3 Top 20 Counties for Marijuana Possession -r: p 20 Counties for Largest Increases in Arrest Rates per 100k people (2018) M rijuana Possession Arrest Rates per 100k p ople (2010-2018) Possession 2010 2018 % County County Rate Rate Increase Arrest Rates Chester, South Carolina 2,000.72 Pr nce George, Virginia 61.72 1090.14 1666.3% Columbia, New York 1,794.25 Charlottesville City, Virginia 41.41 371.13 796.2% Newberry, South Carolina 1,610.30 Fr, nklin, North Carolina 37.27 241.05 546.8% Worcester, Maryland 1,391.27 Bo'$sier,Louisiana 51.18 316.86 519.1% Darlington, South Carolina 1,370.12 A~gusta, Virginia 8.15 46.38 469.1% Greene, New York 1,315.23 Isle of Wight, Virginia 50.97 286.85 462.8% Marion, South Carolina 1,258.89 Somerset, Pennsylvania 97.51 530.36 444.0% Dorchester, Maryland 1,203.20 Fr ~nklin, Virginia 92.55 489.37 428.8% Calvert, Maryland 1,144.53 Ar gelina, Texas 77.75 408.73 425.7% Dodge, Nebraska 1,138.31 H; ywood, North Carolina 62.78 314.15 400.4% Prince George, Virginia 1,090.14 Pi ke, Pennsylvania 137.56 669.40 386.6% Spalding, Georgia 1,084.48 VE rmilion, Louisiana 65.41 308.47 371.6% Laurens, South Carolina 1,083.89 C. Ipeper, Virginia 219.90 1035.79 371.0% Kershaw, South Carolina 1,075.21 Jerferson, Ohio 144.08 663.78 360.7% Culpeper, Virginia 1,035.79 Nassau, New York 60.50 275.49 355.4% Washington, New York 1,000.11 M ushall, Tennessee 61.92 277.70 348.5% Colleton, South Carolina 973.88 H4mderson, Kentucky 43.23 193.02 346.5% St. Mary, Louisiana 966.93 Rcbertson, Tennessee 94.98 409.14 330.8% Erie, Ohio 963.47 Chester, South Carolina 478.57 2000.72 318.1% Perry, Pennsylvania 956.17 Athens, Ohio 135.64 554.44 308.8% Source: FBI Unltorrn C nl,: Rl.por t lb Pf'J5r 1m O-:}t,J j"U US CI,..f1 J Dl'_il So ~rce: FBI/Uniform Come Reporting Progralll DJta ~nd J S. Cens(I'; Dala Note: Include •• tQunt, ••. '11th· 30(JI)U pOpJlll'Or. > 1 81J(':1( poprd.JtlOll If lev:,t 2') No e: Includes coulllle~ ,'Vlth..•30.000 population. 1. BlaCK populatIon. alleast 25 m(:lrlJU,lll,) po" es:;ron lrrt!~r md 60 UCP overd~L Ino IJuana possession arrests In 2018 :1nd > 50'l,l., UCR coveraGe 24 ACLUResearch Report Page 64

Item #5. 6 illustrates the changes from 2010 to 2018 in TABLE 5 marijuana possession arrest rates for states that had States That Legalized or Decriminalized Marijuana Possession (Before 2018) legalized before 2018, states that had decriminalized before 2018, and states where marijuana possession Eight States and District of Columbia Legalized remained fully illegal in 2018.46 The rates fall Colorado (2012) precipitously in legalized states, indicating that, Washington (2012) as expected, legalization of marijuana possession Alaska (2014) reduces overall arrest rates for marijuana possession. District of Columbia (2014) Overall, arrests for marijuana possession decreased Oregon (2014) over time in all states that had legalized. However, California (2016) when dis aggregating legalized states, we see some Maine (2016) interesting differences (see Figure 7; note that Massachusetts (2016) the red line on the state graphs indicates when Nevada (2016) legalization occurred). In some states, the decreases Five States Decriminalized Before 2010 in arrests clearly began after legalization (Colorado, Ohio (1975) Maine, and Nevada). In other legalized states, Minnesota (1976) decreases continued on a downward trend that had already begun pre-legalization (Alaska, Oregon, North Carolina (1977) and Washington). In Massachusetts and California, Mississippi (1978) perhaps due to earlier decriminalization, the Nebraska (1979) decline in arrest rates occurred several years before Eight States Decriminalized Between 2010-2017 legalization, and remained relatively flat in the years Connecticut (2011) just before legalization and through 2018 (see also Rhode Island (2012) Figure 7). Vermont (2013) Marijuana sales make up a small proportion of Maryland (2014) marijuana arrests - only 10.4% of all marijuana Missouri (2014) arrests in 2018. Decreases in arrest rates for Delaware (2015) marijuana sale were far greater in legalized states Illinois (2016) than in other states, dropping from 36.1 arrests per New Hampshire (2017) 100,000 in 2010 to 6.27 arrests per 100,000 in 2018, an 82.7% decrease in the arrest rate. In comparison, FIGURE 6 over the same time period, sales arrest rates Marijuana Possession Arrest Rates Per 100k decreased by 35.1% in states that had decriminalized People by Legal Status (2010-2018) and 13.2% in states where marijuana remained fully illegal. Fully 111••• 1 Before 2018 Decrlmlnollud Be,.". 2018 Locol Bel •••• 2018 While marijuana possession and sales arrests consistently fell following legalization, the impact of marijuana legalization on other drug arrests is less clear. As shown in Figure 7, in some states, such as - Alaska, other drug arrest trends appear unassociated 24.5 with marijuana. In others, such as Colorado, other drug arrests climb following legalization. This is not 2010 2018 2010 2018 2010 2018 necessarily the result of marijuana legalization, and Source: FBI Undnrm ('rlmp Rpportrng PIOE;ram Datrl.lnr1 U.S, census Dat-) A Tale of Two Countries: Racially Targeted Arrests in the Era of Marijuana Reform 25 Page 65

Item #5. FIGURE 7 Drug Arrests in States With Legalized Marijuana (Befo e 2018) ••• All Other Drugs ••• Marijuana Possession Alaska California Colorado 1,600 200,000 12,000 1,200 150,000 10,000 100,000 8,000 800 50,000 6,000 400 o Maine Massachuse s Nevada 3,000 25,000 2,500 9,000 20,000 2,000 6,000 15,000 1,500 10,000 3,000 1,000 5,000 0 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 Oregon Washington 16,000 12,500 10,000 12,000 7,500 8,000 5,000 4,000 2,500 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2010 2012 2014 20 6 2018 Source: FBI/I)r IOlln (•.'IIN.; R{;portl! b ProgrJIT D-:ttJ additional research is warranted to understand how, ev· enced sharp declines immediately following if at all, marijuana legalization impacts enforcement deriminalization, a number of other states of other drugs. co~tinued a downward trend in arrests that began prf,decriminalization (Connecticut, Delaware, Ill· ois, New Hampshire, and Vermont). Decriminalized States M rijuana sales arrests also dropped in Decriminalization also appears to be associated with decriminalized states from 2010 to 2018, although a reduction in the rate of marijuana arrests, though it is less dramatically related than legalization (see . to much lesser extent than in legalized states. In st tes that decriminalized marijuana between the Figure 6). Overall, arrests for possession fell slightly ye rs of 2010 and 2018, sales arrest rates went from between 2010-2018 in states that had decriminalized 378 per 100,000 people down to 24.5 per 100,000 by marijuana possession, but possession arrest 2~8 - a 35.1%drop. For comparison, even in states rates remain approximately eight times higher in were marijuana remained fully illegal, there was on decriminalized states than in legalized states. av rage a 13.2%decrease in marijuana sales arrests As illustrated in Figure 8, there was also significant fr m 2010 to 2018. Similar to legalized states, arrest variability across decriminalized states (the red line ra es of all other drugs appear generally unassociated on state graphs indicates when decriminalization wi h the decriminalization of marijuana possession occurred).47Whereas Maryland and Rhode Island (s e also Figure 8). 26 ACLU Research Report Page 66

Item #5. FIGURE 8 Drug Arrests in All States that Decriminalized Marijuana (between 2010-2017) •• All Other Drugs •• Marijuana Possession Connecticut Delaware Illinois 8,000 3,000 25,000 2,500 20,000 6,000 2,000 15,000 4,000 1,500 10,000 2,000 1,000 5,000 Maryland Missouri New Hampshire 24,000 22,000 24,000 4,000 20,000 21,000 3,000 18,000 18,000 2,000 16,000 14,000 15,000 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 Rhode Island Vermont 1,200 2,000 900 1,500 600 1,000 300 500 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 Source: FBI/Uniform Crime Reporting ProgrulTl D.lll Across the country, considering both possession and sale offenses, states that legalized marijuana have seen larger average decreases in marijuana arrest rates than states that only decriminalized marijuana, A Tale of Two Countries: Racially Targeted Arrests in the Era of Marijuana Reform 27 Page 67

Item #5. Racial Dispariti s in Marijuana Arre ts As legalization efforts take hold in states across t~e nation, it is critical to continue examining the extent of racial bias in the enforcefent of marijuana laws, specifically against Black and Latinx populations. 48In order '0 ground legalization efforts in racial justice, we must understand the impact of r forms on racial inequities in drug enforcement. Thus, in this report, we examine racial disparities not only at the national, state, and county level, as we did in our 2013 repoi t,49but also specifically among states that have legalized or decriminalized marijuana. Because the FBI's Uniform Crime Reporting (VCR) FI URE 9 Program data, like many federal data collection Usage of Marijuana For Ages 12+ (2018) efforts, treats Latinx as an ethnicity rather than Ufetlmeu •• Pasty •• ru •• Past month u•• a distinct racial group, Latinx individuals are incorporated into both white and Black arrest rates. Thus, because the UCR data used for this report does not identify Latinx populations as a distinct racial group, potential disparities in arrest rates for Latinx • • . populations cannot be examined (see Methodology and Limitations section for more information). Black White Black White We are mindful that in addition to Latinxgroups, racial bias in policing and drug enforcement may negatively affect other racial or ethnic groups, such as Native and Indigenous populations, Arab and ex licitly on Black-white disparities in marijuana Middle Eastern populations, Asian populations, Pacific Islander populations, and those with multiple Fo this report, racial disparities in policing and racial! ethnic identities (e.g., biracial populations), elorcement of marijuana possession laws were among others. Improved data collection tools and q ntified by comparing arrest rates in the Black more in-depth research into the specific experiences po ulation to arrest rates in the white population. of these groups as related to drug enforcement is B I dividing the arrest rate in the Black population clearly necessary. However, given the focus of this by the arrest rate in the white population, we can report and the limitations of the most current and es imate how much more likely Black people are than comprehensive available data (VCR), we provide data 28 ACLU Research Report Page 68

Item #5. white people to be arrested for marijuana possession, FIGURE 10 known as the "rate ratio" (see the Methodology and Rates of Black and White Marijuana Possession Arrests per 100k people Limitations section for more details on how the rate ratio was calculated). A rate ratio of one indicates 600 that Black individuals and white individuals are arrested at the same rate. A rate ratio greater than one indicates how much more likely Black populations are 400 than white populations to be arrested for marijuana 200 .••• White ---- arrest rate••• possession - for example, a rate ratio of three indicates that Black people are three times more likely than white people to be arrested for marijuana 0 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 possession. A rate ratio ofless than one indicates that white people are more likely than Black people in Source: FBI/Uniform Crime Reporting Progr.1nl Dnta and U,S. Cen'iuc;. D.lt.:l Note: Flollda i;lnd Wac,hington, D,C did not provid~ d:Ha a given state or county to be arrested for marijuana possession. annual surveys of marijuana use over respondents' Despite the pronounced disparities in arrest rates lifetime, over the past year, and over the past month. 50 for marijuana possession between Black and SAMSHA survey data consistently finds that rates white people demonstrated in this report, rates of ever use and recent use by race do not significantly of marijuana use are roughly equal between Black differ between Black and white populations (see and white people. The Substance Abuse and Mental Figure 9 for 2018 usage rates). Therefore, the wide Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), a racial disparities in marijuana possession arrest federal branch of the U.S. Department of Health and rates cannot be explained by differences in marijuana Human Services, conducts nationally representative usage rates between Black and white people. TABLE 6 Black and White Marijuana Possession Rates (2010-2018) The National Landscape Arrest Rates per 100k Enormous disparities exist nationwide between arrest rates of Blacks and whites for marijuana Black/ Marijuana Black White White possession. Despite using marijuana at similar rates Possession Arrest Arrest Rate (see Figure 9), Black people are 3.64 times more Year Arrest Rate Rate Rate Ratio likely than white people to be arrested for marijuana 2010 250.52 659.06 199.19 3.31 possession. In 2018, 567 Black people per 100,000 2011 229.69 624.43 178.43 3.50 were arrested for marijuana possession, compared to 156 white people per 100,000 (see Figure 10). While 2012 217.79 601.68 168.75 3.57 national arrest rates for marijuana possession have 2013 253.51 625.68 212.55 2.94 fallen for both Black and white individuals since 2010, 2014 199.40 552.13 155.80 3.54 the rate ratio has not improved at all. As detailed in 2015 174.06 459.89 138.90 3.31 Table 6, in 2010, Black people were 3.31 times more likely to be arrested for marijuana possession than 2016 179.99 477.64 143.42 3.33 whites, and in 2018, they were 3.64 times more likely- 2017 207.44 560.08 160.60 3.49 the greatest disparity ofthe past nine years. 2018 203.88 567.51 156.06 3.64 Source: FBI/Uniform Crime RepOrlll'o Program Daln 'lnrl U.S Censu, Drltd A Tale of Two Countries: Racially Targeted Arrests in the Era of Marijuana Reform 29 Page 69

Item #5. State and County Landscape two~poPulations, for each state. States are ordered by the r rate ratio. In 2018, Montana was the state with the ighest rate of racial disparities between Black States anlwhite people, with a rate ratio of9.62, indicating Although overall arrest rates and the extent of tha Black people in that state were 9.62 times more racial disparities in arrests varied across states, in lik ly to he arrested for marijuana possession than every single state, Black people were more likely to who epeople. be arrested for marijuana possession than white Alt, ough Montana had the greatest racial disparities, people. Figure 11 displays a map of racial disparities WYFming had the highest arrest rate for Black people in marijuana possession arrests by state - darker specifically (see Figure 12 for the 20 states with red states have higher arrest rate ratios between thelhighest Black arrest rates). In 2018, Wyoming Black and white individuals than lighter red states. arrested 2,677 Black people out of every 100,000. The darkest red states (Montana, Kentucky, Illinois, West Virginia, and Iowa) had the highest racial Ge rgia was the state with the highest overall number I disparities in marijuana possession arrest rates in of ~lack arrests for marijuana possession, with 2018 (9.62,9.36, 7.51, 7.31, and 7.26, respectively). 27:t81 arrests in the year 2018 alone (see Appendix, Ta Ie B for total number of Black marijuana Table 7 provides the overall marijuana possession po session arrests, by state). arrest rate, the arrest rates for the Black and white populations, and the rate ratios between Black and Alt ough racial disparities have decreased in some white arrests, a measure of the disparity between the sta es since 2010, they have actually worsened in a FIGURE 11 Black-to-White Rate Ratios for Marijuana Possession rrests by State (2018) Darker red states have higher rate ratios of arrest betwee Black and white individuals than lighter red states WA OR CA AK HI Source: FBlfUnlft m Cl m(' Rtportl'lg Program D:'lt) )nri U S Cf'1"I \I Din Ox 2x 4x 6x 8x 10x Note: Flo/ld1 ~rlrl Va"lilngloi1 D_C :'lId nOl rlOvldp rlat~ 30 ACLU Research Report Page 70

Item #5. majority of states. In 31 states, racial disparities racial disparities in marijuana possession arrests were larger in 2018 than in 2010; in 18 states, racial increased by 25% or more (see Figure 13). As shown disparities were narrower than in 2010.51 In 20 states, in Figure 13, the states with the greatest growth FIGURE 12 States With Highest Black Arrest Rates for Marijuana Possession (2018) Per 100k Black people Wyoming West Virginia South Dakota Utah North Dakota South Carolina Nebraska Wisconsin Montana Idaho New Jersey New Mexico Tennessee Georgia New Hampshire Louisiana Kentucky Missouri Iowa Virginia Source: FBI/Uniform Grune Renortlllg Program D~la ,lnn U.S Censu<: Dma FIGURE 13 States With Largest Increases in Racial Disparities (Since 2010) Montana iiiiiiiiiii::~:-•••• New Mexico Maine Illinois Hawai'i New Hampshire Wyoming ••••••••• WestKentucky Virginia :::::::::::. Vermont Oklahoma Delaware Idaho Arizona Rhode Island Utah North Dakota South Carolina New Jersey Virginia 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% A Tale of Two Countries: Racially Targeted Arrests in the Era of Marijuana Reform 31 Page 71

Item #5. TABLE 7 Arrest Rates per 100k Black and White Marijuana Possession Marijuana Black Arrest White Arrest Black/White Arrests Rates and State Possessitln Rate Rate Rate Ratio Disparities by State Arrest R~lte (2018) Montana 127.62 1064.23 110.60 9.62 Kentucky 141.72 788.34 84.19 9.36 Illinois 43.01 137.84 18.36 7.51 West Virginia 447.32 2516.95 344.26 7.31 Iowa 133.82 776.28 106.90 7.26 Vermont 21.54 126.26 20.83 6.06 North Dakota 332.52 1437.25 260.99 5.51 Minnesota 126.71 536.94 100.02 5.37 Wyoming 592.89 2677.27 515.27 5.20 South Dakota 707.34 2151.53 426.79 5.04 Utah 343.37 1526.97 310.43 4.92 Kansas 80.56 323.84 66.94 4.84 Oklahoma 199.25 719.47 169.62 4.24 Wisconsin 324.37 1125.85 265.58 4.24 Delaware 89.33 222.45 53.57 4.15 Alabama 55.82 128.03 31.01 4.13 New Hampshire 202.10 803.40 195.28 4.11 Massachusetts 4.52 14.76 3.65 4.04 Connecticut 49.85 152.57 37.91 4.02 Maine 54.99 214.84 53.89 3.99 New Mexico 225.71 837.21 210.54 3.98 Idaho 332.16 1026.94 263.83 3.89 Michigan 140.95 373.80 104.06 3.59 Indiana 247.61 712.06 204.01 3.49 New Jersey 369.54 1007.96 292.49 3.45 South Carolina 673.26 1420.68 412.27 3.45 Virginia 314.33 768.01 223.37 3.44 Ohio 248.68 526.73 153.48 3.43 Louisiana 412.48 795.52 237.31 3.35 Rhode Island 37.80 110.17 33.17 3.32 North Carolina 234.85 528.27 162.03 3.26 Tennessee 343.94 820.16 255.09 3.22 Nebraska 409.42 1163.94 379.73 3.07 Arizona 208.75 580.65 190.90 3.04 Nevada 76.65 212.26 69.72 3.04 Pennsylvania 226.52 577.96 190.40 3.04 Georgia 428.81 804.32 271.82 2.96 Mississippi 294.78 478.88 176.39 2.71 Missouri 340.28 780.94 296.38 2.63 New York 287.76 597.59 227.53 2.63 Texas 244.12 561.60 213.99 2.62 Arkansas 322.12 648.46 271.21 2.39 Washington 25.90 52.18 24.44 2.14 Maryland 279.40 470.16 220.74 2.13 Oregon 69.54 130.90 71.74 1.82 California 9.14 18.12 10.00 1.81 Source: FBI. UllltorlTl Cnnle PeIJOrtll1,E! Hawai'i 55.78 130.90 73.42 1.78 Program Dat~ .:Ind U S Cen.:.;;s Data 45.40 1.56 Alaska 53.35 70.82 Note: Florida Jnd W<t •.•...,ni~ton D ( d,,; ot provide d ::Ita Colorado 82.20 130.51 84.90 1.54 32 ACLU Research Report Page 72

Item #5. in racial disparities - Montana, New Mexico, and In 2018,96.1 %of these counties (1,081 counties total) Illinois - each had an increase in Black-white arrest had a rate ratio greater than one, indicating a higher disparities of more than 100%(increases of 175.6%, likelihood of arrest for Black people than white 118.7%, and 118.3%, respectively). people. Put another way, in less than 5% of these counties was the rate ratio equal to or lower than one - These findings, combined with findings on changes i.e., white people were as likely as or more likely than in arrest rates from 2010-2018, demonstrate that Black people to be arrested for marijuana possession. falling arrest rates do not automatically lead to a Figure 14 displays the range of disparities by county- reduction in racial disparities - in fact, in some in almost all counties (96.1%), Black people were more states, racial disparities rose even as arrest rates likely than white people to be arrested for marijuana fell (see Appendix, Table A for changes in racial possession. In a sizable proportion of these counties, disparities and arrest rates, over time by state). Black people were between two and 10 times more likely than whites to be arrested for marijuana. They were up to 20 times more likely to be arrested in a Counties small number of other counties (see also Figure 14). The racial disparities found at the state level exist Table 8 lists the 20 counties with the highest racial at the county level, as well. In the overwhelming disparities, or rate ratios, between Black and white majority of counties across the U.S., Black people arrests for marijuana possession. The highest racial were more likely to be arrested for marijuana disparities can be found in Pickens County, Georgia, possession than white people. When ranking county- where Black people were almost 100 times more level racial disparities, we considered counties with likely to be arrested for marijuana possession than populations greater than 30,000, greater than 1% white people (rate ratio of 97.22). Carter County, Black population, and more than 50% data coverage, 52 Tennessee had the sharpest increase in disparities which contain 81% of the U.S. population. from 2010-2018 - 976.7% (see Table 9). In terms of FIGURE 14 Distribution of County-Level Black-to-White Rates of Racial Disparities (2018) Most counties arrested Black people for marijuana possession at 3 to 5 times the rate of white people 200 counties 150 100 50 o 111111•..... _-- ------- 1x 10x 20x 30x Soutce: FBL Uniform Cnm~ ReJJorf,ng Prus'i:S11l Oat.) dnu US Len' IS D,Jtrt Note: Includes counties wltl, _> :lU,UU!] populdtlon. _"> I t Blal.:K pupulatlon md :> 5(J~ UCR CU\ltH'::I~e. An adliltlonal e l.Ulll"\tle~ _11thrat", r Jt u ,:"UO/t ;lIlA \'.ert' rt'mo.~d A Tale of Two Countries: Racially Targeted Arrests in the Era of Marijuana Reform 33 Page 73

Item #5. TABLE 8 Top 20 Counties for Racial Disparities in Marijuana Po session Arrests (2018) Pickens Georgia 31,243.16 321.38 97.22 DeKalb Alabama 1,159.80 25.57 45.35 Tazewell Illinois 682.21 15.76 43.30 Ozaukee Wisconsin 5,548.04 158.98 34.90 Manitowoc Wisconsin 7,862.33 263.44 29.85 Perry Pennsylvania 21,158.65 746.03 28.36 Washington Wisconsin 6,164.84 227.70 27.07 Washington Ohio 4,477.05 166.34 26.91 Clarion Pennsylvania 4,651.16 181.54 25.62 Medina Ohio 3,166.91 125.82 25.17 Preston West Virginia 11,558.56 463.02 24.96 Putnam West Virginia 5,284.23 213.36 24.77 Peoria Illinois 326.50 13.52 24.16 Waukesha Wisconsin 3,314.30 138.78 23.88 Douglas Nevada 4,969.82 226.80 21.91 Walker Georgia 4,675.58 216.82 21.56 Clinton Michigan 2,867.60 133.26 21.52 Hanover Virginia 5,808.88 280.07 20.74 Wayne Ohio 3,730.71 184.02 20.27 Geauga Ohio 1,519.42 76.55 19.85 Source: FBI/Uniform Cnme Reporlmg Program Data and US. Censu,; Data Note: Includes countleo:; wilh 30.000 pOptil;Hlon, > 1 BIJ('~ population. 11 IJ;!:-'Ist 21j m;'lrIJuana pI "seSSion alfo'?c,t :md > 50Q.l"., UCR covfC!ra~e highest overall rate of Black people arrested in 2018, de reased for both Black and white populations, yet Pickens County, Georgia, leads the counties with th racial disparities in arrest rates persist. In every a rate of 31,243.16 per 100,000, followed by Perry st te that has legalized or decriminalized marijuana County, Pennsylvania, with 21,158.65 per 100,000. po I session, Black people are still more likely to be Lastly, a full one-fourth (5) of the top 20 counties for ar ested for possession than white people. racial disparities in 2018 were located in Illinois (see As shown in Figure 15, on average, states that also Table 8). le1~lized marijuana possession had lower racial di parities in possession arrests in 2018 than st tes where marijuana remained fully illegal, as States That Legalized or we as states that decriminalized. However, it is Decriminalized Marijuana no! clear that these lower racial disparities are a re ult oflegalization, given the fact that the states Possession th .t legalized also had lower racial disparities in As reported in the previous section, the total number th I years prior to legalization. It is worth noting of people arrested for marijuana possession, and th t, on average, racial disparities in states that rates of arrests, have decreased in all legalized decriminalized were relatively similar to disparities states and most decriminalized states. These rates in I tates that were fully illegal (see also Figure 15). 34 ACLU Research Report Page 74

Item #5. TABLE 9 20 Counties With Largest Increases in Racial Disparities in Marijuana Possession Arrests (2010-2018) County State 2010 2018 Percent Increase Carter Tennessee 1.29 13.89 976.7% Washington Virginia 1.34 12.22 811.9% Isabella Michigan 2.36 14.90 531.4% Ozaukee Wisconsin 6.20 34.90 462.9% Santa Fe New Mexico 2.51 13.65 443.8% Hanover Virginia 3.92 20.74 429.1% Rogers Oklahoma 1.75 9.13 421.7% Catoosa Georgia 2.56 13.25 417.6% Granville North Carolina 2.31 11.69 406.1% Frederick Virginia 1.37 6.92 405.1% Schoharie New York 2.44 11.99 391.4% DeKalb Alabama 9.23 45.35 391.3% Fannin Texas 1.45 6.95 379.3% Burnet Texas 1.70 7.88 363.5% Washington Ohio 6.26 26.91 329.9% Habersham Georgia 3.60 15.38 327.2% Delaware New York 3.19 13.48 322.6% Columbia Wisconsin 2.68 10.98 309.7% Walworth Wisconsin 3.64 14.83 307.4% Fauquier Virginia 1.56 6.28 302.6% Source: FBI/Unlfol m Crim~ Reporting Progrdm Oatcl and U S. Censu~ DatJ Note: Include";; L.ountlt:!~ 'Jlth ,30.000 POjJuliltion. > 1 BI<lrk POpuldtltJn at least 25 martjudnfJ po.,session Clrresh. In 2U18 cmd :> 50~ UCR cov~raee. The absolute difference between Black and white FIGURE 15 arrest rates was narrower in legalized states at Times More Likely Black People Arrested for Marijuana Possession by Legal Status (2010-2018) the end of the decade than at the beginning, but racial disparities remain in every legalized state Fully Illegal Before 2018 Decrlml ••• 11zed Before 2018 "",1 Befo •• 2018 and every decriminalized state (see Figures 16 and 17;the red line on state graphs indicates when legalization or decriminalization occurred). In some legalized states, the disparities actually got worse. For example, Maine went from a disparity of 2.1 in 2010 to 4.0 in 2018. In other legalized states, the disparities did improve, dropping from 4.0 to 3.0 in Nevada and from 2.2 to 1.8 in California, 2010 2018 2010 2018 2010 2018 for example. These results clearly indicate that Source: FBI Ur1lfOlm Crllne RF:'POlt'r1,:> Prol!,ram Ddta and US Cen'l.; D1 iJ T neither decriminalization nor legalization of marijuana possession alone eliminates the research is warranted to better understand why disproportionate criminalization of Black people these disparities narrowed in some states and in marijuana regulation and enforcement. Further widened in others. A Tale of Two Countries: Racially Targeted Arrests in the Era of Marijuana Reform 35 Page 75

Item #5. lJoda~ 4:JJeaSa~ m::)'V 9S cqea sf"I"ua:) S r vue ep')(1 UJel~OJd SlOi: 9l0i: PlOl i:lOi: OLOi: SlOi: 9l0l PlOi: lLOl OlOl ... upaded aWIJ!) UJJOJllInIl8:j :a:unos xp xg°i: X~rz; xg X£ XS XZ;o£ XOl XVoS SlOi: 9l0i: PlOi: i:lOi: OLOi: x~n; Xz; x£ xg°Z; xgo£ X£ xp e..l!'1SdW8H MeN puel.(Aew xgo£ Xv XLo£ xg XsoS xg x6°£ Xv XL xp Xlov S!OU!III e..leMelea ~n:)!~euuo:> f!.I8W paZ!leU!W!.I:»aa ~8~.lsa~e~s U! Sa!~!.IedS!a18!:»eH Ll3~n81::1 ell:'!O sn£u98 'S n pUB 121ea l.ueJ~OJd vlOi: llOl mOi: SlOi: 9l0i: PlOi: 1:l0i: alai: i l'lJodad aWIJJ WJOjlUn '18:j :a:unos xglol xz; xgol xz;oz; xgLol xv°Z; xl uoJe..lO SlOi: 9l0i: PlOi: lLOi: mOi: X£ Xl xgo£ xgol Xv x£ xgov xgT xg Xv Xv epeAeN eU!8W xgol x~n xgLol xl Xi: xgol x£ xgi:°i: xgo£ ope..lolO:> 811s81V (8~OC;aJO~a8 eUenf!.I8W paZ!le~a, ~~!Msa~e~s U! sa!~!.I8ds!ale!:»eH gl3~n81::1 Page 76

Item #5. Conclusion Findings detailed in this report reveal an uncomfortable truth: While there has been some progress in scaling back the war on people who use marijuana, it is still wreaking havoc in much of the U.S. Despite decades of failure, prohibition and punitiveness generally remain the centerpiece of governments' approach to drug use. Law enforcement continues to make hundreds of thousands of marijuana possession arrests every year, accounting for almost half of all drug arrests nationwide. Furthermore, although marijuana possession arrest rates were lower nationally in 2018 than in 2010, the initial decline of the first part of the decade appears to have stagnated, or even reversed. As disturbingly, this report also finds that marijuana enforcement remains as racialized as ever, notwithstanding similar underlying usage rates. In 2018 - unchanged from 2010 - Black people were still nearly 4 times more likely than white people to get arrested for marijuana possession, despite similar usage rates. Our findings indicate that states that legalized or decriminalized marijuana have enjoyed a reduction of marijuana possession arrests between 2010 and States that legalized 2018, and a significantly greater reduction than in states where marijuana remains illegal. Arrests for or decriminalized marijuana sales also decreased greatly from 2010 to marijuana have 2018 in states that legalized marijuana. However, it is also clear from the findings that most jurisdictions have enjoyed that have enacted progressive marijuana policy have failed to do so from a foundation of racial justice. As a reduction such, though legalization and decriminalization of marijuana appear to reduce the overall number of marijuana possession arrests for Black and white people alike, possession arrests. such laws have not substantially reduced, let alone eliminated, the significantly larger arrest rates of Black people. A Tale of Two Countries: Racially Targeted Arrests in the Era of Marijuana Reform 37 Page 77

Item #5. This report also finds that there is wide variation in marijuana enforcement not only between states, but also within states, as measured by both the number of arrests and the attendant racial disparities. Progress reducing such arrests and disparities over the past decade also varies significantly. The one common finding across every state and the vast majority of counties is that Black people are more likely to be arrested for possessing marijuana than white people, regardless of whether possession is illegal, legal, or decriminalized in their state. The U.S. has waged a failed, devastating, decades- long war on drugs, including marijuana, in specific communities. Rounding up hundreds of thousands of people every year - millions every decade - for marijuana offenses, this racist campaign has caused profound and far-reaching harm on the people arrested, convicted, and/or incarcerated for marijuana offenses. It has been a colossal waste of money and law enforcement resources that has only deepened the divide between communities and their governments and increased public hurt rather than safety. Such harm cannot be undone, but as a country we can acknowledge, repair, and rebuild so that our future looks nothing like our prohibitionist past. It is long past due for the U.S. to end marijuana prohibition, and to do so in a way that confronts head-on the stark racial inequities in marijuana enforcement and grounds legalization in racial justice. 38 ACLU Research Report Page 78

Item #5. Recommendations As the ACLU recommended in our original report in 2013, the most effective way to eliminate arrests for marijuana use and possession, and the racial disparities that plague such arrests, is through marijuana legalization. 53 Iflegalization is not yet achievable, states should, at a minimum, decriminalize marijuana offenses. Based on the findings from this report, racial equity should be centered in every aspect of the legalization and decriminalization process. States must also improve their data collection practices and policies with regard to arrests by race. We cannot undo the harms perpetuated by marijuana prohibition, but we can chart a smarter, fairer future that uplifts and repairs the people and communities most harmed by criminalization. Recommendations at a Glance For Federal, State, and Local For Law Enforcement Agencies Governments • End the enforcement of marijuana • Legalize marijuana use and possession possession and distribution • Do not replace marijuana prohibition • End racial profiling by police with a system of fines, fees, and arrests · Eliminate consent searches • Grant clemency to or resentence anyone · End the practice of using raw numbers of incarcerated on a marijuana conviction stops, citations, summons, and arrests as a and expunge all marijuana convictions metric to measure productivity and efficacy • Eliminate collateral consequences • Develop systems for the routine collection that result from marijuana arrests or of accurate data on a range of police convictions practices • Ensure new legal markets benefit and • Invest in nonpunitive programs and are accessible to communities most community-based services and divest from harmed by the War on Drugs law enforcement • Ensure marijuana possession and • Develop, secure, and implement strong, other low-level offense arrests are not independent, and effective oversight included in performance measures for mechanisms for local law enforcement federal funding A Tale of Two Countries: Racially Targeted Arrests in the Era of Marijuana Reform 39 Page 79

Item #5. Federal, State, and Local Governments It is critical that states' legalization 1. Legalize marijuana use and possession. schemes must The federal government should remove marijuana be equitable and from the Controlled Substances Act; until it does, it grounded in racial should not enforce marijuana offenses. justice. States should legalize marijuana through a system of taxation, licensing, and regulation under which private businesses licensed and regulated by the hel ensure that racial disparities do not continue state can sell marijuana. This mode oflegalization offers numerous benefits; it would largely address the arrests epidemic and - if centered in racial Further, some states have seen a rise in youth arrests equity - its attendant racial disparities by removing fotarijuana.6G It is vital that when states legalize marijuana possession and use from the criminal for adults, they do not continue to criminalize justice system. Further, it would save cash-strapped yo tho They should also decriminalize marijuana- state and local governments millions of dollars in reI. ted activities for youth. Instead of the continued decreased police, jail, and court costs that could be cri~inalization of young people, jurisdictions that redirected toward repairing the harms of the War on legEze, decriminalize, or depenalize youth offenses Drugs. sh uld provide alternatives to criminal intervention su h as drug education programs or community As a society, we permit the controlled use of alcohol serl .ceoIf drug education programs are provided as and tobacco, substances that can be dangerous to an~ternative, they should be scientifically accurate health and, at times, public safety. We educate society ab ut the harms of drugs and sympathetic toward the about those dangers and have constructed a system yo ng people in the program who may have used and/ oflaws that allow for the use and possession of these or old drugs. substances while seeking to protect the public from their dangers. Particularly given the findings of this report, states that have not legalized should create 2. Do not replace marijuana similar systems for legalizing marijuana use and p hibition with a system of fines, possession. 54 fe s, and arrests. In addition, while legalization and decriminalization We should not replace a criminal system with fines significantly lower the overall numbers of marijuana an fees that create a modern-day debtors' prison. It arrests, some states have seen an even steeper rise is i portant to recognize that replacing marijuana in the proportion of Black people whose lives are ar 'fsts with fees, fines, or tickets is not an ideal impacted by a marijuana arrest. 55 This indicates solhtion for a number of reasons. First, the same that it is critical that states' legalization schemes rac~[. al disparities that exist nationwide in arrests for must be equitable and grounded in racial justice. ma ijuana possession would likely be replicated in The recommendations in this report are vital to cit tions for civil offenses for marijuana possession. instill equity into the legalization process and to Se ond, the monetary fines that accompany civil 40 ACLU Research Report Page 80

Item #5. offenses can place a substantial burden on those fined, nonpayment, penalties should be limited and under particularly the young, poor, and people of color - all no circumstances should they result in incarceration, of whom are disproportionately targeted by police. suspension or revocation of driver's licenses, Third, individuals who are unable to make payments disenfranchisement, extension or revocation of in a timely fashion, or at all, or who do not appear probation, parole or any other form of supervision, or in court to answer to the civil charge, are subject to additional monetary penalties. 59 Finally, because of arrest - often by a warrant squad - which results the discriminatory impact of fines and fees and their in individuals being brought to court and in some massive impact, outstanding debt for marijuana fines cases jailed for failing to pay the fines or to appear. In and fees should be forgiven with legalization. addition to placing significant personal and financial burdens on the individual, this imposes significant costs on the state, possibly exceeding the original 3. Include clemency, resentencing, fine imposed. All fees, taxes, and surcharges that are and expungement processes in imposed for the purpose of recouping operating costs legalization efforts. should be repealed. While progress in reforming our nation's drug laws is While fees should never be implemented, if fines vital, we must remember that if we legalize marijuana must be, they should be proportionate, both in terms without righting the wrongs of past enforcement, of individual income and severity of the offense, we risk reinforcing the decades of disproportionate and they should impose an equitable burden on harm communities of color have endured. That is why people regardless of income level. In the case of legalization must come with processes for clemency, nonpayment, there should be limited penalties for resentencing, and expungement to reflect the change failure to pay. At a bare minimum, "ability to pay" in law. No one should be incarcerated on a marijuana hearings should be required before the imposition offense. And having a marijuana conviction on your of any fines or fees, and any preexisting laws that record can make it difficult to secure and maintain tie the hands of judges who wish to reduce or waive employment, housing, or secure government fines should be repealed. For those who cannot pay, 57 assistance for the rest of your life. 60 If we believe that there should be mechanisms in place for proactively marijuana is not worthy of criminal intervention, requesting a reduction or waiver based on financial then it is only right we stop the suffering inflicted on circumstances prior to default. 58 In the case of people by marijuana prosecution, especially since we know it disproportionately falls on the shoulders oflow-income communities and communities of color. Clemency, resentencing, and expungement Legalization must processes should be speedy, automatic, and provided at no cost to the person who is being granted come with processes clemency or resentencing or whose record is being for clemency, expunged. resentencing, and Illinois, California, and others have instituted expungement and resentencing processes expungement to concurrently with or following legalization, giving us a model of successful tactics as well as roadblocks to reflect the change clearing people's records. The categories of offenses eligible for automatic clemency, resentencing, in law. or expungement should be wide, and include as many people and types of offense as possible. This A Tale of Two Countries: Racially Targeted Arrests in the Era of Marijuana Reform 41 Page 81

Item #5. means ensuring that the burden is placed on the • oss of driver's licenses government, not the people, to begin the process of • eportation expunging marijuana records and granting clemency and resentencing to people incarcerated or being oss offederal financial aid punished for marijuana offenses. This process should be as quick as possible. Every day, week, month, • ans on participation in the marijuana industry or year that people spend incarcerated or being or those with drug arrests punished for marijuana offenses or that marijuana • elony disenfranchisement records are maintained is a day, week, month, or year that large numbers of people will struggle to gain employment, housing, education loans, and 5. Implement new legal markets to others. An expedient process is burdensome but also b nefit communities most harmed tremendously beneficial. Some localities have found b the War on Drugs. creative ways to ensure that people are resentenced or have their records expunged in a timely manner. Th benefits reaped from emerging legal Cook County, for example, is using Code for America m ketplaces for marijuana should be shared with to assist in analyzing conviction data to autopopulate the communities most harmed by the War on Drugs. forms for expungement. g, For all those who are not We have 5een multiple 5tate5 that prevent those with automatically expunged, the process should be as dr g convictions on their record from participating quick and cheap as possible. in 1jhelegal marijuana marketplace, therefore pri~enting those most harmed by marijuana legrization from the profits and employment 4. Eliminate collateral th t these new markets bring.62 Iflegislatures consequences that result from or esidents determine that we should no longer marijuana arrests or convictions. crijinalize marijuana because it is ineffective and disr~oportionatelY impacts people of color, then those No person should be denied public benefits or mo t harmed by criminalization should be able to suffer other collateral consequences due to access the industry. marijuana use, arrest, or conviction. Collateral consequences can significantly derail many In ddition, legalization should include licensing for aspects of a person's life post arrest, conviction, or sumption spaces that are open to the public in incarceration. As enforcement of marijuana offenses or er to provide space for legal consumption for those disproportionately falls on communities of color, so wh live in public housing or rental units that do not too does the brunt of collateral consequences and all w consumption or smoking. This is important, discrimination on the basis of marijuana use, arrests, beoause iflegalization occurs without providing co sumption spaces (such as cafes) open to the public, and conviction. pejPle who live in rental or public housing have no The following collateral consequences and pIa e to consume marijuana without risking eviction discriminatory measures should be eliminated with or riminalization for public consumption. legalization: Gi n the history of the War on Drugs and the • Denial of public benefits based on use, arrests, or de astating harm it has caused communities of convictions for marijuana col r, it is only just that the tax revenue raised by the new legal market be put toward repairing these • Drug tests for benefit eligibility ha s. Revenue can be invested in communities • Separation of families in the child welfare system mo t harmed by the drug war through programming 42 ACLU Research Report Page 82

Item #5. on people who commit low-level offenses, including low-level drug users, possessors, and distributors. The benefits reaped By including marijuana possession arrests and from emerging legal other low-level offense arrests in performance assessments of a state's use of federal funds, the marketplaces should federal government is relying upon an unreliable measure of law enforcement's ability to increase be shared with the public safety and reduce the exploitative trafficking communities most of drugs. Indeed, such arrests reduce neither the use nor availability of marijuana. harmed by the War on Drugs. Law Enforcement Agencies that helps to end the collateral harms of marijuana 1. End the enforcement of laws prohibition, including barriers to employment, and criminalizing marijuana possession supports small businesses owned and/or run by and distribution. communities directly impacted by the War on Drugs. Aggressive enforcement of low-level offenses such Finally, it is important to create fair licensing as marijuana possession unnecessarily funnels structures in which the cost of obtaining a license is hundreds ofthousands of people into the criminal reasonable and accessible to small business owners legal system - primarily young people of color and to the communities most impacted by the War and particularly Black people. Therefore, police on Drugs. It should not take an exorbitant amount of departments and municipal government entities money to be able to profit from the new legal market, should end police enforcement of marijuana and the communities most impacted by the failed possession and marijuana distribution, as well as War on Drugs should be able to participate in and a range of other low-level offenses, such as traffic profit from the emerging industry. infractions and "quality oflife" offenses, and work to address these issues through measures that do not employ the criminal legal system. If this is not 6. Ensure marijuana possession possible, police departments and local government and other low-level offense arrests entities should make these offenses a low priority for are not included in performance enforcement. measures of law enforcement Over the past decade, certain cities, including Seattle agencies for federal funding. and San Francisco (prior to legalization), made Federal government grants, including the Byrne marijuana possession their lowest enforcement Justice Assistance Grants (or Byrne JAG), should priority.63 Such a policy provides local governments not include arrest numbers in their performance with additional resources to fund public health, measures. As long as arrest statistics - which include economic, and education initiatives that address the any arrest, including any drug arrest - are included social challenges at the root of most criminal offenses. in law enforcement's performance measures, police departments are likely encouraged to increase their arrest numbers by targeting their resources 2. End racial profiling. A Tale of Two Countries: Racially Targeted Arrests in the Era of Marijuana Reform 43 Page 83

Item #5. Racial profiling refers to the act of selecting or targeting a person(s) for law enforcement contact (including stop, frisk, search, and arrest) based on Racial profiling the individual's actual or perceived race, ethnicity, national origin rather than a reasonable suspicion or can lead to the that the individual has or is engaged in criminal aggressive activity. Racial profiling includes policies or practices (such as broken windows policing) that enforcement of have a disparate impact on certain communities- minor offenses specifically those of color. in communities Police interactions with people should be directed only toward investigating actual threats to public of color. safety. However, too often, police stop and search people of color without substantial evidence of wrongdoing, based on explicit and implicit biases. Such racial profiling can lead to the aggressive Fu ther, police departments as well as local and state go rnments should ban pretextual stops, where enforcement of minor offenses in communities of pol ce stop someone - often because of the person's color, disproportionately and needlessly entangling race or ethnicity - for a minor infraction, such as people - particularly young people - in the criminal a trl ffic offense, as a pretext to investigate other legal system for offenses that are rarely, if ever, poslsible crimes. Indeed, marijuana possession is enforced in more affluent, predominantly white oft n used as such a pretext. communities. Police departments should adopt model racial profiling policies that define racial Poltce departments should investigate all complaints profiling, prohibit law enforcement from engaging in 1 in thorough and timely manner using their it, and make clear that it is unconstitutional under the exi1ting resources, if they are not already being Fomth Amendment.64 handled by a more effective independent oversight body (more discussion in the later sections), and A further step that courts and state legislatures imJlement appropriate and proportionate discipline should take is to raise the level of suspicion required for oncompliance with such policies (including to stop and briefly detain a person against their will dis issal). for investigative purposes. The current constitutional baseline requires a relatively low bar - reasonable suspicion of criminal activity - for such stopS.65 3. nd the use of consent searches. Raising this standard to the same standard as a Co sent searches are defined as searches made regular arrest- probable cause to believe the person by 1 w enforcement based on the consent of the is engaged in criminal activity - would significantly ind vidual whose person or property is being reduce the number of innocent people detained sea ched. Because the legality of the search depends and reduce the risks of racial profiling. For similar on -fuefact of consent rather than any particular reasons, courts and state legislatures should consider ev~. entiary showing by the police, police officers use raising the standard for "frisk" searches during co ent searches to circumvent legal standards that investigative stops by requiring more than mere req ire most searches to be based on probable cause. "reasonable belief' that someone is armed to carry out Ho ever, the environment in which they seek consent a search of their person. IS 1 erently coercive, and most policies do not even 44 ACLU Research Report Page 84

Item #5. require officers to notify the person that it is possible and harassment of police; justified frustration and to refuse consent. They are used overwhelmingly anger toward our criminal legal system, particularly against people of color, in circumstances where it policing practices; a de-emphasis on true justice and is doubtful that the officers would have been able to healing, including restorative justice and trauma- justify the search without the legal fiction of consent. informed responses to harms in communities; and As such, local governments should ban the use of the funneling of people of color into our criminal legal consent searches through policies and legislation. system at immense personal cost to individuals and their families as well as pecuniary cost to taxpayers. 4. End the practice of using raw To move away from evaluating public safety and police efficacy through arrest numbers, police numbers of stops, citations, departments should reduce the reliance on stops, summons, and arrests as a metric citations, summons, and arrests and broaden to measure productivity and their benchmarks of success, relying instead on effectiveness. measurements such as community satisfaction with Evaluating law enforcement agencies and individual law enforcement; number of complaints filed against officers based on the numbers of stops, citations, law enforcement; rate of racial disparities in arrests; summons, and arrests does not properly measure and number of serious crimes solved. public safety and health; it also exerts additional pressure on police officers and departments to aggressively enforce criminal laws for low- 5. Develop systems for the level offenses. Including arrests as a measure of routine collection of accurate effectiveness and productivity, through COMPSTAT data regarding a range of police and similar programs, creates an incentive for practices. police to selectively target and harass poor and marginalized communities for enforcement oflow- Police should prioritize accountability and level offenses, as such offenses are committed more transparency by collecting stop, frisk, search, frequently than serious, harmful crimes. citation, and arrest data; making the aggregate data publicly available and easily accessible; creating When officers are subject to arrest goals or quotas, evaluation systems to analyze such data to identify making arrests for low-level offenses is the easiest and address racially biased and harmful practices way to meet these requirements because they are low- and policies; and developing strategies and tactics resource and less time-intensive than investigating that eliminate any form of racial disparities in serious crimes. By relying heavily on numbers enforcement practices. of stops, citations, summons, and arrests, police departments squander their resources on low-level Whether or not a citation is issued or an arrest is offenses. This increases arrest statistics and can made, the police officer must document the following make departments appear productive and highly information (in addition to providing the data, time, active, while discouraging police from reporting and and location of the stop as a "receipt" to anyone they solving more serious crimes. Further, the pressure stop or search): on police officers to "make their numbers" results in • The demographic information of the individual aggressive stops and searches that often fail to meet stopped (including race, national origin, ethnicity, constitutional requirements and lead to arrests for age, disability, and gender) and the date, time, and minor offenses, including marijuana possession. The location of the stop end results are that overpoliced communities are not made safer but rather harmed by the routine presence • The duration and reason for the stop A Tale of Two Countries: Racially Targeted Arrests in the Era of Marijuana Reform 45 Page 85

Item #5. • Whether a search was conducted and for what ho sing, schools, jobs, public health, and violence reason pr vention programs) that help build stable, safe co munities rather than furthering harm by • Whether and what type of contraband was reI ing on punitive interventions. State and local recovered g01ernments spend over $100 billion a year on their • The outcome of the encounter (summons ,citation , la,,[ enforcement agencies. The federal government warning, arrest, no action) su~plements funding costs by giving out billions of do~ars' worth of grants to law enforcement agencies • The identification of the officers involved thr ugh DOJ programs such as Byrne JAG. 66 Police To guarantee statewide uniform arrest and citation sh uld not be given unfettered discretion to redirect documentation, state legislatures should require the money saved from halting the enforcement of all police departments (municipal and state) to low:level offenses toward other types of enforcement; electronically record information regarding stops, ins ead, DOJ should mandate that local governments frisks, searches, citations, and arrests by locality, an~dthe ~olice put such resources toward nonpunitive race, national origin, ethnicity, age, and gender, an pubhc health programs that benefit public share the information with a central state agency, sa£ ty through measures unrelated to the criminal and publish the data in quarterly reports (on their leg 1system. As such, local, state, and federal website and in print so it is accessible to everyone in go ernments should work with community member:;; the community). Personally identifiable information to 1 mit the role of police in communities of color and about the individual stopped should not be recorded, .rect these funds to other services so jurisdictions so as not to violate the individual's right to privacy. ca appropriately and adequately address economic, The reports should be easily searchable. Such he th, and social problems at their root in ways transparency will provide the public - community tha strengthen rather than sabotage impacted members, activists, local and state policymakers, co munities. criminologists, lawyers, academics, the media, etc. - with a meaningful empirical basis for determining whether any demographics have been targeted and to raise concerns and propose policy solutions. This would provide more objective and understandable information for assessing public safety; inform Local, state, discussions about the nature and appropriateness of police practices and police resources; promote and federal community safety, trust, and autonomy; and better ensure accountability of police departments and governments individual officers. should work with community 6. Invest in nonpunitive programs and community-based services members to limit rather than the criminal legal the role of police system. in communities Since the 1980s, the amount of money spent on the criminal legal system has dramatically outpaced of color. expenditures on community services (such as 46 ACLU Research Report Page 86

Item #5. 7. Implement strong, independent, and effective oversight mechanisms for local law enforcement. A range of government entities on the municipal, state, and federal levels should work to develop external oversight agencies that conduct regular audits and review of police departments and practices, including marijuana enforcement and racial disparities in such enforcement and enforcement more broadly. 67 These agencies could take the form of independent prosecutors, inspectors general, independent and strong community oversight boards, or some combination of the three. That said, community oversight is especially important, because it ensures the community has autonomy to oversee and hold law enforcement accountable, as is appropriate in a democratic society where public servants serve the people. Any external oversight agency should regularly analyze data regarding a police department's stops, frisks, searches, citations, and arrests to assess whether there are any racial disparities in enforcement practices and policies. Their analyses and findings should be made available to the public. They should also be given the power to review and implement policies that are not subject to a unilateral veto by the mayor, police commissioner, or police chief. A Tale of Two Countries: Racially Targeted Arrests in the Era of Marijuana Reform 47 Page 87

Item #5. Page 88

Item #5. ALABAMA ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black people were Alabama ranks Arrests for the possession of marijuana made up 16th in the nation for largest racial .1x more likely than white 20% of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be arrested the state + marijuana possession for marijuana possession t Direction of -+ indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of lack arrests· compared todmi¥iWiU"for Statewide mari"uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people to all ot er Clrugarrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely to be arrested 2018 4.13x 2010 3.54x 200 100 o 100 200 Arrests per 100k 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY All counties with.ttgrnr:@.f!U!mabove the Counties with the largest racial disparities national average (3.64x) Counties with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage of >50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. _ White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested 1. DeKalb 1.160 45.35x 126 .55 12.84x 2. Lee 4 3. Baldwin 8.55x 135 181 4. Marshall 7.03x he 5. Tuscaloosa 6.93x .75 Arrests per 100k Page 89

Item #5. ALASKA ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black pee Alaska ranks Arrests for the possession of 1. marijuana made up 48th 34% in the nation for largest racial more likely th n white of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be · rrested the state + marijuana possession for marijuana p ssession + Direction of -+ indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME -,.".,.""S,..t=S compared to@mi¥ih@§for S atewide mari"uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people t all otlier ilrug arrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely I legalized to be arrested I 2018 71 1.56x 2010 510 2.11x 600 300 o 300 600 Arrests per 100k 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE BOROUGH All boroughs withh;t4E1IHt1ebnOmabove the B roughs with the largest racial disparities national average (3.64x) B, roughs with a pop. of >20,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage o >50% and at least 10 marijuana possession arrests are included. White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested 1.Juneau City & Borough • 73 2. Anchorage 2.03x unicipality 1.39x Arrests per 100k Boroughs with missing data are striped. Page 90

Item #5. ARIZONA ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black people were Arizona ra n ks Arrests for the possession of 3x marijuana made up 34th 43% in the nation for largest racial more likely than white of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be arrested the state + marijuana possession for marijuana possession t Direction of .•• indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of Black arrests compared totMffii¥lhM§for Statewide mari"uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people to all otl1er dru arrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely to be arrested 2018 581 3.04x 2.29x 2010 705 500 o 500 Arrests per lOOk BY THE COUNTY All counties withltt4E1IHMo$lmmabove the Counties with the largest racial disparities national average (3.64x) Counties with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage of >50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. _White Rate _ Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested _______ 4.14x ""'1,~7~lI.I3 1. Mohave 2. Navajo 4.1 Ox Ell 508 3. Maricopa 3.89x .131 518 4. Pinal 3.63x .143 5. Yuma 3.56x Arrests per 100k Page 91

Item #5. ARKANSAS ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black people were Arkansas ranks Arrests for the possession of 2. x marijuana made up 42nd 49% in the nation for largest racial of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for the state t marijuana possession Direction of -+ indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of lack ar ests compared tor;!]5UilhMfflfor S tewideGi!UJ.m.i.ti1¥MMbarrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people to all other drug arrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely to be arrested 3 2018 648 2.39x 2 2010 517 3.09x 400 o 400 O~ _ Arrests per lOOk 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY All counties withltil4t1'1r:@o§Imttlabovethe C unties with the largest racial disparities national average (3.64x) C ,unties with a pop. of >30,000. a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage of >50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested 1.375 .,5, 9.11x 1.624 2. Pope •• 5.32x -- 1.475 3. Craighead 4.88x II!!D 2,067 4. Washington 4.73x 791 •• .,68 5, Lonoke 4.72x Arrests per 100k Counties with missing data are striped. Page 92

Item #5. CALIFORNIA ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black people were California ranks Arrests for the possession of 1.8x marijuana made up 46th 2% in the nation for largest racial more likely than white of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be arrested the state + marijuana possession for marijuana possession + Direction of -+ indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of lack arrests compared toltffiiiWMfflfor mari"uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people u arrest rates, per 100k people Black people x I times more likely 600 I Legalized to be arrested I 480 2018 18 1.B1x 360 2010 2.17x 240 '" 120 400 200 o 200 400 I Arrests per lOOk 0 • • I • • • 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY Counties with the largest racial disparities Counties with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage of >50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. _ White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested ________ 45••• 3 8.03x 1. Siskiyou 2. Shasta •• 6.42x 3. Contra Costa .32 I6 5.42x 4. Humboldt 5.05x 5. Alameda .30 h 4.09x Arrests per lOOk Page 93

Item #5. COLORADO ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black peop e were Colorado ranks Arrests for the possession of 1. marijuana made up 49th 25% in the nation for largest racial more likely th n white of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be rrested the state-+ marijuana possession for marijuana p ssession-+ Direction of -+ indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of Black arrests compared tolt;!l5i'¥lhMfflfor Statewide mari"uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people to all other drug arrest rates, per 100k people Black people x I times more likely I Legalized to be arrested I 2018 1.54x 2010 407 1.84x 500 250 o 250 500 Arrests per 100k 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY All counties withltl4E1I'i@·Smtmabovethe C unties with the largest racial disparities national average (3.64x) C unties with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage of >50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested 335 -.m 1. efferson 3.75x 265 - 2. 3.74x 149 3. 2.49x 4. 2.24x 5. 2.03x ~ Arrests per 100k Page 94

CONNECTICUT 2018 SUMMARY * Item #5. Black people were Connecticut ranks Arrests for the possession of 4x marijuana made up 19th 21% in the nation for largest racial more likely than white of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for the state .•. people to be arrested marijuana possession for marijuana possession t Direction of -+ indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of Black arrests compared tot!Mffii¥ihMfflfor StatewideGillbl!!iid.I.M14l4tM1arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people to all ottier (lrug arrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely 300 : Decriminalized to be arrested 240 2018 4.02x 180 3.75x 120 2010 701 60 500 o 500 o Arrests per 100k ~----~------------------------------------ 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY All counties withUitMnrHM.fImmabove the Counties with the largest racial disparities national average (3.64x) Counties with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage of >50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. _ White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested -- '67 1. New London 9.06x III 229 2. Tolland 8.78x '45 3. Litchfield 6.32x '23 4. Middlesex 4.45x •• '52 5. Fairfield 4.12x Arrests per 100k Page 95

Item #5. DELAWARE. ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black peop e were Delaware ranks Arrests for the possession of 15th in the nation for largest racial 4. more likely than white marijuana made up 23% of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be a rested the state + marijuana possession for marijuana p ssession t Direction of -+ indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of lack arrests compared tot!:!]5h¥lhMfflfor Statewide marijuana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people to IIother rug arrest rates, per 100k people Black people x 1 times more likely I Decriminalized to be arrested 1 2018 4.15x 3.00x 2010 615 400 o 400 Arrests per 100k 2012 2014 2016 2018 2010 BY THE COUNTY Allcounties withlf14rnr:@¥Untt1above the C unties with the largest racial disparities Co nties with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage national average (3.64x) of 50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. White Rate _ Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested 360 "'•• '=""' ••••-------------- 5.38x 305 4.42x 3. New Castle II 3.92x Arrests per 100k Page 96

Item #5. GEORGIA ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black people were Georgia ra nks Arrests for the possession of 3x marijuana made up 37th 52% in the nation for largest racial more likely than white of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be arrested the state + marijuana possession for marijuana possession t Direction of ....•indicates increase or decrease since 20'0. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of ac arrest compared toHl5h¥ihMfflfor Statewide mari"uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people to all ottier Cirugarrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely to be arrested 2018 804 2.96x 2.92x 2010 500 o 500 Arrests per lOOk 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY All counties with.tt4E1r;@·eWlmabove the Counties with the largest racial disparities national average (3.64x) Counties with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage of >50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. _ White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested 31.243 1. Pickens 97.22x I 321 4.66 2. Walker 21.56x 217 2.941 3. Jackson 16.96x 173 4.456 4. Habersham 15.38x 1290 .1,455 5. Catoosa 13.25x 110 Arrests per lOOk Counties with missing data are striped. Page 97

Item #5. HAWAI'I ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black peop e were Hawai'i ranks Arrests for the possession of 1.8x marijuana made up 47th 34% in the nation for largest racial more likely than white of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for the state •. people to be a rested marijuana possession for marijuana p ssession t Direction of -+ indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of Black arrests compared toe5ii¥ihMfflfor St tewide mari"uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people to II other Clrugarrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely 200 to be arrested 160 2018 1.78x 120 2010 O.98x 200 100 a 100 200 Arrests per 100k 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY All counties with.iit4E1IH!01.mmmabove the C~unties with the largest racial disparities national average (3.64x) Counties with a pop. of >30,000, a data coverage of >50% and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested 708 ----------' 4.05x 104 2.29x Counties with missing data are striped. Arrests per lOOk ...i'vt Hawai'i decriminalized marijuana possession in 2019. More recent data is Page 98 ~ needed to analyze trends since the enactment of the recent law.

Item #5. IDAHO ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black people were Idaho ranks Arrests for the possession of .9x marijuana made up 22nd 49% in the nation for largest racial more likely than white of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for the state-+ people to be arrested marijuana possession for marijuana possession t Direction of -+ indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of lack arrests compared toeffiijW4Uifor Statewide mari"uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people to all ottier Clru .arrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely 400 to be arrested 320 2018 1,027 3.89x 2010 2.85x 240 160 = : : : 80 1,000 500 o 500 1,000 0 Arrests per 100k 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY All counties with'fIM1r;@o6IHtmabovethe Counties with the largest racial disparities national average (3.64x) Counties with a pop. of >30,000, a data coverage of >50% and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. _ White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested 2.721 1. Madison 13.21x 2. Bonner 7.41x 3. Kootenai 6.19x 725 4. Bingham 5.73x .127 •• '!!!!!!!"",... '.500 5. Nez Perce 4.50x Arrests per 100k Page 99

ILLINOIS 2018 SUMMARY * ACLU Item #5. Black peop e were Illinois ranks Arrests for the possession of 7.5x marijuana made up 3rd 16% in the nation for largest racial more likely than white of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be ~rrested the state + marijuana possession for marijuana p ssession t Direction of ....•indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME ==~,....,.re="",scompared toI!:!]5U¥WM§for tewide marijuana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people II other drug arrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely 20 to be arrested 7.51 x 2018 12 3.44x 2010 448 4 500 250 o 250 500 Arrests per lOOk 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY All counties withIfWnr:@·EWfmabove the C ' unties with the largest racial disparities Co nties with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage national average (3.64x) of 50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested 682 1. lTazewell 43.30x 116 2. 24.16x 114 700 3. hiteside 19.56x .36 4. 5. 121 Counties with missing data are striped . Arrests per 100k Page 100 .•...6...• Illinois legalized marijuana possession in 2019. More recent data is ...••• needed to analyze trends since the enactment of the recent law.

Item #5. INDIANA ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black people were Indiana ranks Arrests for the possession of 3.5x marijuana made up 24th 45% in the nation for largest racial more likely than white of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be arrested the state + marijuana possession for marijuana possession + Direction of -+ indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of lack arrests compared tol!ilffii¥W41fflfor Statewide mari"uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people to all otlier Cirugarrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely to be arrested 2018 3.49x 2010 3.73x 500 o 500 Arrests per 100k 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY All counties withl6lM'!1IHtioflmmabove the Counties with the largest racial disparities national average (3.64x) Counties with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage of >50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. _ White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested 2.309 1. Boone 17.96x .129 2,303 2. Shelby 12.48x .185 l,4CM 3. Hamilton 11.48x .122 4. Hancock 11.10x 5. Delaware 8.44x .111 Arrests per 100k Page 101

Item #5. 9v~ • XS9'S UU!l·g W~ X&&'U 6£V'~ •• S9 I OpJOE)OJJa ·v X&n;l llOO .£ '~8 9~~ • XZ;Z;'&l O£S·~ xSS'Ll 'l8·~ palSalJe aq Ol ~la>j!1aJOW SaW!l x aldoad >joelS ale~ >l0eIS ale~ all4M 'papnIOU! aJe SlSaJJe uo!ssassod euenflJew 9(; lseal le pue '%09 ~o ajleJafloo elep e '%~< ~o 'dod >joelS e '000'08< ~o 'dod e 4l!M Sa!lUn 0:) (X179'&) eBeJeAe,euO!leU l samJuds!p IU!:»UJ~saBJUIa1n 4~!M sa!~unGO aLIl eAoqeQiJmm·@ilLiJElilI4l!M senuno:» 1I'd A.LNnOO 3H.L AS mOl; OOO'~ o OOO'~ 9 8gv'~ mOl; xgtr'S palSalJe aq Ol Of: Ala>l!1aJOW SaW!l x aldoad >joelS e,doed >10m Jed 'SelUJ lSeJJUjnJp. Je4~0 II a,doed >10m Jed 'uolssessod uuenrlJUW paJudwo:» salUJ lSaJJUuo!ssasso uuun.!JUW ap!MalelS JOJq"' .•• W•••. '¥-.)••.W•••@-olpaJudwo:>slSeJJe>l:>e' , ,•••• JOsalu~ 311\11.1 H3AO S.1S3HH~ 'OWl aou!s asealoap JO aseaJOU! SaleO!pU! •....~o UO!pal!O t uo!ssass<l>d euenfpew .I0! UO!SS8SS0d euenfpew t 8lelS 84l pa~sa.l.l aq o~ aldoad JO} SlS8JJe U! S8!Weds!P U! SlS8JJe l3nJP lie }O a~!IIM u 4+l\la>l!1 a.low le!oeJ lS8l3Jel JO} UO!leU 84l U! %99 dn 8pew euenfpew }O uo!ssassod 84l JO} SlS8JJ\if a..laM a doad lI:>elB AHVll\lll\lnS 8~O~ YMOI Page 102

Item #5. KANSAS ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black people were Kansas ranks Arrests for the possession of 4.8x marijuana made up 12th 52% in the nation for largest racial more likely than white of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be arrested the state t marijuana possession for marijuana possession t Direction of ...• indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of lack arrest compared tomffi;SWMfflfor Statewide mari"uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people to all ottier Clru arrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely to be arrested 2018 324 4.84x 2010 500 4.32x 500 250 o 250 500 Arrests per 100k BY THE COUNTY All counties withItiI4mr:@.fi!Umabovethe Counties with the largest racial disparities national average (3.64x) Counties with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage of >50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. _ White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested - 1. Lyon 1,129 15.38x .73 1,055 2. Cowley 9.14x 735 3. Reno 8.66x II - 4. Harvey 7.84x I!!I 925 5. Ford 7.58x Arrests per lOOk Counties with missing data are striped. Page 103

Item #5. KENTUCKY ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black peop e were Kentucky ranks Arrests for the possession of marijuana made up 2nd 20% in the nation for largest racial more likely th n white of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be arrested the state +- marijuana possession for marijuana p ssession tI Direction of .•• indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of Blac a ests compared toMffii¥ihMfflfor tewide mari"uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people II other drug arrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely to be arrested 2018 788 9.36x 5.85x 500 o 500 Arrests per 100k 2014 2016 2018 2012 BY THE COUNTY All counties withlfl4rt1r*1·ennrnabove the C unties with the largest racial disparities Co nties with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage national average (3.64x) of 50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested 1.905 l4.36x .,33 9.44x 3. lDaviess 8.l7x l 4. oPkins 8.l0x 7.80x Arrests per 100k Page 104

Item #5. LOUISIANA ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black people were Louisiana ranks Arrests for the possession of 3.4x marijuana made up 29th 51% in the nation for largest racial more likely than white of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for the statet people to be arrested marijuana possession for marijuana possession t Direction of -+ indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of Blac a est compared tollMffii¥lh41mfor Statewide mari"uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people to all ottier Clrugarrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely to be arrested 400 2018 796 3.35x 300 2010 673 3.29x 200 100 500 o 500 o Arrests per lOOk BY THE PARISH Parishes with the largest racial disparities Parishes with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage of >50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. _ White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested ,._ 1. East Bato n •• 1,135 7.01x Rouge 2. Acadia •.., 6.08x .89 3. St. Bernard '8' 5.96x I 30 - _____ '"..29••' 5.94x 4. Natchitoches ~ ~ 5. Beauregard 5.82x Arrests per lOOk Parishes with missing data are striped. Page 105

Item #5. MAINE ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black peop e were Maine ranks Arrests for the possession of 4 marijuana made up 20th 20% in the nation for largest racial more likely th n white of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be a rested the state + marijuana possession for marijuana p ssession t Direction of -+ indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of ack ar s compared tor;!]m(¥lhMtuor tewide mari"uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people to IIother drug arrest rates, per 100k people Black people x I times more likely I Legalized to be arrested I I 2018 3.99x 2010 500 250 o Arrests per lOOk 250 500 2.09x 2010 2012 2014 \: 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY All counties withlti4F!1"@·eWtmabove the C unties with the largest racial disparities national average (3.64x) Co nties with a pop. of >30,000, a data coverage of >50% and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested l'jrk .69 _~ .::.::83~5 12.19x 2. omerset 6.28x 3. ennebec 4.77x 4'lenobscot 5. Oumberland •• .48 142 3.52x 2.95x Arrests per lOOk Page 106

Item #5. MARYLAND. ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black people were Maryland ranks Arrests for the possession of 2.1x marijuana made up 44th 50% in the nation for largest racial more likely than white of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for the state,J. people to be arrested marijuana possession for marijuana possession ,J. Direction of ...• indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of a rests compared toM5j(¥lhMijfor Statewide mari"uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people to all ottier drug arrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely 500 : Decriminalized to be arrested 400 2018 470 2.13x 300 2010 782 2.B1x 200 100 500 o 500 Arrests per 100k 0 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY Counties with the largest racial disparities Counties with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage of >50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. _ White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested 1. Queen ________ ....;5""19=8 8.75x Anne's 1m - 732 2. Carroll 6.91x 1106 ~_--,,4.080 3. Cecil 6.82x 4. Frederick 6.01x .272 5. Allegany 5.62x .294 Arrests per 100k Page 107

Item #5. MASSACHUSETT ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black peop e were Massachusetts ranks Arrests for the possession of 4 marijuana made up 18th 3% in the nation for largest racial more likely th n white of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be arrested the state + marijuana possession for marijuana p ssession t Direction of --. indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of Blac arrests compared toMmi¥ih4U'for tewide mari"uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people II other Cirugarrest rates, per 100k people Black people x o times more likely 20 Legalized to be arrested 2018 4.04x 2010 3.41x 100 50 a 50 100 Arrests per 100k 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY All counties withlti!4mr:@·@tmabovethe C unties with the largest racial disparities national average (3.64x) CoJmties with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage of r50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested -- 15 6.46x - 22 6.27x 3.61x - 23 •••• --------....:;.;:." 3.29x 6 2.01x Arrests per 100k Page 108

Item #5. MICHIGAN ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black people were Michigan ranks Arrests for the possession of 3.6x marijuana made up 23rd 47% in the nation for largest racial more likely than white of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be arrested the state +- marijuana possession for marijuana possession t Direction of -+ indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of ck arrest compared tol!\!]mi¥1h4Uifor Statewide mari"uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people to all otlier drug arrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely 200 to be arrested 160 2018 3.59x 120 2010 3.27x 80 500 250 o 250 500 40 Arrests per lOOk o ~----------------------------------------- 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY Counties with the largest racial disparities Counties with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage of >50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. _ White Rate '•r~• Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested 2,868 1. Clinton 21.S2x .133 J •• If • •• • 2. Bay 162 17.40x •••r. 3. Allegan 2,759 14.91x ..... " .185 .•.••• ~ '-:. ••• -== I II •••-.!!I.,!!!I .• ••• r "..a..•. Michigan legalized marijuana possession in 2018. More recent data 4. Isabella 5. St. Clair 198 181 1,456 1,183 Arrests per lOOk 14.90x 14.63x Page 109 ~ is needed to analyze trends since the enactment of the recent law.

Item #5. MINNESOTA. ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black peop e were Minnesota ranks Arrests for the possession of marijuana made up 8th in the nation for largest racial more likely th n white 35% of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be arrested the state + marijuana possession for marijuana p(])ssession + Direction of -+ indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of lack arrests compared tolt'lffii¥ihMijfor St tewide mari'uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people to II other ilrug arrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely 300 to be arrested 240 2018 537 100 S.37x 180 2010 828 104 7.94x 120 : 60 500 o 500 0 Arrests per 100k 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY All counties withl{lgrnr:@ofi\mmabovethe C unties with the largest racial disparities national average (3.64x) Co~nties with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage 0if J50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested 1. oodhue • 2,362 11,19x 8.47x 3. ~t. Louis 8.26x 377 4. Jamsey 7.13x 153 7.07x Arrests per 100k Page 110 .•.(\d Minnesota eliminated the punishment of imprisonment for a first offense of possession 0 certain amounts of marijuana in 1976. ~ However, it continued to classify marijuana possession as a crime, and in some cases mai tained harsher criminal penalties.

Item #5. MISSISSIPPI. ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black people were Mississippi ranks Arrests for the possession of 2.7x marijuana made up 38th 44% in the nation for largest racial more likely than white of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be arrested the state + marijuana possession for marijuana possession + Direction of -+ indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of Black arrest compared toC5h¥IhMfflfor Statewide mari"uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people to all otlier drug arrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely to be arrested 2018 479 2.71x 2010 547 3.09x 600 300 o 300 600 Arrests per lOOk 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY All counties withlf14E1IHMo§!mmabove the Counties with the largest racial disparities national average (3.64x) Counties with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage of >50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. _White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested - 2.207 10A9x 1. Hancock 2. Madison 5.21x .119 315 3. DeSoto 4.58x 169 4. Rankin 4.51x 1,'187 5. Harrison 4.44x Arrests per lOOk "A, Mississippi eliminated the punishment of imprisonment for a first offense of possession of certain amounts of marijuana in 1978. Page 111 ~ However. for larger amounts and multiple offenses. it continued to classify marijuana possession as a crime. and in some cases maintained criminal penalties. including imprisonment.

MISSOURI 2018 SUMMARY * ACLU Item #5. Black peop e were Missouri ranks Arrests for the possession of 39th in the nation for largest racial 2. x more likely th n white marijuana made up 50% of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be arrested the state +- marijuana possession for marijuana p ssession t Direction of -+ indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of lack arrests compared to(!\!jffii¥WMfflfor tewide mari"uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people to II other Clrugarrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely I Decriminalized I to be arrested I 2018 781 2.63x 2010 786 2.52x 500 o 500 Arrests per lOOk 2018 2012 2014 2016 BY THE COUNTY C unties with the largest racial disparities . ~' .• Co nties with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage of 50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included . _ Black Rate Black people x times more likely • • .- to be arrested .•• I.lr ., ··..,~Ir 1. J ,hnson 1261 10.73x 10.43x •••••••• 2. Uincoln 1181 7,237 •.,. •_- 3. fayette 10.33x _ ... _700 ••• JlI iiI.\ 8.00x 6.90x .503 Arrests per 100k Missouri eliminated the punishment of imprisonment for a first offense of possession of marijuana, however Page 112 it continues to classify marijuana possession as a crime, and in some cases maintain criminal pe lalties.

Item #5. MONTANA ACiU 2018 SUMMARY Black people were Montana ranks Arrests for the possession of 9.6x marijuana made up 1st 45% in the nation for largest racial more likely than white of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be arrested the state '" marijuana possession for marijuana possession t Direction of .•• indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of lack arrests compared tol!:!]5hOOlhM§for mari"uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people arrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely to be arrested 2018 111 9.62x 2010 131 3.49x 1,000 500 o 500 1,000 Arrests per 100k 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY All counties withlt14Fi1r:@.eWtmabove the Counties with the largest racial disparities national average (3.64x) Counties with a pop. of >30,000, a data coverage of >50% and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. _ White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested 2,174 I .,20 1. Gallatin 18.15x 1.995 2. Yellowstone .,43 13.99x • 867 3. Missoula 11.52x 175 Counties with missing data are striped. • 4. Flathead 5. Ravalli .,22 In Arrests per lOOk S.17x 7.34x Page 113

Item #5. NEBRASKA. ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black peop e were Nebraska ranks Arrests for the possession of marijuana made up 33rd 48% in the nation for largest racial more likely th n white of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be arrested the state + marijuana possession for marijuana p I ssession + Direction of ....• indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of lack arrests compared tol!:!]Mi¥WMfflfor St tewide mari"uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people to) II other CIug arrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely to be arrested 2018 1,164 3.07x 4.40x 2010 1,711 1,000 o 1,000 Arrests per lOOk 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY All counties withIM4MI'i@.eWtmabove the C unties with the largest racial disparities Co nties with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage national average (3.64x) of 50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested 542 1. Buffalo 8.93x 161 2,040 2. dams 8.51x .240 3353 - 3. 6.84x EmI 2360 4. 6.43x 2.036 5. n.incoln 6.21x _328 Arrests per 100k ~ 1 Nebraska decriminalized first offenses of possession of certain amounts of marijuana in 19 9. However,for larger amounts and multiple offenses, it continued to classify marijuana poss ssion Page 114 as a crime, and in some cases maintained criminal penalties, including imprisonment.

Item #5. NEVADA ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black people were Nevada ranks Arrests for the possession of 3x marijuana made up 35th 20% in the nation for largest racial more likely than white of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be arrested the state + marijuana possession for marijuana possession + Direction of .•• indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of lack arrests compared to@mi¥IhMflUor Statewide mari"uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people to all ottler drug arrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely 900 Logollzed to be arrested 720 2018 212 3.04x 540 4.00x 360 2010 1,408 180 1,000 o 1,000 o Arrests per 100k ~------------------------------~----------- 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY All counties with.tii4F11r:@·$Wfmabovethe Counties with the largest racial disparities national average (3.64x) Counties with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage of >50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. _White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested 4,970 21.91x 1. Douglas .227 2. Lyon 13.19x .147 2,148 3. Elko 11.31x .190 416 4. Washoe 4.76x 1s7 .188 5. Clark 3.50x I 54 Arrests per 100k Page 115

Item #5. NEW HAMPSHIR I ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black peop e were New Hampshire ranks Arrests for the possession of 4.1x marijuana made up 17th 43% in the nation for largest racial more likely than white of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be ~rrested the state + marijuana possession for marijuana p ssession t Direction of -+ indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of lack arrests compared tor;!]ffi;¥h2Mfflfor tewide mari"uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people II ottier Clrugarrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely IOecrlm. to be arrested 2018 803 4.11x 24 2.49x 2010 500 o 500 Arrests per 100k 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY All counties withlfi4Mrt@.@rfmabove the C unties with the largest racial disparities national average (3.64x) Co nties with a pop. of >30,000, a data coverage of >50% and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested 2.058 13.15x .157 6.70x _______ ---'2"".9"""18 6.04x 346 5.95x I58 5.28x Arrests per 100k Page 116

Item #5. NEW JERSEY ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black people were New Jersey ra nks Arrests for the possession of 3.5x marijuana made up 25th 55% in the nation for largest racial more likely than white of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be arrested the statet marijuana possession for marijuana possession t Direction of ....• indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of lack arrest compared toi]miilhMfflfor Statewide mari"uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people to all ottier dru arrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely to be arrested 2018 1,008 3.4Sx 2010 2.81x 1,000 500 o 500 1,000 Arrests per lOOk 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY All counties withUI4E1I'i@.§WU11abovethe Counties with the largest racial disparities national average (3.64x) Counties with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage of >50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. _White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested 1. Hunterdon 9,218 13.71x .672 1.861 2. Ocean 9.34x I 199 2,493 3. Morris 7.74x 1322 4. Warren 7.57x .341 5. Cape May 6.45x .726 Arrests per lOOk Page 117

Item #5. NEW MEXICO ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black people were New Mexico ranks Arrests for the possession of 4 marijuana made up 21st 54% more likely th n white in the nation for largest racial disparities in arrests for 1 people to be ~rrested of all drug arrests in the state t marijuana possession for marijuana p0ssession t Direction of -+ indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of lack arrests compared tot'lm(¥W;U"or mari"uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people g arrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely to be arrested 2018 837 3.98x 2010 1.82x 500 o 500 Arrests per 100k 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY C unties with the largest racial disparities Co nties with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage of 50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested ________ --"7""18"-12 13.65x .526 5.84x 3.96x 3. LI a 4'iona Ana 2.44x 643 5. tero 2.42x .266 ~ New Mexico decriminalized marijuana possession in 2019. More recent data is Arrests per 100k ~ needed to analyze trends since the enactment of the recent law. Page 118

Item #5. NEW YORK ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black people were New York ranks Arrests for the possession of 2.6x marijuana made up 40th 54% in the nation for largest racial more likely than white of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be arrested the state"l. marijuana possession for marijuana possession "l. Direction of -+ indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of lack rrests compared tol!M5h¥IhMfflfor StatewideGi!hmEilil.i.ti14!4fffl1arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people to all ottier Clrugarrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely to be arrested 600 2018 228 2.63x 480 360 4.73x 2010 240 1,000 500 o 500 1,000 120 Arrests per 100k O~ _ 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY All counties with.tit4E1IHt1·mmmabove the Counties with the largest racial disparities national average (3.64x) Counties with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage of >50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. _ White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested 4.499 1. Steuben 19.07x .236 354 2. Richmond 18.63x 19 5.328 3. Tioga 18.48x .288 182 4. Bronx 17.47x 10 276 5. New York 16.83x 16 Arrests per lOOk ~ New York decriminalized marijuana possession in 2019. More recent data Page 119 ~ is needed to analyze trends since the enactment of the recent law.

Item #5. NORTH CAROLIN ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black peop e were North Carolina ranks Arrests for the possession of x marijuana made up 31st in the nation for largest racial • more likely th n white 53% of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be arrested the state + marijuana possession for marijuana p ssession + Direction of -+ indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of Black s compared toeffii¥ihMfflfor tewide marijuana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people II other drug arrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely 40 to be arrested 2018 528 3.26x 24 2010 533 3.34x 600 300 o 300 600 Arrests per lOOk 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY All counties withltii4E1r:@·mmmabovethe C unties with the largest racial disparities national average (3.64x) Co~nties with a pop, of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage of >50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. White Rate _ Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested •""",.....3-44----~----""'4,""05""'3 11.79x 512 ranville 11.69x 144 _______ ..",,;;c3,135 11.26x • 278 11.23x 1,892 dkin 9.57x .198 Counties with missing data are striped. Arrests per lOOk Page 120 ...f'L" North Carolina eliminated the punishment of imprisonment for possession of certain amou~ts of marijuana in 1977. -<i;? However, it continued to classify marijuana possession as a crime, and in some cases main ained criminal penalties.

Item #5. NORTH DAKOTA ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black people were North Dakota ranks Arrests for the possession of 5.5x marijuana made up 7th in the nation for largest racial more likely than white 47% of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be arrested the state + marijuana possession for marijuana possession t Direction of ...• indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of Black arrests compared tot:!]rni¥lhMtJfor Statewide mari'uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people to all otlier ilrug arrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely to be arrested 2018 1,437 5.51x 4.40x 2010 1,000 o 1,000 Arrests per lOOk 2010 BY THt;· COUNTY All counties with. fl4Mr: IM.fIUmabove the Counties with the largest racial disparities national average (3.64x) Counties with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage of >50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. _ White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested 1. Morton 9.57x .215 -- 2. Cass 6.58x .174 3. Burleigh 3,69 5.40x 4. Grand Forks 4.91x .245 655 5. Ward 3.97x .165 Arrests per 100k ~ North Dakota decriminalized marijuana possession in 2019. More recent Page 121 ~ data is needed to analyze trends since the enactment of the recent law.

Item #5. OHIO. ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black peop e were Ohio ranks Arrests for the possession of marijuana made up 28th 50% in the nation for largest racial more likely th n white of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be arrested the state t marijuana possession for marijuana p I ssession + Direction of _. indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of lack arrests compared tolt5h¥WMfflfor tewide marijuana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people II other Clrugarrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely 50 to be arrested 400 2018 527 3.43x 300 2010 538 3.85x 200 600 300 a 300 600 100 Arrests per 100k OL_ _ 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY All counties withlii!§S1rHM.mmmabove the Cqunties with the largest racial disparities national average (3.64x) co,l nties with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage of 50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested 4.477 shington 26.91x 1166 3.167 'I'M 25.17x 1126 3.731 3. ayne 20.27x 1184 4.G auga 19.85x 1 • 0 5. L wrence 18.65x 1121 Arrests per lOOk Page 122 ",A", In 1975Ohio classified certain amounts of marijuana possession as a misdemeanor, but did not impose imprisonment nor -s;? a criminal record. However,for larger amounts, it maintained harsher criminal penalties, in luding imprisonment.

Item #5. OKLAHOMA ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black people were Oklahoma ranks Arrests for the possession of 4.2x marijuana made up 13th 42% in the nation for largest racial more likely than white of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be arrested the state + marijuana possession for marijuana possession t Direction of ...• indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of Black arrests compared tor;t]mi¥lh4Ui'hor Statewide mari"uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people to all ottier Clrugarrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely 300 to be arrested 2018 719 4.24x 240 180 ~ :-~~ 2.98x 120 2010 810 60 500 o 500 0 Arrests per lOOk 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY All counties withUlMt1IHMobImmabove the Counties with the largest racial disparities national average (3.64x) Counties with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage of >50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. _ White Rate Black Rate Black people x • times more likely t...II·I to be arrested ~-I•• ."'4-rr ...= ,••9.,.,. ._w. ~·41•. 5,090 1. Pontotoc 13.94x .365 6,544 2. Ottawa 13.48x .485 936 3. Rogers 9.13x 1103 ••• ·111 •.. 4. Cherokee 904 '103 8.76x 977 5. Stephens 8.68x 1113 Arrests per lOOk Page 123

Item #5. OREGON ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black people were Oregon ranks Arrests for the possession of 45th in the nation for largest racial 1. more likely th n white marijuana made up 18% of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for the state .•. people to be rrested marijuana possession for marijuana p ssession t Direction of ....• indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of Black arrest compared tommiOOWMfflfor mari"uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people arrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely 50 : Legalized to be arrested 40 2018 131 1.82x 1.77x 20 2010 731 10 500 o 500 Arrests per lOOk 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY All counties with.ttgtl1'Ht-HUnmabove the C unties with the largest racial disparities national average (3.64x) Co nties with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage 50%'and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. J White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested -.- 1. Clackamas 123 7.87x 752 5.32x 545 4.85x 4.33x 412 5. Ik •• 4.25x Arrests per lOOk Page 124

Item #5. PENNSYLVANIA ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black pea pie we re Pennsylvania ranks Arrests for the possession of x marijuana made up 36th 42% in the nation for largest racial more likely than white of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for the state t people to be arrested marijuana possession for marijuana possession + Direction of -+ indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of lack arrest compared tom5i;iIhMfflfor Statewide mari"uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people to all ottier dru arrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely to be arrested 2018 578 3.04x 4.80x 2010 624 400 o 400 Arrests per lOOk 2010 BY THE COUNTY Allcounties withlti14tt1r:@·mmmabove the Counties with the largest racial disparities national average (3.64x) Counties with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage of >50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. _ White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested 1. Perry 21,159 28.36x 1746 4,651 2. Clarion 25.62x 1182 3. Indiana 16.68x 3,746 4. Clinton 16.62x 1225 2,499 5, Westmoreland 12.66x 1197 Arrests per lOOk Page 125

Item #5. RHODE ISLAND ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black people were Rhode Island ranks Arrests for the possession of x marijuana made up 30th • 18% in the nation for largest racial more likely th n white of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for the state .• people to be rrested marijuana possession for marijuana p ssession t Direction of -. indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of lack ar ests compared toltffit¥WMfflfor tewide mari"uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people II other ilrug arrest rates, per 100k people Black people x I times more likely I Decriminalized to be arrested I 24 2018 110 3.32x 2010 523 2.59x 600 300 o 300 600 Arrests per 100k 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY All counties withltt3Ft11'i@.Ehl1tt3above the C unties with the largest racial disparities national average (3.64x) Co nties with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage of 50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested """' ••••• •••6_1 8.99x =- 619 8.57x 6.10x 3.56x Arrests per 100k Page 126

Item #5. SOUTH CAROLINA ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black people were South Carolina ranks Arrests for the possession of 3.5x marijuana made up 26th 48% in the nation for largest racial more likely than white of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be arrested the state + marijuana possession for marijuana possession t Direction of -+ indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME ~~~ compared to@5h¥ih@fflfor Statewide mari"uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people to all ot er drug arrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely to be arrested 2018 1,421 3.45x 2.76x 2010 1,000 o 1,000 Arrests per 100k 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY Allcounties with'ifii4E1Il@·6nQmabovethe Counties with the largest racial disparities national average (3.64x) Counties with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage of >50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. _ White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested ________ 8.36x ...:..::3.956 1. Pickens •• - 2.151 2. Oconee 8.31x .259 2.931 3. Horry 6.80x 4. Lexington 5.80x .208 5. Greenville 5.25x .300 Arrests per lOOk Page 127

Item #5. SOUTH DAKOTA ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black peop e were South Dakota ranks Arrests for the possession of 5 marijuana made up 10th 55% in the nation for largest racial more likely th n white of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be arrested the state'+ marijuana possession for marijuana p ssession t Direction of -+ indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of lack arrests compared toeffii¥W@§for mari"uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people arrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely to be arrested 2018 5.04x 2010 5.03x 2,000 1,000 o 1,000 2,000 Arrests per 100k 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY C unties with the largest racial disparities Co nties with a pop, of >30,000, a Black pop, of >1%, a data coverage of 50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. White Rate _ Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested nnington S.SOx 2. rOOkingS '"'••••,Fl•••,i_--------..,;3;:,:,16~1 7.53x 3'iincOln 6.S7x 4. rown 5.07x 1,766 5. innehaha 4.47x Arrests per lOOk Page 128

Item #5. TENNESSEE ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black people were Tennessee ranks Arrests for the possession of .2x marijuana made up 32nd 42% in the nation for largest racial more likely than white of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be arrested the state + marijuana possession for marijuana possession + Direction of -+ indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of Black arrests compared toMffii¥WtUJtor Statewide mari"uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people to all other drug arrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely to be arrested 2018 820 3.22x 2010 771 4.04x 500 o 500 Arrests per lOOk 2010 2012 BY THE COUNTY All counties with.tI4Ft1w:@·eWtmabovethe Counties with the largest racial disparities national average (3.64x) Counties with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage of >50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. _White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested 2,437 1. Claiborne 15.36x .159 2. Carter 13.89x .129 2,945 3. Williamson 10.73x 4. Lawrence 10.24x 2,377 5. Sevier 8.36x .284 Arrests per 100k Page 129

Item #5. TEXAS ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black peop e were Texas ranks Arrests for the possession of 41st in the nation for largest racial 2. x more likely th n white marijuana made up 44% of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be rrested the state + marijuana possession for marijuana p ssession tI Direction of -+ indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of lack ar ests compared to(!;!jffii¥WMt'1tor marijuana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people arrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely 40 to be arrested 32 2018 2.62x : 2.33x 16 2010 627 400 o 400 Arrests per 100k 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY C unties with the largest racial disparities Co~nties with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage of 50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested 806 n Zandt l3.63x I S9 10.62x 9.82x 9.69x _______ ...,;;:,4,l::l69,l:.18 8.l6x Arrests per 100k Counties with missing data are striped. Page 130

Item #5. UTAH ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black people were Utah ranks Arrests for the possession of .9x marijuana made up 11th 40% in the nation for largest racial more likely than white of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be arrested the state t marijuana possession for marijuana possession t Direction of -+ indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of lack rests' compared toMmiiWMfflfor Statewide mari"uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people to all otlier ilrug arrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely 500 to be arrested __ -_._._'l -. - 400 2018 1,527 4.92x 300 2010 1,000 o 1,000 3.86x 200 100 -- • ...---- 0 Arrests per lOOk 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY All counties withlfl4Mr:lMobimmabove the Counties with the largest racial disparities national average (3.64x) Counties with a pop. of >30,000, a data coverage of >50% and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. _White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested 1,862 1. Washington 9.17x .203 2,030 2. Iron 6.99x .291 - 4.46 3. Wasatch 6.91x Ell 3,138 4. Sanpete 6.36x 5. Utah 6.31x .336 Arrests per lOOk Counties with missing data are striped. Page 131

Item #5. VERMONT. ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black peop e were Vermont ranks Arrests for the possession of 6.1 marijuana made up 6th 12% in the nation for largest racial more likely th n white of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be arrested the state .• marijuana possession for marijuana p ssession t Direction of __. indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of Blac est compared tolt;TlHh¥ihMfflfor St tewide marijuana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people to II other drug arrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely 200 : Decriminalized to be arrested 160 2018 126 21 6.06x 120 2010 508 4.14x 80 600 300 o 300 600 40 Arrests per 100k 0 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY Counties with the largest racial disparities co~nties with a pop. of >30,000, a data coverage of >50% and at least 10 rarijUana possession arrests are included. White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested ] 1 shington. 16 13.72x 243 11.79x m ________ ---"2""-'70 9.76x 1m ___ 163 8.53x 111 4.24x Arrests per lOOk .•.ai Vermont legalized marijuana possession in 2018. More recent data Page 132 ...•. is needed to analyze trends since the enactment of the recent law.

Item #5. VIRGINIA ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black people were Virginia ranks Arrests for the possession of 27th in the nation for largest racial 3. x more likely than white marijuana made up 52% of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for the state .•. people to be arrested marijuana possession for marijuana possession t Direction of -+ indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME -.:;....."........,ests compared tolTilm(¥WMfflfor Statewide mari"uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people to all ottier Clru arrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely to be arrested 2018 768 3.44x 2010 518 2.82x ----~.--~.-------~ 500 o 500 Arrests per lOOk 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY All counties withlti!4E1r:@·eWtmabove the Counties with the largest racial disparities national average (3.64x) Counties with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage of >50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. _White Rate _ Black Rate Black people x times more likely ~A to be arrested II." -~. 1. Hanover .280 5.809 20.74x "'~ 5.200 2. Smyth 16.14x • 322 -"'. ~C.,,- \.•. i~ ~.~it· t~ 3. Washington 4. Augusta ,'69 .320 33 12.22x 9.7Bx :.- •• ai-\ 5. Arlington 1,,0 1.071 9.70x Arrests per lOOk Page 133

Item #5. WASHINGTON ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black people were Washington ranks Arrests for the possession of 2.1 marijuana made up 43rd 14% in the nation for largest racial more likely th n white of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be arrested the state + marijuana possession for marijuana p ssession + Direction of -+ indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of lack arrests compared tolt'l5UOOWMfflfor Statewide mari"uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people to II ottier Cirugarrest rates, per 100k people Black people x I times more likely 200 I Legallted to be arrested 160 2018 2.14x 120 2010 462 2.53x 80 250 a 250 500 40 500 Arrests per 100k O~ ~ _ 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY All counties withltit4mr:I~1ofmtmabove the C unties with the largest racial disparities national average (3.64x) Co nties with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage of :>50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. White Rate _ Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested 9.19x 8.82x _______ ..:3~26~6.77x 25 6.76x 4.69x Arrests per 100k Page 134

Item #5. WEST VIRGINIA ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black people were West Virginia ranks Arrests for the possession of 7.3x marijuana made up 4th in the nation for largest racial more likely than white 47% of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be arrested the state t marijuana possession for marijuana possession t Direction of -+ indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of lack arrests compared toM5h¥IWi#1tor Statewide mari'uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people to all otlier Clru.arrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely to be arrested 2018 2,517 344 7.31x 2010 271 4,67x 2,000 1,000 o 1,000 2,000 Arrests per 100k 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY Counties with the largest racial disparities Counties with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage of >50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. _ White Rate Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested 1. Preston 11,559 24.96x .463 2. Putnam 24.77x 1213 3. Harrison 17.39x 1.823 4. Wood 12,41x 1147 5. Logan 11.42x .469 Arrests per 100k Page 135

Item #5. WISCONSIN ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black people were Wisconsin ranks Arrests for the possession of marijuana made up 14th 57% in the nation for largest racial more likely than white of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be ~rrested the state + marijuana possession for marijuana p ssession + Direction of -+ indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of Black rests compared tol!:!]m(¥lhMfflfor St tewide mari"uana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people to all other Clrugarrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely 40 to be arrested 32 2018 1,126 4.24x 24 2010 1,297 5.82x 16 8 1,000 500 o 500 1,000 Arrests per lOOk 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 BY THE COUNTY All counties with.flaFi'1I!@·mmmabove the C~unties with the largest racial disparities national average (3.64x) Copnties with a pop. of >30,000, a Black pop. of >1%, a data coverage of 50%, and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. White Rate _ Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested 5.548 34.90x I159 ________ ...;.7,""86~2 29.85x 6,165 27.07x 1228 23.88x "".-53-, ~ __ ..•.7:o:.:.872:.1 14.83x Arrests per lOOk Page 136

Item #5. WYOMING ACLU 2018 SUMMARY Black people were Wyoming ranks Arrests for the possession of 5.2x marijuana made up 9th in the nation for largest racial more likely than white 59% of all drug arrests in disparities in arrests for people to be arrested the state + marijuana possession for marijuana possession t Direction of -+ indicates increase or decrease since 2010. ARRESTS OVER TIME Rates of Black arr.ests compared toM5h¥IhMfflfor Statewide marijuana ossession arrest rates compared marijuana possession, per 100k people to all ottier dru arrest rates, per 100k people Black people x times more likely to be arrested 2018 5.20x 2010 3.19x 2,000 1,000 o 1,000 2,000 Arrests per lOOk 2010 BY THE COUNTY All counties withUaaE1r:@.f!U!mabovethe Counties with the largest racial disparities national average (3.64x) Counties with a pop. of >30,000, a data coverage of >50% and at least 25 marijuana possession arrests are included. _ White Rate _ Black Rate Black people x times more likely to be arrested 3,661 1. Fremont 13.12x 1279 '!!!!!!! ".03x ...::8"",633"" 2. Campbell .783 3. Sweetwater 7.48x .381 4,308 4. Albany 4.56x 1m 5. Laramie 3.50x Arrests per lOOk Page 137

Item #5. Page 138

Item #5. APPENDIX TABLE A Arrest Rates and Racial Disparities per State (2018) Marijuana Black White Marijuana Possession Possession Possession Racial Possession State Arrest Rate Arrest Rate Arrest Rate Arrest Rate Rate Ratio Disparities Rate Alabama 63.06 55.82 128.03 31.01 4.13 16.7% -51.7% Alaska 57.72 53.35 70.82 45.40 1.56 -26.1% -45.0% Arizona 220.01 208.75 580.65 190.90 3.04 32.8% -24.4% Arkansas 358.79 322.12 648.46 271.21 2.39 -22.7% 4.3% California 13.79 9.14 18.12 10.00 1.81 -16.6% -92.5% Colorado 91.00 82.20 130.51 84.90 1.54 -16.3% -59.8% Connecticut 64.77 49.85 152.57 37.91 4.02 7.2% -56.4% Delaware 118.90 89.33 222.45 53.57 4.15 38.3% -50.3% Geor~ia 499.68 428.81 804.32 271.82 2.96 1.4% -8.1% Hawai'i 59.18 55.78 130.90 73.42 1.78 81.6% -33.7% Idaho 351.37 332.16 1026.94 263.83 3.89 36.5% -13.1% Illinois 76.17 43.01 137.84 18.36 7.51 118.3% -67.0% Indiana 286.73 247.61 712.06 204.01 3.49 -6.4% -11.0% Iowa 147.80 133.82 776.28 106.90 7.26 -14.1% -16.0% Kansas 99.80 80.56 323.84 66.94 4.84 12.0% 26.2% Kentucky 170.07 141.72 788.34 84.19 9.36 60.0% -38.7% Louisiana 459.82 412.48 795.52 237.31 3.35 1.8% 2.9% Maine 61.64 54.99 214.84 53.89 3.99 90.9% -58.6% Maryland 317.86 279.40 470.16 220.74 2.13 -24.2% 0.0% Massachusetts 13.13 4.52 14.76 3.65 4.04 18.5% -72.4% Michigan 156.98 140.95 373.80 104.06 3.59 9.8% -10.5% Minnesota 158.83 126.71 536.94 100.02 5.37 -32.4% -18.9% Mississippi 348.68 294.78 478.88 176.39 2.71 -12.3% -12.9% Missouri 359.93 340.28 780.94 296.38 2.63 4.4% -11.6% Montana 135.19 127.62 1064.23 110.60 9.62 175.6% -38.2% Nebraska 453.58 409.42 1163.94 379.73 3.07 -30.2% -31.2% Nevada 95.60 76.65 212.26 69.72 3.04 -24.0% -62.4% New Hampshire 219.20 202.10 803.40 195.28 4.11 65.1% -30.9% New Jersey 404.67 369.54 1007.96 292.49 3.45 22.8% 23.3% New Mexico 249.93 225.71 837.21 210.54 3.98 118.7% 53.4% New York 300.26 287.76 597.59 227.53 2.63 -44.4% -5.8% North Carolina 256.40 234.85 528.27 162.03 3.26 -2.4% -3.0% North Dakota 354.04 332.52 1437.25 260.99 5.51 25.2% -18.2% Ohio 272.79 248.68 526.73 153.48 3.43 -10.9% 0.9% Oklahoma 229.69 199.25 719.47 169.62 4.24 42.3% -20.9% Oregon 77.00 69.54 130.90 71.74 1.82 2.8% -67.0% Pennsylvania 264.87 226.52 577.96 190.40 3.04 -36.7% 9.9% Rhode Island 49.93 37.80 110.17 33.17 3.32 28.2% -70.3% South Carolina 753.11 673.26 1420.68 412.27 3.45 25.0% -9.6% South Dakota 746.68 695.86 2147.03 426.35 5.04 0.2% -18.1% Tennessee 387.44 343.94 820.16 255.09 3.22 -20.3% -2.9% Texas 259.08 244.12 561.60 213.99 2.62 12.4% -19.0% Utah 372.71 343.37 1526.97 310.43 4.92 27.5% 6.8% Vermont 33.56 21.54 126.26 20.83 6.06 46.4% -78.0% Virginia 344.02 314.33 768.01 223.37 3.44 22.0% -6.5% Washington 30.94 25.90 52.18 24.44 2.14 -15.4% -71.2% West Virginia 496.32 447.32 2516.95 344.26 7.31 56.5% 9.9% Wisconsin 360.59 324.37 1125.85 265.58 4.24 -27.1% -10.0% Wyoming 655.00 592.89 2677.27 515.27 5.20 63.0% -13.3% Source: FBI, Ur, forn Crimi' Rt'portrng Pfo~nrn O'lt.=1.::lnrl U.S. C n u U3t-3 Note: Flortd<'l ~nd :N01shmgl ")n. 0 C. did not nro rdp. c::l~t'" A Tale of Two Countries: Racially Targeted Arrests in the Era of Marijuana Reform 99 Page 139

Item #5. APPENDIX TABLE B Drug Arrests and Populations per State (2018) _.111 Alabama 13,598 3,082 2,729 l:'-_·I' 1,678 •. .. 1,048 - ~. 1,310,802 3,379,955 4,887,871 Alaska 1,112 410 378 20 214 27,534 470,249 709,419 Arizona 34,447 15,778 14,971 2,115 11,335 364,280 5,937,806 7,171,646 Arkansas 19,762 10,692 9,599 3,038 6,391 468,475 2,356,410 2,980,124 California 212,967 5,454 3,614 463 2,853 2,556,000 28,531,740 39,557,045 Colorado 18,601 5,183 4,682 339 4,210 259,711 4,959,310 5,695,564 Connecticut 8,348 2,314 1,781 655 1,084 429,298 2,859,280 3,572,665 Delaware 3,705 1,150 864 494 360 222,070 672,019 967,171 Georgia 86,508 52,471 45,029 27,381 17,259 3,404,212 6,349,613 10,501,080 Hawai'i 1,873 679 640 38 199 29,030 271,056 1,147,287 Idaho 11,980 6,164 5,827 162 4,306 15,775 1,632,188 1,754,208 Illinois 34,938 9,694 5,474 2,564 1,795 1,860,101 9,777,446 12,726,363 Indiana 37,129 19,187 16,570 4,691 11,617 658,729 5,694,468 6,691,878 Iowa 6,994 4,236 3,835 937 2,766 120,754 2,587,507 2,866,103 Kansas 4,481 2,896 2,338 578 1,678 178,520 2,506,434 2,902,183 Kentucky 32,001 7,600 6,333 2,964 3,295 375,972 3,913,936 4,468,402 Louisiana 37,271 21,331 19,135 12,095 6,919 1,520,428 2,915,478 4,638,940 Maine 3,698 825 736 47 682 21,877 1,265,648 1,338,404 Maryland 33,974 19,208 16,883 8,781 7,842 1,867,592 3,552,355 6,042,718 Massachusetts 10,489 906 312 91 204 617,097 5,577,194 6,902,149 Michigan 30,255 15,691 14,089 5,265 8,246 1,408,392 7,923,927 9,995,915 Minnesota 20,609 8,912 7,110 2,043 4,719 380,414 4,718,176 5,611,179 Mississippi 20,018 10,413 8,804 5,406 3,116 1,128,912 1,766,301 2,986,530 Missouri 41,987 22,038 20,835 5,658 15,053 724,513 5,079,051 6,122,811 Montana 3,001 1,431 1,351 66 1,041 6,233 941,588 1,058,637 Nebraska 16,289 8,751 7,899 1,149 6,469 98,757 1,703,446 1,929,268 Nevada 11,851 2,901 2,326 649 1,571 305,848 2,253,711 3,034,392 New Hampshire 6,357 2,973 2,741 187 2,469 23,293 1,264,217 1,356,458 New Jersey 60,138 36,050 32,921 13,484 18,767 1,337,754 6,416,347 8,908,520 New Mexico 8,727 5,237 4,730 449 3,619 53,576 1,718,901 2,095,428 New York 104,911 58,678 56,234 20,603 30,989 3,447,729 13,619,931 19,542,209 North Carolina 45,491 26,565 24,333 12,148 11,860 2,299,469 7,319,785 10,360,922 North Dakota 5,420 2,691 2,527 368 1,727 25,620 661,549 760,077 Ohio 58,008 31,887 29,069 7,996 14,690 1,517,999 9,571,522 11,689,442 Oklahoma 18,917 9,057 7,857 2,208 4,960 306,890 2,924,365 3,943,079 Oregon 15,979 3,227 2,914 122 2,609 92,958 3,635,926 4,190,713 Pennsylvania 69,838 33,922 29,010 8,851 19,947 1,531,457 10,476,085 12,807,060 Rhode Island 2,234 528 400 97 294 88,411 887,259 1,057,315 South Carolina 71,336 38,289 34,229 19,607 14,361 1,380,145 3,483,455 5,084,127 South Dakota 11,073 6,587 6,139 451 3,175 20,956 743,971 867,926 Tennessee 55,644 26,230 23,285 9,478 13,559 1,155,631 5,315,272 6,770,010 Texas 160,681 74,307 70,017 20,628 48,373 3,673,157 22,605,330 28,681,023 Utah 26,938 11,782 10,854 698 8,896 45,700 2,865,634 3,161,105 Vermont 1,121 210 135 11 123 8,753 589,986 626,299 Virginia 51,963 29,303 26,774 12,989 13,221 1,691,267 5,918,670 8,517,685 Washington 14,089 2,331 1,952 168 1,453 322,826 5,944,924 7,535,591 West Virginia 17,349 8,963 8,078 1,642 5,811 65,231 1,687,993 1,805,832 Wisconsin 33,373 20,963 18,857 4,380 13,448 389,047 5,063,526 5,813,568 Wyoming 5,841 3,784 3,425 202 2,756 7,557 534,943 577,737 Soutce: FBI/Unltorm CriMe R€~ortl/1"" Pru~ranl L);HJ Jnu U.S Cen liS Ddta Note: FlonU.1 ;:tnd Ja:;hlnt',ton 0 C did nut pruvlJe data 100 ACLU Research Report Page 140

Item #5. 3U!WO~M U!suo:)S!M L~O(; SOI8!U!p.l!1\~saM 8sm l~O(; 1>01 uo~l:Iul4s8M 8!U!j.l!1\ 1700(; £~O(; 8~Ol &m~uow.lal\ 8~0(; l:m48~n S8xa~ aassauua~ 8~0>l8a4~nos 8U!IO.l80 4~nos 900(; l~O(; 10lpu81S1apo4H 9Wc; 0018!U8AIASuuad 8SS~ v~Ol ssuopa.lO SW(; 8s8W0481>10 9W(; 9LS~ lsOl40 9W(; S~O(; 968~0>l8a4~.I0N LLS~ ss8UII0.l80 4~.I0N vW(; S~O(; t>6>1.10A MaN LOO(; S~O(; &s0:)!xallll MaN O~Ol uAaS.lar MaN £~Ol L~Ol Isa.ll4Sdw8H MaN 000(;/8SS~ 9Wl 068p8AaN SL6~ ss8>1S8.1qaN 9~Ol/vOO(; 888U8~UOIIII 8W(; v~Ol 18!.InOSSIIIII 8LS~ 981uuISSISSIIIII V~O(; 9LS~ S88~osauuIIIII 800(; 8~Ol t>1IU8p14:)11III lW(; 800(; 9Wl &8Snasn4:)8ss81111 VW(; v~Ol l:8PU8IA.l81111 SOOl/S66~ 9~Ol 18aUI81111 8~Ol/9~Ol 088u81sInol ~>I:)n~ua)l S8SU8)1 8MOI 8U81pul £~Ol 9~Ol SWl 6lSIOUIIII o48PI 000(; 6~Ol 8l1.18M8H S~Ol u8ll:1.10a~ 9~Ol 9l8P1.lOI:t mOl/8S6~ v~Ol Sl8!qwnloO :J0~:)I.I~sla ~Wl mOl I>la.l8M81aa l~Ol ~~Ol &l~n:)!~:)auuoo OOOl l~O(; uOP8.1°100 966~ mOl 9~Ol 1l8!U.l0:J!l8O 9~0(; OLS8SU8>1.1V mOl 698UOZ!.IV 866~ V~O(; 898>1S81V 8W8q81V le:>!pal/ll paZ!lejal paZ!leU!W!.I:>aa paz!le~al a~e~s 0(';0('; 4:)·n~Wlose 'pa~:)eu3 s.leaA "0·0 pue sa~e~s ·s·n lie .101SMe, euenrl.lew :::> 3l8V'1 XION3ddV' Page 141

Item #5. recreational consumption (see Appendix, Table C for full list and Endnotes dates). 9 Mike Males and Lizzie Buchen, Reforming Marijuana Laws: Which Approach Best Reduces the Harms of Criminalization? A Five-State 1 American Civil Liberties Union, The War on Marijuana Analysis (San Francisco: Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice in Black and White (New York: ACLU, June 2013), September 2014), http://www.cjcj.org/uploads/ cjcj/documents/~jcj_ https:llwww.aclu.org/reportlreport-war-marijuana- marijuana_reform_comparison.pdf. See also Drug Policy Alliance, black-and-white?redirect=criminal-law-reforml Marijuana Decriminalization and Legalization (New York: DPA, war-marijuana-black-and-white. February 2018), http://www.drugpolicy.org/sites/defaultlfiles/ marijuanalegalizationanddecriminalization_factsheet_feb2018_O. 2 Throughout this report we capitalize "Black" when referring to pdf. Black people, whereas we do not capitalize "white" when referring to white people. Capitalizing "Black" allows for Black populations 10 Drug Policy Alliance, From Prohibition to Progress: A Status to be written about in the same manner as other ethnic groups, such Report on Marijuana Legalization (New York: DPA, January 2018), as Latinx, Asian, or British. However, "white" remains lowercase http://www.drugpolicy .orgl sitesl default/filesl dpa_marijuana_ as it is not a similar ethnic signifier. The capitalization of "Black" legalization_report_febI4_2018_0.pdf.30. also raises the visibility and prominence of a population who has often been erased, marginalized, and stripped of its importance. In 11 "FBI: Marijuana Arrests Rise for Third Year in a Row, Outpace adopting this style, we follow other organizations that have officially Arrests for All Violent Crimes," National Organization for the adapted their editorial style in this manner, such as the Brookings Reform of Marijuana Laws, October 3, 2019, https:llnorml.org/ Institute, Conscious Company, and Diversitylnc, among others. news/2019/10/03/fbi-marijuana-arrests-rise-for-third-year-in-a-row- outpace-arrests-for-all-violent-crimes. 3 This report includes data from 49 of the 50 U.S. states. Florida and Washington, D.C., do not report data to the FBI's Uniform 12 ACLU, The War on Marijuana in Black and White. Crime Reporting (UCR) Program, and, thus, we submitted Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to Washington, D.C:s 13 Throughout this report we capitalize "Black" when referring to Metropolitan Police Department (MPDl and the Florida Department Black people, whereas we do not capitalize "white" when referring of Law Enforcement. Despite the D.C. Mayor's Office of Legal to white people. Capitalizing "Black" allows for Black populations Counsel ruling ordering MPD to produce responsive records within to be written about in the same manner as other ethnic groups, such five business days, D.C. did not provide data in an appropriate, timely as Latinx, Asian, or British. However, "white" remains lowercase manner for analysis in this report. Florida refused to provide any as it is not a similar ethnic signifier. The capitalization of "Black" data in response to the FOIA request. also raises the visibility and prominence of a population who has often been erased, marginalized, and stripped of its importance. In 4 The reason that possession arrest rates do not drop to zero even adopting this style, we follow other organizations that have officially when possession of marijuana is legalized or decriminalized is that adapted their editorial style in this manner, such as the Brookings there remain certain circumstances where individuals still can be Institute, Conscious Company, and DiversityInc, among others. arrested for marijuana possession. The specific reasons for these possible arrests somewhat differ by state, but common examples 14 Craig Reinarman, "Social Construction of Drug Scares," include possession arrests for juveniles to whom legalization does in Constructions of Deviance: Social Power, Context, and Interaction, not apply, or violations of specific elements of the law, such as eds. Patricia A. Adler and Peter Adler (Belmont, CA: Wadsworth exceeding the legal amount permitted to possess or using marijuana Publishing Co., 1994),92 -105; Matthew D. Lassiter, "Impossible in a prohibited location. Criminals: The Suburban Imperatives of America's War on Drugs: Journal of American History 102, no. 1 (June 2015): 126-40, 5 Pew Research Center, Race in America 2019 (Washington, D.C.: https:lldoi.org/l0.1093/jahistljav243;LauraSmith, "How a Racist Pew Research Center, April 2019), https:llwww.pewsocialtrends. Hate-Monger MastermindedAmerica's War on Drugs" Timeline org/2019/04/09/race-in-america-2019/. This report finds that February 28,2018, https:/ Itimeline.com/harry-anslU:ger-racist-~ar- Latinx people are more likely to be identified as white than Black on-drugs-prison-industrial-complex-fb5cbc281189?gi=cbf7ef9a2741; and that Latinx people perceived as nonwhite are more likely to ' David McDonald, "The Racist Roots of Marijuana report experiencing discrimination or being treated unfairly because Prohibition: Foundation for Economic Education, April 11, 2017, oftheir race than those perceived as white. https:/ Ifee.org/articles/the-racist-roots-of-marijuana-prohibition. 6 Joseph E. Kennedy, Isaac Unah, and Kasi Wahlers, "Sharks and 15 Dan Baum, "Legalize It All: Harper's Magazine, April 2016, https:11 Minnows in the War on Drugs: A Study of Quantity, Race and Drug harpers.org/archive/2016/04/legalize-it-all. Type in Drug Arrests," UC Davis Law Review 52, no. 2 (December 2018): 743, https:lllawreview.law.ucdavis.edu/issues/52/2/ 16 Suchitra Rajagopalan, "United Nations and World Health Articles/52-2_Kennedy. pdf. Organization Call for Drug Decriminalization: Drug Policy Alliance, June 29, 2017, http://www.drugpolicy.orglblog/united-nations- 7 Washington (2012), Colorado (2012), Oregon (2014), Alaska (2014), and-world-health-organization-call-drug-decriminalization. In 2016, Washington, D.C. (2014), California (2016), Massachusetts (2016), the ACLU and Human Rights Watch (HRW) released the report Maine (2016), Nevada (2016), Vermont (2018), Michigan (2018), and Every 25 Seconds, calling for federal and state governments to end Illinois (2019). the criminalization of the personal use of drugs and the possession of drugs for personal use. HRW and ACLU, Every 25 Seconds: The 8 Before legalizing marijuana for recreational use, many of the Human Toll of Criminalizing Drug Use in the United States (New states mentioned passed decriminalization measures. To date, 15 states have decriminalized marijuana but have not legalized it for 102 ACLU Research Report Page 142

Item #5. York: Human Rights Watch, October 2016), https:llwww.hrw.org/ has always been a vehicle for policing and surveillance and social sites/defaultifiles/report_pdf/usdrug1016_web_0.pdf. control of certain communities. If we want to get to the heart of the problem, we need to address these issues. Our clients have long 17 Lucas Laursen, "Canada Today Becomes the Second Country to been targeted by the NYPD for marijuana enforcement based on Legalize Weed. Here's What It Can Learn From the First," Fortune their race and socioeconomic status. The legalization effort must Magazine, October 17,2018, https://fortune.coml2018/10/17/ take this into account and make them whole. Anything short of this canada-marijuana-weed-legalization-uruguay/. is unacceptable." Eli Northrup, written testimony, "Hearing re: Marijuana Legalization: Equity and Justice for NYC" (February 18 Justin McCarthy, "Two in Three Americans Now Support Legalizing 27,2019), https:llwww.bronxdefenders.org/wp-eontentl Marijuana," Gallup, October 22,2018, https:llnews.gallup.com/ uploads/2019/03/City-Council-Testimony-Marijuana.pdf. po1ll243908/two-three-americans-supportriegalizing-marijuana. aspx. 30 Amanda Geller, Jeffrey Fagan, Tom Tyler, and Bruce G. Link, "Aggressive Policing and the Mental Health of Young Urban 19 James Cole, memorandum for all United States attorneys, "Guidance Men," American Journal of Public Health 104, no. 12 (December Regarding Marijuana Enforcement," August 29,2013, https:llwww. 2014): 2321-2327, https:lldoi.org/l0.2105/AJPH.2014.302046. justice.govliso/opa/resources/3052013829132756857467.pdf. 31 Substance Abuse and Mental Health Service Administration, 20 Ashley Southall and Jack Healy, "U.S. Won't Sue to Reverse States' Results from the 2018 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: Legalization of Marijuana, " New York Times, August 29, 2013, Detailed Tables (Washington, D.C.: SAMHSA, August 2019), https:llwww.nytimes.com/2013/08/30/us/politics/us-says-it-wont- https:llwww.samhsa.gov/datalsites/default/files/cbhsg-reports/ sue-to-undo-state-marijuana-laws.html. NSDUHDetailedTabs2018R2INSDUHDetailedTabs2018.pdf. See Table 1.26B, which finds that in 2018, reported marijuana use during 21 Thomas Fuller, "Recreational Pot Is Officially Legal in the prior year among individuals age 18 and older was 16.8% for white California," New York Times, January 1, 2018, https:llwww.nytimes. people and 18.2% for Black people. com/2018/01/01/us/legal-pot-california.html. 32 "Overall, marijuana dominates all other types of drugs in terms of 22 German Lopez, "January Was the Biggest Month yet arrests. Black and Hispanic people are arrested disproportionately in for Marijuana Legalization, Despite Trump's New terms of their share of the overall population." Kennedy, "Sharks and War on Pot," Vox, January 31,2018, https:llwww. Minnows," 746-747. vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/1/31/169247261 marijuana-legalization-ealifornia-vermont-january-2018. 33 Sagiv Galai, "Equity Must Be at the Heart of Marijuana Legalization," ACLU, June 26, 2019, https:llwww. 23 Jefferson Sessions, memorandum for all United States attorneys, aclu.orglblogl criminal-Iaw-reforml drug-Iaw-reform/ "Marijuana Enforcement," January 4,2018, https:llwww.justice.gov/ equity-must-be-heart-marijuana-Iegalization. opal press-releasel filel 10221961 download. 34 Manhattan DistrictAttorney's Office, "DA Vance: Marijuana 24 John G. Roberts Jr., 2019 Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary Prosecutions Down 94% in First Quarter of New Policy," press (Washington, D.C.: Public Information Office of the United States release, November 1,2018, https:llwww.manhattanda.org/da-vance- Supreme Court, December 2019), https:llwww.supremecourt.gov/ marijuana-prosecutions-down-94-in-first-quarter-of-new-policy/. publicinfo/year-end/2019year-endreport.pdf. 35 Jolie McCullough, "Austin Police Chief: We Will Still 25 Sara Brittany Somerset, "Attorney General Barr Favors a More Ticket, Arrest for Marijuana," Texas ,]hbune, January Lenient Approach to Cannabis Prohibition," Forbes, April 15, 2019, 24,2020, https:llwww.texastribune.org/2020/01l24/ https:llwww.forbes.com/sites/sarabrittanysomersetl2019/04/151 austin-texas-police-ehief-marijuana-arrests-will-eontinue/. attorney-general-barr-favors-a-more-lenient-approach-to-eannabis- legalization! #7 ca35a2ec4c8. 36 In 2003, Seattle voters approved a measure that set marijuana policing as low law enforcement priority. At least 15 other cities 26 Benjamin Goggin, "Black People Face Big Barriers Entering the have followed Seattle's footsteps. "Seattle Voters Approve Initiative Legal Weed Industry," Vice, September 20, 2018, https:llwww.vice. Making Marijuana Enforcement City's 'Lowest Priority,'" National com/en_us/article/yw4pkw/weed-industry-equity-Black-business. Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, September 18, 2003, https:llnorml.org/news/2003/09/18/seattle-voters-approve- 27 "Marijuana Justice Coalition Asserts Statement of Principles on initiative-making-marijuana-enforcement-city-s-lowest-priority. Federal Marijuana Reform," Human Rights Watch, July 9, 2019, https:llwww.hrw.org/news/2019/07/09/marijuana-justice- 37 States are categorized based on their most liberal law to date. For coalition-asserts-statement-principles-federal-marijuana-reform#. example, a state that legalized marijuana for medical use and later legalized recreational use is counted among "legalized." See 28 Harry G. Levine and Deborah Peterson Small, Marijuana Arrest Appendix, Table C forfulliist of marijuana laws by state. Crusade (New York: New York Civil Liberties Union, April 2008), http://marijuana-arrests.com/docs/MARIJUANA-ARREST- 38 "Any changes to Wisconsin's current marijuana policy appear CRUSADE.pdf. unlikely, with state lawmakers recently saying they won't consider a proposal to allow medical use. But that isn't stopping state 29 In February 2019, the Bronx Public Defenders addressed this matter residents from going to Illinois to buy legal weed." Corrinne during their testimony before the New York City Council on the Hess, "Wisconsin Residents Head to Illinois to Buy Legal subject of marijuana legalization and policing in their city. "The Weed," Wisconsin Public Radio, January 2,2020, https:/lwww.wpr. truth is that marijuana enforcement is rarely about marijuana. It org/wisconsin-residents-head-illinois-buy-Iegal-weed. A Tale of Two Countries: Racially Targeted Arrests in the Era of Marijuana Reform 103 Page 143

Item #5. 39 "These Nonviolent Inmates Serving Life without Parole for decriminalization laws states have enacted. For that reason, and Marijuana Need Clemency from President Trump," Life for Pot, because this report is focused on marijuana arrests between 2010- accessed March 3, 2020, https:llwww.lifeforpot.com/inmates- 2018, which is also the extent of the marijuana arrest data we sought, over-62.html. we have only analyzed arrest data pre-and post-decriminalization individually by state for states that have enacted such laws since 2010 40 Using UCR data, the FBI reported that in 2018, law enforcement (shown in Figure 8). officials across the country had made more than 10 million arrests. Of these, 521,103 were for "violent crime." As noted in our report, 48 David Brand, "Nearly Every Single Person Arrested for Weed in NYC that is less than the total marijuana arrests made that year. See This Year Was Black or Latinx," Queens Daily Eagle, August 21,2019, Federal Bureau ofInvestigation, Crime in the United States, 2018 https:llqueenseagle.com/ alii nearlY-ilvery-single-person-arrested- (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, 2019), https:llucr. for-weed-in-nyc-this-year-was-black-or-latinx. fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2018/crime-in-the-u.s.-2018/topic-pagesl persons-arrested. pdf. 49 ACLU, The War on Marijuana in Black and White. 41 The National Archive of Criminal Justice Data produced the arrest 50 SAMSHA, Results from the 2018 National Survey on Drug Use and data by age, sex, and race for all years up until 2016. Since the FBI Health. See Table 1.26B. moved to an incident bases system, they have yet to publish results for 2017 -2018. We used the FBI's APIfor their new system to acquire 51 For a total of 49 states, as Florida and Washington, D.C., did not marijuana arrest data for 2017 - 2018 (as detailed in the Methodology provide data for this report (see Methodology and Limitations section and Limitations section), but the data is currently not available for for further details). other drug types. 52 Counties have >50% coverage when more than 50% of their population 42 Violent crimes, according to the FBI's definition, include murder and is covered by an agency that reports 12 months of data to the non-negligent manslaughter, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault. UCR Program. More information on coverage is available in the Methodology and Limitations section of this report. 43 We provide profiles for 49 states. There are no profiles for Florida and Washington, D.C. because they failed to provide us data for this 53 ACLU, The War on Marijuana in Black and White, 110-112. report (see Methodology and Limitations section for more detailed information). 54 ld. 44 The states that passed laws in the 1970s were often quite limited 55 Drug Policy Alliance, From Prohibition to Progress, 7. in terms of the scope of activity decriminalized or contained loopholes that police departments could exploit, and thus were 56 Ben Markus, "As Adults Legally Smoke Pot in Colorado, More less comprehensive than the more recent decriminalization laws Minority Kids Arrested For It," National Public Radio, June 29, 2016, that have been enacted. For that reason, and because this report is https:llwww.npr.org/2016/06/29/483954157 1as-adults-legally- focused on marijuana arrests between 2010-2018, which is also the smoke-pot-in-eolorado-more-minority-kids-arrested-for-it. extent of the marijuana arrest data we sought, we have only analyzed arrest data pre-and post-decriminalization individually by state for 57 ACLU of North Carolina, At All Costs: The Consequences of Rising states that have enacted such laws since 2010 (shown in Figure 8). Court Fines and Fees in North Carolina (Raleigh, NC: ACLU, April However, the states that decriminalized in the 1970s are included 2019): 38-9, https:llwww.aeluofnorthcarolina.org/sites/defaultl in the aggregate analysis of all decriminalized states (as shown in filesl field_documentsl aelu_nc _20 19_fines _and_fees_report_17 _ Figure 6). singles_final.pdf. 45 As discussed in greater detail in Endnote 4, possession arrest rates 58 do not drop to zero even when possession of marijuana is legalized or decriminalized because there remain certain circumstances in which 59 In jurisdictions where nonpayment can still result in incarceration, individuals can still be arrested for marijuana possession. individuals must be provided with an attorney. 46 The national rate ratio of racial disparities in 2018 (3.64) is higher 60 ee ACLU Drug Policy Litigation Project, Collateral Consequences of than the 2018 rate ratios for all three of the subgroups in Figure 6 the War on Drugs (New Haven, CT: ACLU, January 2003), https:11 (Fully Illegal, Decriminalized, Legal) because white people are more www.aelu.org/sites/defaultlfiles/field_document/final%20brochure. likely than Black people to live in a state that has legalized marijuana. pdf. Baseline rates of arrests for both racial groups are much lower in states that have legalized, but only 10.6% of the Black people in this 61 Mariah Woelfel, "How Is Marijuana Expungement Working analysis live in a legalized state, compared to 22.6% of white people. in Illinois?: National Public Radio, October 17, 2019, For background information, see Agresti, Alan. Categorical data https:llwww.npr.orgllocall309/2019/10/17/770701388/ analysis. Wiley-Interscience, 1990 or Good, I. J., and Y. Mittal. "The how-is-marijuana-ilxpungement-working-in-illinois. amalgamation and geometry of two-by-two contingency tables." The Annals of Statistics (1987): 694-711. 62 See Allie Howell, Criminal Conviction Restrictions for Marijuana icensing (Los Angeles: Reason Foundation, September 2018), 47 While a handful of states passed laws in the 1970s removing criminal 7 -11, https:llreason.org/wp-<!ontent/uploads/criminal-eonviction- penalties for certain marijuana offenses (see Table 5), such laws were restrictions-for-marijuana-licensing.pdf. often quite limited in terms of the scope of activity decriminalized or contained loopholes that police departments could take advantage 63 ee "Lowest Law Enforcement Priority Jurisdictions," Marijuana of, and thus were less comprehensive than the more recent Policy Project, https:llwww.mpp.orglissues/criminal-justice/ 104 ACLU Research Report Page 144

Item #5. lowest-Ia w-€nforcement-priority-jurisdictions/. 76 Florida Medical Marijuana Legalization Initiative, Florida Ballot See also San Francisco, Cal., Admin. Code § 96B, Policy Making Amendment 2 (approved by voters November 2016). Marijuana Offenses the Lowest Law Enforcement Priority. 77 Georgia's Hope Act, H.B. 324, 2019 Leg., Reg. Sess. (Ga. 2019). 64 See End Racial Profiling Act of2015, H.R. 1933, 114th Congo (2015). See also The Racial and Identity Profiling Act of 2015, A.B. 953, 2015 78 Medical Use of Marijuana, S.B. 862, 20th Leg., Reg. Sess. (Hi. 2000); Leg., Reg. Sess. (Ca. 2015); "10 Best Practices for Writing Policies A Bill for an Act Relating to Marijuana, H.B. 1383, 30th Leg. Reg. Against Racial Profiling," Southern Poverty Law Center, October Sess. (Hi. 2019). 23,2018, https:llwww.splcenter.org/20181023/10-best-practices- writing-policies-against-racial-profiling. 79 The Compassionate Use of Medical Cannabis Pilot Program Act, H.B. 1, 98th Leg., Reg. Sess. (II. 2013); An Act Concerning Criminal 65 Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) Law, S.B. 2228, 99th Leg., Reg. Sess. (II. 2016) (amending the Cannabis Control Act at 720 Ill. Compo Stat. Ann. 550); The Cannabis 66 United States Office of Management and Budget, A Budget for Regulation and Tax Act, H.B. 1438, 101st Leg., Reg. Sess. (II. 2019). America's Future: Analytical Perspectives (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Publishing Office, 2020), https:llwww.whitehouse.gov/ 80 Louisiana Therapeutic Marijuana Act, S.B. 271, 2016 Leg., Reg. Sess. wp-content/uploads/2020102/spec_fy21.pdf. (La. 2016). 67 See Daniel Ross, "Newark's New Disciplinary Board Could Flex Rare 81 Maine Medical Marijuana for Specific Illnesses, Maine Ballot Muscle over Police," Yes Magazine, September 11, 2015, https:llwww. Question 2 (approved by voters November 1999), amended by Maine yesmagazine. orgl social-justice/2015/091 111newarks-new-civilian- Medical Marijuana Initiative, Maine Ballot Question 5 (approved by board-could-wield-rarlHiisciplinary-muscle-over-police/; "Community voters November 2009); Marijuana Legalization Act, Maine Ballot Oversight: Campaign Zero, accessed March 10, 2020, https:llwww. Question 1 (approved by voters November 2016). joincampaignzero.org/oversight. 82 An Act Concerning Medical Marijuana - Natalie M. LaPrade Medical 68 Alaska Medical Marijuana Act, Alaska Ballot Measure 8 (approved by Marijuana Commission, H.B. 881, 434th Leg., Reg. Sess. (Md. 2014). voters November 1998); An Act to Tax and Regulate the Production, An Act Concerning Criminal Law - Possession of Marijuana - Civil Sale, and Use of Marijuana, Alaska Ballot Measure 2 (approved by Offense, S.B. 364, 434th Leg., Reg. Sess. (Md. 2014). voters November 2014). 83 An Act Establishing a Sensible State Marihuana Policy, H.B. 4468, 69 Arizona Medical Marijuana Act, Arizona Ballot Proposition 203 185th Leg., Reg. Sess. (Ma. 2008); An Initiative Petition for a Law for (approved by voters November 2010). the Humanitarian Medical Use of Marijuana, Massachusetts Ballot Question 3 (approved by voters November 2012); The Regulation and 70 Arkansas Medical Marijuana Amendment, Arkansas Ballot Issue 6 Taxation of Marijuana Act, H.B. 3932, 189th Leg., Reg. Sess. (Ma. (approved by voters November 2016). 2016). 71 Medical Use of Marijuana Initiative, California Ballot Proposition 84 Medical Marijuana Initiative, Michigan Proposal 1 (approved by 215 (approved by voters November 1996); An Act to Amend Section voters November 2008); Michigan Regulation and Taxation of 11357 of the Health and Safety Code, and to Amend Section 23222 of Marihuana Act, Proposal 1 (approved by voters November 2018). the Vehicle Code, Relating to Controlled Substances, S.B. 1449,2010 Leg., Reg. Sess. (Ca. 2010); Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of 85 In 1976, Minnesota amended its possession and sale laws as related Marijuana Act, California Ballot Proposition 64 (approved by voters to petty marijuana offenses, codified at Minn. Stat. § 152.027(a). November 2016). Minnesota Medical Cannabis Therapeutic Research Act, S.F. 2470, 88th Leg., Reg. Sess. (Mn. 2014). Specifically, Minnesota 72 Colorado Medical Use of Marijuana Initiative, Colorado Ballot eliminated the punishment of imprisonment for a first offense of Amendment 20 (approved by voters November 2000); Use and possession of certain amounts of marijuana. However, it continued Regulation of Marijuana Initiative, Colorado Ballot Amendment 64 to classify marijuana possession as a crime, and in some cases (approved by voters November 2012). maintained harsher criminal penalties. There is some disagreement about whether these types oflaws qualify as decriminalization. 73 An Act Concerning the Penalty for Certain Nonviolent Drug Offenses, However, for this report, we adopted a similar criteria as some S.B. 1014,2011 Leg., Reg. Sess. (Ct. 2011); An Act Concerning the other organizations, such as Drug Policy Alliance, Marijuana Policy Palliative Use of Marijuana, H.B. 5389, 2012 Leg., Reg. Sess. (Ct. Project, and NORML, classifying a state which does not impose 2012). imprisonment for first offense as a type of decriminalized state. 74 An Act to Amend Title 16 of the Delaware Code Creating the 86 In 1978, Mississippi amended its marijuana possession laws, codified Delaware Medical Marijuana Act, S.B. 17, 146th Leg., Reg. Sess. (De. atMiss. Code Ann. § 41-29-139(c)(2). Specifically, Mississippi 2011); An Act to Amend Title 16 of the Delaware Code Relating to eliminated the punishment of imprisonment for a first offense of Marijuana, H.B. 39, 148th Leg., Reg. Sess. (De. 2015). possession of certain amounts of marijuana. However, for larger amounts and multiple offenses, it continued to classify marijuana 75 Legalization of Marijuana for Medical Treatment Amendment possession as a crime, and in some cases maintained criminal Act of 2010, Council Act 18-429, 18th Leg., Reg. Sess. (D.C. 2010); penalties, including imprisonment. There is some disagreement Legalization of Possession of Minimal Amounts of Marijuana about whether these types oflaws qualify as decriminalization. for Personal Use Initiative Act of2014, Washington, D.C., Ballot However, for this report, we adopted a similar criteria as some Initiative Measure 71 (approved by voters November 2014). other organizations, such as Drug Policy Alliance, Marijuana Policy A Tale of Two Countries: Racially Targeted Arrests in the Era of Marijuana Reform 105 Page 145

Item #5. Project, and NORML, classifying a state which does not impose or possession of certain amounts of marijuana, it continued imprisonment for first offense as a type of decriminalized state. ito classify marijuana possession as a crime, and in some cases aintained criminal penalties. 87 An Act Modifying Provisions Relating to Criminal Law, S.B. 491, 97th Leg., 2nd Reg. Sess. (Mo. 2014); Medical Marijuana and 96 orth Dakota Compassionate Care Act, North Dakota Initiated Veteran Healthcare Services Initiative, Missouri Amendment tatutory Measure 5 (approved by voters November 2016); An Act to 2 (approved by voters November 2018). Specifically, Missouri end and Reenact North Dakota Marijuana Laws, H.B. 1050, 66th eliminated the punishment of imprisonment for a first offense of eg., Reg. Sess. (Nd. 2019). Though North Carolina eliminated the possession of marijuana, however it continues to classify marijuana unishment of imprisonment for possession of certain amounts of possession as a crime, and in some cases maintain criminal arijuana, it continued to classify marijuana possession as a crime, penalties. There is some disagreement about whether these types nd in some cases maintained criminal penalties. of laws qualify as decriminalization. However, for this report, we adopted a similar criteria as some other organizations, such as Drug 97 n 1975, Ohio amended its marijuana possession laws, classifying Policy Alliance, Marijuana Policy Project, and NORML, classifying ow-level possession as a minor misdemeanor, codified at ORC a state which does not impose imprisonment for first offense as a (\nn. 2925.11(C)(3). Medical Marijuana Control Program Act, H.B. type of decriminalized state. r23, 131st Leg., Reg. Sess. (Oh. 2016). Ohio referred to marijuana ossession as a misdemeanor, but it did not impose imprisonment nor 88 Montana Medical Marijuana Allowance Initiative, Montana Ballot criminal record for certain amounts. However, for larger amounts, Initiative 148 (approved by voters November 2004); reformed by An .t maintained harsher criminal penalties, including imprisonment. Act Establishing Montana Marijuana Act and Revising Laws Relating to the Use of Marijuana, S.B. 423, 62nd Leg., Reg. Sess. (Mt. 2011); 98 edical Marijuana Legalization Initiative, Oklahoma State Question amended by Montana Medical Marijuana Act, Ballot Initiative 182 88 (approved by voters June 2018); amended by Oklahoma Medical (approved by voters November 2016). arijuana and Patient Protection Act, H.B. 2612, 2019 Leg., Reg. ess. (Ok. 2019). 89 In 1979, Nebraska amended its marijuana possession laws, codified at R.R.S. Neb. § 28416(13). Specifically. Nebraska decriminalized 99 regon Medical Marijuana Act, Oregon Ballot Measure 67 (approved first offenses of possession of certain amounts of marijuana. y voters November 1998); Control, Regulation, and Taxation of However, for larger amounts and multiple offenses, it continued arijuana and Industrial Hemp Act, Oregon Ballot Measure 91 to classify marijuana possession as a crime, and in some cases approved by voters November 2014). maintained criminal penalties, including imprisonment. There is some disagreement about whether these types of laws qualify as 100 edical Marijuana Act, S.B. 3, 2015 Leg., Reg. Sess. (Pa. 2016). decriminalization. However, for this report, we adopted a similar criteria as some other organizations, such as Drug Policy Alliance, 101 he Edward O. Hawkins and Thomas C. Slater Medical Marijuana Marijuana Policy Project, and NORML, classifying a state which does ct, S.B. 0710, 2005 Leg., Jan. Sess. (Ri. 2005) (enacted by overriding not impose imprisonment for first offense as a type of decriminalized overnor's veto in January 2006); Uniform Controlled Substance Act, state. S.B. 2253, 2012 Leg., Jan. Sess. (Ri. 2012). 90 Nevada Medical Marijuana Act: Initiative Relating to the Use of a 102 tah Medical Cannabis Act, Utah Proposition 2 (approved by voters Plant of the Genus Cannabis for Medical Purposes, Nevada Ballot ovember 2018); amended by Medical Cannabis Amendments, S.B. Question 9 (approved by voters November 1998); Nevada Medical 002,2019 Leg., 1st Spec. Sess. (Ut. 2019). Marijuana Act, Nevada Ballot Question 9 (approved by voters November 2000); Nevada Marijuana Legalization Act: Initiative to 103 Act Relating to the Medical Use of Marijuana, S.B. 76,2004 Regulate and Tax Marijuana, Nevada Ballot Question 2 (approved by eg., Reg. Sess. (Vt. 2004); An Act Relating to Civil Penalties for voters November 2016). ossession of Marijuana, H. 200, 2013 Leg., Reg. Sess. (Vt. 2013); n Act Relating to Eliminating Penalties for Possession of Limited 91 An Act Relative to the Use of Cannabis for Therapeutic Purposes, H.B. ounts of Marijuana by Adults 21 Years of Age or Older, H. 511, 573,2013 Leg., Reg. Sess. (Nh. 2013); An Act Relative to the Penalties 018 Leg., Reg. Sess. (Vt. 2018). for Possession of Marijuana, H.B. 640, 2017 Leg., Reg. Sess. (Nh. 2017). 104 ashington Medical Marijuana Initiative, Washington Initiative 692 (approved by voters November 1998); Washington Marijuana 92 New Jersey Compassionate Use Medical Marijuana Act, S.B. 119, Legalization and Regulation, Washington Initiative 502 (approved by 213th Leg., Reg. Sess. (Nj. 2010). oters November 2012). 93 The Lynn and Erin Compassionate Use Act, S.B. 523, 48th Leg., 1st 105 est Virginia Medical Cannabis Act, S.B. 386, 2017 Leg., Reg. Sess. Sess. (Nm. 2007); Decreasing Penalties for Possession of Marijuana (Wv.2017). and of Drug Paraphernalia, S.B. 323, 54th Leg., 1st Sess. (Nm 2019). 94 Medical Use of Marijuana, S.B. 7923, 2014 Leg., Reg. Sess. (Ny. 2014); An Act to Amend the Penal Law and the Criminal Procedure Law, S.B. 6579, 2019 Leg., RegSess. (Ny. 2019). 95 In 1977, North Carolina amended its marijuana possession laws to classify low-level possession as a Class C misdemeanor and remove the threat of imprisonment, codified at N.C. Gen. Stat. § 90-95(d). Though North Carolina eliminated the punishment of imprisonment 106 ACLU Research Report Page 146

Item #5. Page 147

Item #5. Page 148

ATTACHMENT #4 Council Committee of the Whole Meeting ofItem #5. 09/26/2023 Rivera, Arielle M From: Ellen Richardson <ellenr711@aol.com> Sent: Monday, September 25, 2023 3:24 PM To: City Clerks Office Subject: EXTERNAL:Input on legalization of use of Marijuana in Dover WARNING: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. "There are a couple of hot button issues on the agenda. There is a public hearing tonight on the old post office property and tomorrow we willhave a discussion about the future of legal marijuana in the city. Your input is solicited in person or email cityclerk@dover.de.us .. My personal input - I suspect here is enough substance abuse in Dover without adding this magnet to attract out of towners to Dover. Ellen Richardson 1 Page 149

Item #10. Monthly Report August 2023 Office of City Assessor Page 150

Item #10. ASSESSOR’S REPORT Number of Deeds Stamped for Transfer Tax Dollar Amount for the Month of Aug. 2022/2023 the Month of Aug. 2022/2023 36 $200 $134 40 30 32 30 Thousands 28 $109 $78 30 18 $64 20 $100 $65 10 0 2 1 1 2022 $0 $12 $1 2022 0 $0 2023 2023 First Time Buyer for the Month Aug. 2022/2023 Realty of Aug. 2022/2023 Property Sales in Dollars 36 Received Prior to Recording 36 $9 $9 $9 34 32 $10 $7 Millions Res. Non‐First 32 30 30 Time Buyers $5 $0 $1 $1 $0 2022 30 $0 Res. First Time 2023 28 Buyers 26 2022 2023 Major Updates June July August Assessment Change $2,603,100 $10,577,240 $0 Residential Sales Ratio Report Sales in Study Total Assessed Total Sale Price Ratio PRD Value 59 $9,663,300 $16,027,789 0.60 1.01 Ratio – Assessed Value divided by Sale Price. PRD – Mean – A PRD above 1.03 tends to indicate assessment regressivity – high valued properties are under appraised relative to low valued properties. A PRD below .98 tends to indicate assessment progressivity – high valued properties are relatively over appraised. 1 Page 151

Item #10. ASSESSOR’S REPORT Assessor’s Office Wild Meadows / Persimmon Park Place Home Sales for August 2023: Property Address Assessed Value Sales Price 18 Karen Place $93,500 $203,000 119 Persimmon Circle $98,900 $219,000 802 Farrall Drive $69,000 $163,400 14 Sutton Drive $53,500 $128,900 2 Page 152

012ÿ445ÿ 44ÿ24647 89 ÿ 9ÿÿ12 010ÿ 1 ÿ 21ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ 874 29 >?@ A8 100 A>9 00 1 ? 0 910 0 18A ÿ22 01ÿ 2981Item #10.0    % &  #ÿ()*+ÿ,+-ÿ& " " $ 7< )1 ÿÿÿÿÿ = # )8,# ÿÿÿÿÿ#= ÿ ! ! " % &  ÿ,&./0(.++ÿ*+ % $$  #$# 6< )1 ÿÿÿÿÿ "=  )8,# ÿÿÿÿÿ= ÿ   ! # &  !ÿ*.-ÿ1)++2ÿ&  $%!  #$ ) )1 ÿÿÿÿÿ#=% # )8,# ÿÿÿÿÿ= ÿ!# ! # #$ # &   ÿ342+)5ÿ60  $%"  ! 7< )1 ÿÿÿÿÿ#=%  )8,# ÿÿÿÿÿ"= ÿ# ! #% # &  %ÿ7++&.1ÿ60  $!#  # 6< )1 ÿÿÿÿÿ%=" !)8,# ÿÿÿÿÿ#%= ÿ" ! ""! % &  ÿ&ÿ4)5ÿ&  $$  %% 7 )1 ÿÿÿÿÿ#%= ")8,# ÿÿÿÿÿ#%$=$ ÿ ! "%  &  !"ÿ-ÿ,41&-4&/ÿ)1 # $"% #" 6< 1, ÿÿÿÿÿ %"= )8,# ÿÿÿÿÿ#= ÿ ! ! ! # &  $ÿ/ÿ08&-7&&2ÿ& # $!%  #$ 7 )1 ÿÿÿÿÿ#= )8,# ÿÿÿÿÿ##!= ÿ ! ! " # &  "%ÿ9.-,ÿ:440ÿ&  $!$  %% 6< )1 ÿÿÿÿÿ $$=" # )8,# ÿÿÿÿÿ###= ÿ ! %  &  ÿ*)&ÿ/0 " $"% ! 6 :& ÿÿÿÿÿÿ%%=$ )8,# ÿÿÿÿÿ $!= ÿ" !# % &  " ÿ-ÿ,41&-4&/ÿ)1 " $ "! 6< , ÿÿÿÿÿ !!=# # )8,# ÿÿÿÿÿ= ÿ! %$  # &  !$ÿ7)64-ÿ)1  $!"  $ 6< )1 ÿÿÿÿÿ % =  )8,# ÿÿÿÿÿ#= ÿ %$! # &  !$ ÿ(.++&ÿ&  $!"   6< )1 ÿÿÿÿÿ =  %)8,# ÿÿÿÿÿ$#= ÿ % # # &  %%"ÿ049-/-ÿ7+1  $!#  " 6< , ÿÿÿÿÿ=%  )8,# ÿÿÿÿÿ= ÿ%# % #$ # &  $$ÿ(649++ÿ&  $! " 6 , ÿÿÿÿÿ != ")8,# ÿÿÿÿÿ= ÿ!% % #! # &  " ÿ:&)&ÿ& " $"  6 )1 ÿÿÿÿÿ "$=  #)8,# ÿÿÿÿÿ= ÿ! % "#"  &  ÿ0)ÿ*)&02ÿ0&+ # #  ""% 6< )1 ÿÿÿÿÿ %!= )8,# ÿÿÿÿÿ#"= ÿ % "#  &  ÿ0)ÿ*)&02ÿ0&+ # #  ""% 6< )1 ÿÿÿÿÿ %=! ")8,# ÿÿÿÿÿ$= ÿ# % "#!  &  %ÿ0)ÿ*)&02ÿ0&+ # #  ""% 6< )1 ÿÿÿÿÿ %=% %)8,# ÿÿÿÿÿ$!=" $ ÿ % "  &  $ÿ34*5.-/ÿ)1 " #  6< )1 ÿÿÿÿÿ=% )8,# ÿÿÿÿÿ#%=" ÿ % "  &  ÿ34*5.-/ÿ)1  #   6< )1 ÿÿÿÿÿ $=# )8,# ÿÿÿÿÿ#"!=$ ÿ % !  % % &  ÿ-ÿ)(&.6)-ÿ)1ÿ;0 # $" " # 7 )1 ÿÿÿÿÿ#=! )8,# ÿÿÿÿÿ##= ÿ! % !  % &  "ÿ-ÿ7&):4&ÿ/0 $  !% 7 )1 ÿÿÿÿÿ = )8,# ÿÿÿÿÿ#"%= ÿ"% % %  ! ! &  !%ÿ93.0ÿ4)5ÿ& # $ ## 6 )1 ÿÿÿÿÿ "="  )8,# ÿÿÿÿÿ= ÿ"% % $"  &  #ÿ)6)6.)ÿ*+ % $$%  " 6 )1 ÿÿÿÿÿ "= )8,# ÿÿÿÿÿ = ÿ$# % $!%  &  "ÿ()34,)-2ÿ*+ % $$  $ 6 )1 ÿÿÿÿÿ  = #)8,# ÿÿÿÿÿ#= ÿ % $%  &   ÿ()34,)-2ÿ*+ % $$  $ 6 )1 ÿÿÿÿÿ = )8,# ÿÿÿÿÿ"= ÿ % $ " &  "ÿ+;.-,04-ÿ*+ %    #% 6< , ÿÿÿÿÿ !=% )8,# ÿÿÿÿÿ!= ÿ# % $#$ " &  $ÿ+;.-,04-ÿ*+ % ! "% 6< , ÿÿÿÿÿ %%= #)8,# ÿÿÿÿÿ#= ÿ !#"! &  " ÿ781)+ÿ+- " % # 7< )1 ÿÿÿÿÿ!= $)8,# ÿÿÿÿÿ= ÿ% !"  &  #ÿ+.00+ÿ-ÿ9)2 #   "# 6< )1 ÿÿÿÿÿ #=  )8,# ÿÿÿÿÿ"="$ ÿ !"  &   ÿ+.00+ÿ-ÿ9)2 # #  "# 6< )1 ÿÿÿÿÿ #= %)8,# ÿÿÿÿÿ!=$$ ÿ! !"#  &   $ÿ+.00+ÿ-ÿ9)2 # #  "# 6< )1 ÿÿÿÿÿ #= %)8,# ÿÿÿÿÿ=$$ ÿ! Page 153

012ÿ445ÿ 44ÿ24647 89 ÿ 9ÿÿ12 010ÿ 1 ÿ 21ÿ4ÿÿÿÿÿÿ 874 29 =>? @8 100 @=9 00 1 > 0 910 0 18@ ÿ22 01ÿ 2981Item #10.0  !!"# ! )# #ÿ&+,,&ÿ-ÿ.(/ # #" !!" ! # "! '; (4 ÿÿÿÿÿ#"< %(:5!" ÿÿÿÿÿ!<$ ÿ !#" # )# !ÿ0,1-/ÿ) # % #$% ! #  '; 5 ÿÿÿÿÿ#<% "#(:5!" ÿÿÿÿÿ!< ÿ#  #$#! ) "$ÿ2()ÿ3(4-ÿ) # ! #$% # #% ' (4 ÿÿÿÿÿÿ <# "#(:5!" ÿÿÿÿÿ#"< ÿ"  # )# ##ÿ'1-,+--,(&ÿ) #  #$% ! !#%% 9 (4 ÿÿÿÿÿ!"<$ !"(:5!" ÿÿÿÿÿ" < ÿ % ! )# #%ÿ5)-.(/ÿ&- # #" #$% ! #! ' (4 ÿÿÿÿÿ## < #(:5!" ÿÿÿÿÿ!< ÿ %!# $ )# !#!ÿ-ÿ6+)6.11ÿ0, # # #$" ! $! ' (4 ÿÿÿÿÿÿ"< !!(:5!" ÿÿÿÿÿÿ< ÿ$% %!"## $ )# "!ÿ''+&ÿ0, # # #$ # ! ' 7) ÿÿÿÿÿÿ<#  (:5!" ÿÿÿÿÿ#"#< ÿ ! %! $ )# !"ÿ-ÿ514)-1)0ÿ(4 # # #$" ! !"! ' 7) ÿÿÿÿÿ#"<$ !%(:5!" ÿÿÿÿÿ!"< ÿ #!%  # )# ! "ÿ,)(7(&5()ÿ) #  ! ! !" '; (4 ÿÿÿÿÿ!!$<! "#(:5!" ÿÿÿÿÿ"#< ÿ" #"# ! # )# #!!ÿ,3(80ÿ) # #" #$$ ! !! '; (4 ÿÿÿÿÿ#"<%  (:5!" ÿÿÿÿÿ!"< ÿ #"! " # )# # "ÿ,3(80ÿ) # #" #$$ ! #$ '; (4 ÿÿÿÿÿ# <  #(:5!" ÿÿÿÿÿ!!< ÿ# ! ! # )# ÿ8(2&ÿ&- # " #$!! # #" ' (4 ÿÿÿÿÿ# <$ "(:5!" ÿÿÿÿÿ"#< ÿ  %   )# "!%ÿ9&:'1(,ÿ0, # # !#$ ! #  9 (4 ÿÿÿÿÿ!#$< "#(:5!" ÿÿÿÿÿ"!< ÿ% #!  )# #"ÿ&(77),/ÿ&- # # #$$ # #! ' (4 ÿÿÿÿÿ#%"<" !!(:5!" ÿÿÿÿÿ#"< ÿ# # # " )# #!"ÿ0ÿ0,(,ÿ0, # ! #$ $ # #!# ' (4 ÿÿÿÿÿ#%< ##(:5!" ÿÿÿÿÿ"< ÿ! # )# "#ÿ)1104&,ÿ(4 # ! #$ $ # % ; 45 ÿÿÿÿÿ#""<  (:5!" ÿÿÿÿÿ!< ÿ" %%#! #! )# $ÿ1(6ÿ) # # #$ # # ' (4 ÿÿÿÿÿ#%!<$ #(:5!" ÿÿÿÿÿ!"$< ÿ %#!" #! )# " ÿ8+810(ÿ(4 #  #$! ! #%#% '; (4 ÿÿÿÿÿ#!<% !(:5!" ÿÿÿÿÿ"#< ÿ &'%# ### # )# # ÿ0:,,1-ÿ) # ## !" # #!$ ' 5 ÿÿÿÿÿÿ"< !"(:5!" ÿÿÿÿÿ#!%<$ ÿ ! &'%# ##%!# )# %!ÿ7())(&&ÿ) # ## ! # #%" ' 5 ÿÿÿÿÿÿ$< "#(:5!" ÿÿÿÿÿ#"<  ÿ ! &'%#"% #( )# ##$ÿ2)0+881-ÿ'+) # ## #$$# # ##! ; (4 ÿÿÿÿÿÿ$%<$ !$(:5!" ÿÿÿÿÿ!#$< ÿ  &'%#%##$ #( )# #%ÿ6()-ÿ2& # ## ! # #" ' 5 ÿÿÿÿÿÿ$"< #(:5!" ÿÿÿÿÿ!"< ÿ  &'%#!   )% ! " ÿ.3+,ÿ1(6ÿ)  ÿÿÿÿÿÿ !< !(:5!" ÿÿÿÿÿÿ%< ÿ &'%%#! "( )# ##"ÿ81:)-+-5ÿ14ÿ&- # # !!# # !### ( 5 ÿÿÿÿÿ!%< "#(:5!" ÿÿÿÿÿ< ÿ &'%%#!$ "( ) #!#ÿ81:)-+-5ÿ14ÿ&-  ÿÿÿÿÿÿ"$< #(:5!" ÿÿÿÿÿ#< ÿ"$ &'%## #" )# !$ÿ(0,ÿ.+-ÿ) # % #$$ ! #%  '; (4 ÿÿÿÿÿ#$<" #(:5!" ÿÿÿÿÿ"< ÿ Page 154

Item #11. Page 155

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT FUND JULY 1, 2023 - JUNE 30, 2024 100-10-12-99-000-53037 Current Balance- $ 19,500.00 I nner City Cultural League Vendor # 200 BUDGETED COM M UNI TY ENHANCEM ENT FUND - $2,500 FOR EACH COUNCI L M EM BER PER DI STRI CT AND $5,000 FOR THE AT-LARGE COUNCI L M EM BER. THE PURPOSE OF THE FUND I S TO ALLOW M EM BERS TO $ 25,000.00 AM OUNT CONTRI BUTE FUNDS TO A SM ALL PROJECT OR COM M UNI TY NEEDS I N EACH DI STRI CT. FI NAL BUDGET $ 25,000.00 TOTAL COUNCI L TOTAL YEAR TO DATE SPONSOR VENDOR DESCRI PTI ON I NVOI CE # BATCH# CHARGES DATE BALANCE Women and Children Councilman Anderson authorized the designation of $500.00 of his community Email from David Anderson dated 05/24/2023 and Email & Letter 7/10/2023 Anderson Transformation Ministry enhancement funds to the Women and Children Transformation Ministry International, $500.00 $500.00 $24,500.00 from William Snorton, Jr. received 05/23/2023 International, Inc. Inc. for their Boys to Men Development Program for Gas cards Councilman Anderson authorized the designation of $300.00 of his community Email from David Anderson dated 07/12/2023 and email from 7/12/2023 Anderson The 302 Movement $300.00 $800.00 $24,200.00 enhancement funds to The 302 Movement for the backpack program. Tracey Weems dated 07/11/2023 Councilman Boggerty authorized the designation of $200.00 of his community Email from Andre Boggerty dated 07/17/2023 and email from 7/17/2023 Boggerty I Am Me, Inc. $200.00 $1,000.00 $24,000.00 enhancement funds to I Am Me, Inc. for their ME Festival Peirrce McCoy dated 07/17/2023 Councilman Hare authorized the designation of $200.00 of his community enhancement Email from Bill Hare dated 07/17/2023 and email from Peirrce 7/17/2023 Hare I Am Me, Inc. $200.00 $1,200.00 $23,800.00 funds to I Am Me, Inc. for their ME Festival McCoy dated 07/17/2023 Councilman Lewis authorized the designation of $300.00 of his community enhancement Email from Brian Lewis dated 07/25/2023 and email from Peirrce 7/25/2023 Lewis I Am Me, Inc. $300.00 $1,500.00 $23,500.00 funds to I Am Me, Inc. for their ME Festival McCoy dated 07/17/2023 Councilman Anderson authorized the designation of $200.00 of his community Email from David Anderson dated 07/25/2023 and email from 7/25/2023 Anderson United Way $200.00 $1,700.00 $23,300.00 $550.00 enhancement funds to United Way for their "Book Bash" Kenyatta Livingston dated 07/25/2023 Councilwoman Pillsbury authorized the designation of $250.00 of her community Email from Julia Pillsbury dated 07/25/2023 and email from 7/25/2023 Pillsbury United Way $250.00 $1,950.00 $23,050.00 enhancement funds to United Way for their "Book Bash" Kenyatta Livingston dated 07/25/2023 Councilman Neil authorized the designation of $100.00 of his community enhancement Email from Fred Neil dated 07/25/2023 and email from Kenyatta 7/25/2023 Neil United Way $100.00 $2,050.00 $22,950.00 funds to United Way for their "Book Bash" Livingston dated 07/25/2023 Councilman Boggerty authorized the designation of $1000.00 of his community Email from Andre Boggerty dated 07/31/2023 and email from 7/31/2023 Boggerty The Inner City Cultural League $1,000.00 $3,050.00 $21,950.00 enhancement funds to The Inner City Cultural League for the reasons stated in the email. Reuben Salters dated 07/25/2023 Councilman Anderson authorized the designation of $250.00 of his community Email from David Anderson dated 08/04/2023 and Email & Letter 8/4/2023 Anderson Yeshua Lighthouse $250.00 $3,300.00 $21,700.00 enhancement funds to The Yeshua Lighthouse for bookbags for their community day from Liana Pritchett received 08/01/2023 Councilman Rocha authorized the designation of $200.00 of his community enhancement Email from Gerald Rocha dated 08/07/2023 and email from 8/7/2023 Rocha United Way $200.00 $3,500.00 $21,500.00 funds to United Way for their "Book Bash" Kenyatta Livingston dated 07/25/2023 Councilman Neil authorized the designation of $100.00 of his community enhancement Hispanic Organization of Latin Email from Fred Neil dated 08/12/2023 and email from Anthony 8/14/2023 Neil funds to the Hispanic Organization of Latin Americans (HOLA) for their Baila Con Dover $100.00 $3,600.00 $21,400.00 Americans (HOLA) (Tony) Velazquez dated 08/11/2023 Festival. Councilperson Arndt authorized the designation of $200.00 of her community Hispanic Organization of Latin Email from Tricia Arndt dated 08/14/2023 and email from Anthony 8/14/2023 Arndt enhancement funds to the Hispanic Organization of Latin Americans (HOLA) for their $200.00 $3,800.00 $21,200.00 Americans (HOLA) (Tony) Velazquez dated 08/11/2023 Baila Con Dover Festival. Councilman Anderson authorized the designation of $250.00 of his community Hispanic Organization of Latin Email from David Anderson dated 08/14/2023 and email from 8/14/2023 Anderson enhancement funds to the Hispanic Organization of Latin Americans (HOLA) for their $250.00 $4,050.00 $20,950.00 Americans (HOLA) Anthony (Tony) Velazquez dated 08/11/2023 Baila Con Dover Festival. Councilman Boggerty authorized the designation of $250.00 of his community Hispanic Organization of Latin Email from Andre Boggerty dated 08/14/2023 and email from 8/14/2023 Boggerty enhancement funds to the Hispanic Organization of Latin Americans (HOLA) for their $250.00 $4,300.00 $20,700.00 Americans (HOLA) Anthony (Tony) Velazquez dated 08/11/2023 Baila Con Dover Festival. Councilman Lewis authorized the designation of $300.00 of his community enhancement Hispanic Organization of Latin Email from Brian Lewis dated 08/14/2023 and email from Anthony 8/14/2023 Lewis funds to the Hispanic Organization of Latin Americans (HOLA) for their Baila Con Dover $300.00 $4,600.00 $20,400.00 Americans (HOLA) (Tony) Velazquez dated 08/11/2023 Festival. Councilman Rocha authorized the designation of $200.00 of his community enhancement Hispanic Organization of Latin Email from Gerald Rocha dated 08/18/2023 and email from 8/18/2023 Rocha funds to the Hispanic Organization of Latin Americans (HOLA) for their Baila Con Dover $200.00 $4,800.00 $20,200.00 Americans (HOLA) Anthony (Tony) Velazquez dated 08/11/2023 Festival. Councilman Lewis authorized the designation of $200.00 of his community enhancement Email from Brian Lewis dated and Letter from Dr. Linda Hackett 8/18/2023 Lewis DEMCO $150.00 $4,950.00 $20,050.00 funds to DEMCO for their Boog Bag giveaway. dated 08/17/2023 Councilwoman Pillsbury authorized the designation of $250.00 of her community Hispanic Organization of Latin Email from Julia Pillsbury dated 08/21/2023 and email from 8/21/2023 Pillsbury enhancement funds to the Hispanic Organization of Latin Americans (HOLA) for their $250.00 $5,200.00 $19,800.00 Americans (HOLA) Anthony (Tony) Velazquez dated 08/11/2023 Baila Con Dover Festival. Interdenomonational Ministerial Councilman Boggerty authorized the designation of $300.00 of his community Email from Andre Boggerty dated 08/25/2023 and email from 8/28/2023 Boggerty Alliance of Dover and Visinity $300.00 $5,500.00 $19,500.00 enhancement funds to the Annual Community Unity Family Day Dishop W. James Thomas, II dated 08/22/2023 (IMA) TOTALS $5,500.00 $ 19,500.00 Budgeted District Council Sponsor YTD Expenditures Balance Amount $5,000.00 At-Large Boggerty $1,750.00 $3,250.00 $2,500.00 1st District Pillsbury $500.00 $2,000.00 $2,500.00 1st District Rocha $400.00 $2,100.00 $2,500.00 2nd District Hare $200.00 $2,300.00 $2,500.00 2nd District Lewis $750.00 $1,750.00 $2,500.00 3rd District Arndt $200.00 $2,300.00 $2,500.00 3rd District Neil $200.00 $2,300.00 $2,500.00 4th District Anderson $1,500.00 $1,000.00 $2,500.00 4th District Sudler $0.00 $2,500.00 TOTAL $5,500.00 $19,500.00 Page 156

Item #12. CITY MANAGER’S MONTHLY REPORT August 2023 Page 157 Page 1

Item #12. Blank Page Page 158 Page 2

Item #12. Page 159 Page 3

Item #12. Recap of monthly activities - • Utility rates and tariffs were approved at the council meeting held on June 26, 2023. • Water, Wastewater, and Trash Rates take effect beginning with the July 1, 2023. Electric Rates will take effect beginning with the August 1, 2023. • Real Estate Tax and PILOT bills issued became due on August 31st. • Dover Air Force Base utility rate contract was ratified. • New telephone system implemented for the customer service area. Utility Disconnections for August 2023 Receivable Comparison FY 2023 to FY2024 to date (August 2023) 715 accounts were disconnected for Compared to the same time last year the City had open receivables of non-payment of service. $12,359,018 vs $11,206.886 across all categories. Total receivable collected through the This represents a 9% decrease in debts owed to the City. disconnection process $279,326.13 August 2023 Ending Utility Receivable Due - $7,209,743 Customer Service Department Mission Continually provide quality public service to our diverse group of customers with Page 160 professionalism, respect, & integrity. ~ City of Dover Customer Service Department Page 4

ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT Item #12. Electric Divisions System Peak Total System Load Number of New Month outages customers Oct 21 58,157 Services Oct 21 117.77 Nov 21 55,279 May 21 9 733 May 21 6 Nov 21 95.71 Jun 21 10 736 Jun 21 40 Dec 21 96.13 Dec 21 58,299 Jul 21 13 3,730 Jul 21 9 Jan 22 107.95 Jan 22 65,916 Aug 21 11 728 Aug 21 11 Feb 22 55,827 Sep 21 7 1,037 Sep 21 20 Feb 22 103.87 Oct 21 9 4,693 Oct 21 16 Mar 22 99.08 Mar 22 56,876 Nov 21 6 347 Nov 21 23 Apr 22 92.65 Apr 22 50,847 Dec 21 13 1,540 Dec 21 22 May 22 143.11 May 22 59,233 Jan 22 11 1,599 Jan 22 17 June 22 Feb 22 6 1,005 Feb 22 8 June 22 Mar 22 5 512 Mar 22 18 July 22 July 22 Apr 22 1 350 Apr 22 20 Aug 22 Aug 22 May 22 13 4,199 May 22 21 Sep 22 Sep 22 June 22 19 6,639 June 22 11 Oct 22 July 22 7 357 July 22 16 Oct 22 Aug 22 8 395 Aug 22 47 Nov 22 Nov 22 Sep 22 6 2,920 Sep 22 27 Dec 22 Nov 22 Oct 22 3 732 Oct 22 21 Jan 23 Nov 22 4 1328 Nov 22 17 Jan 23 Dec 22 3 6,703 Dec 22 12 Feb 23 Feb 23 Jan 23 3 129 Jan 23 47 Mar 23 Mar 23 Feb 23 2 42 Feb 23 20 Apr 23 Apr 23 Mar 23 7 1,739 Mar 23 29 May 23 Apr 23 12 5,256 Apr 23 31 May 23 May 23 7 1,488 May 23 9 June 23 June 23 June 23 13 6,014 June 23 29 July 23 July 23 July 23 12 3,485 July 23 15 Aug 23 Aug 23 Aug 23 6 316 Aug 23 14 NAES staff is working with a contractor to resolve the metering issues. Electric Monthly Outage Report The annual outage goal will be less than 295 minutes per customer, which is a Delaware Standard. This will be measured by calculating the System Average Interruption Duration Index. SAIDI Long Time looks at the previous 24months of outages FY 24 YTD FY 23 FY 22 40.38 66.37 100.31 Outages Average Response Time Goal is less than 30 minutes Month Year-to-date Month Year-to-date 6 18 32.17 30.13 PROGRAM UPDATES AUG 23 AUG 22 FY24 YTD Tree Trimming 264 256 416 Number of Oil Releases 0 0 0 Lost Time Accidents – All Electric Utility Divisions 0 0 0 New Services 14 47 29161 Page Page 5

Item #12. Fleet & Facilities Management Monthly Report AUGUST 2023 Fleet Maintenance PM Work Orders Completed: 64 Number of Tire Repairs: 29 Number of Road Repairs: 6 Other Work Orders: 48 Repair Hours: 426 Road Repair Hours: N/A Total Work Orders: 112 Fabrication Hours: N/A Misc. Hours: -20.5 PM Hours: N/A # of Scheduled PM’s: 35 # of PM’s Completed: 64 Major Program Updates AUGUST AUGUST MEASURE 2023 2022 DIFFERENCE Fleet Maintenance - Completed PM 64 out of 35 36 out of 35 appointments vs scheduled PM’s 80.00% 182.86 % 102.86 % (Quantity and Percentage) Facilities Maintenance Facilities - Routine work orders 45 out of 50 65 out of 70 completed within 5 days -2.86 % 90.00 % 92.86 % (Quantity and Percentage) Facilities - Emergency work orders 3 out of 3 2 out of 2 completed within 2 days 0.00 % 100.00 % 100.00 % (Quantity and Percentage) Facilities: Total Work Orders Written in August: 53 Total Work Orders Completed in August: 52 (includes previous months’ W/O’s that were incomplete) Page 162 Page 6

Item #12. MEMORANDUM Department of Central Services P.O. Box 475 Dover, Delaware 19903 Phone: (302) 674-7567 Fax: (302) 736-7178 E-mail: mhamlett@dover.de.us TO: Dave Hugg, City Manager Sharon Duca, Assistant City Manager FROM: Michael C. Hamlett, Central Services Director DATE: 9/3/2023 SUBJECT: Fiscal Year Project Update ______________________________________________________________________________ Outlined below are the stages of each project in process for Fiscal Year 2023/24 FC2001 City Hall HVAC Renovation: COMPLETED EA2204 Weyandt Hall HVAC Renovation: Contractor has been selected and approved by Council, awaiting contract terms to be settled. EA2202 Electric Admin Window Replacement: COMPLETED EA2203 Weyandt Hall Window Replacement and LED Lighting Upgrade: COMPLETED LB2201 Library HVAC Controls Upgrade: COMPLETED CS2301 Warehouse LED Lighting Upgrade: COMPLETED CS2302 Warehouse Replacement of Tile Flooring and Exterior Painting: COMPLETED FC2303 City Hall Window Replacement: Contractor selected and windows ordered FC2304 Old Post Office Hazardous Material Abatement: COMPLETED Weyandt Hall Security Upgrades: COMPLETED Michael Hamlett, Central Services Director Phone: 302‐674‐7567 Email: mhamlett@dover.de.us Page 163 Page 7

Item #12. HUMAN RESOURCES August 2023 City of Dover Human Resources Mission Statement: The City of Dover’s Human Resources Department strives to provide quality service to assist our greatest asset, our employees. Equity, Integrity, and Urgency is our focus to ensure employee satisfaction as well as company wellness. We implement policies and procedures that align with organizational goals, including a safe and compliant workplace, effective training and professional development, and addressing both the needs of employees and the organization. City of Dover Human Resources Value Statement: Innovation: We strive to include best HR practices to enhance a robust technological movement to enhance the quality and efficiency of the department. Collaboration: We honor knowledge sharing, diversity of thoughts and ideas, and experiences to encourage an inclusive workforce. Integrity and Transparency: We honor our commitments and promote a healthy environment that promotes fairness, honesty, respect, and trust. Results Driven: Customer service is front and center, and we advocate for employees and retirees’ needs at all times. Summary: August Hiring Trends FY24: The month of August shows a smaller than average hiring rate, with only 3 new hires. This number is lower than the month of July, however, it is noted that there is a slight improvement in retention during the month of August. August Voluntary Termination/Involuntary Termination Trends FY24: We continue to trend steady regarding terminations in the month of August with 0 voluntary and involuntary terminations. This is lower than the month of July which had 1 voluntary termination due to retirement, and 1 involuntary termination. There were no promotions in the month of August. July Diversity Trends FY24: The HR team along with City of Dover Hiring Managers continue to work diligently to ensure fair hiring standards. HR will continue to work with Department Leaders to consistently review hiring practices and continue our quest to effective diverse hiring strategies with a focus to increase as well as promote a more diverse workforce. We continue to research more diverse recruitment strategies as well as jobsites. Page 164 Page 8

Item #12. HUMAN RESOURCES Current City of Dover Ethnicity Breakdown Current City of Dover Gender Breakdown Page 165 Page 9

Item #12. HUMAN RESOURCES Current EEOC Demographics EEOC Demographics 450 400 82 88 106 350 77 80 300 250 200 150 294 308 312 315 306 100 50 0 Mar '19 Mar '20 Mar '21 Mar '22 August '23 Caucasian Minority Five year Full-Time vs Part-Time Employees 500 450 45 400 31 24 27 350 28 300 250 200 396 346 359 367 373 150 100 50 0 Mar '19 Mar '20 Mar '21 Mar '22 August '23 Full-Time Part-Time Page 166 Page 10

Item #12. HUMAN RESOURCES Numbers do not reflect temporary, seasonal, relief fire dispatchers, committee, or council members. Position Hired: 1 FT Building Supervisor, 1 PT Library Clerk, 1 PT Fire Dispatcher Transferred/Promoted: 0 Position Terminated/Resigned/Retired/Other: 0 Terminal Leave: N/A Open or Currently Recruiting* Open or Currently Recruiting by Dept. August 2023 Police Resources Manager 1 FT Communications Operator 1 FT Lan Analyst 1 FT Passport Clerk 1 PT Accountant I 1 FT MEO I – Water Wastewater 1 FT Human Resources Generalist 1 FT Financial Reporting& Account Manager 1 FT Assistant to the Director Council Affairs/FOIA Coordinator 1 FT Civil Engineer I – Water Wastewater 1 FT MEO I - Stormwater 1 FT Police Cadet 1 PT Relief Fire Dispatcher 1 PT Total Open Positions: 10 FT, 3 PT *Not used for Budgeting Purposes Turnover Statistics 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Turnover % 11.00 10.91 6.02 12.05 8.68 15.36 10.33 9.66 13.96 9.69 15.93 4.0 Termination Turnover % 0.29 1.47 0.57 0.28 0.54 1.92 1.36 0.54 1.42 .25 1.62 0.89 Resignation Turnover % 5.21 5.01 2.29 7.56 6.24 7.41 5.98 6.17 7.98 7.14 9.01 2.56 Retirement Turnover % 5.50 4.42 3.15 4.20 1.90 4.39 2.45 2.68 4.27 2.29 1.15 0.44 Other - - - - - 1.65 0.54 0.27 0.28 .25 .23 0.0 2012 Healthcare cost sharing implemented 2013 Healthcare cost sharing implemented for DOE 2016 RIF in Economic Development; 2018 RIF in Electric Page 167 Page 11

Item #12. HUMAN RESOURCES Average Employees 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Number of Employees Separating 38 37 21 42 32 56 38 36 49 38 48 18 from Service Average Number of 333 325 331 333 340 337 340 346 **355 370 405 436 Full-time Employees Average Number of 25 23 12 14 18 24 28 28 28 26 28 34 Part-time Employees * Healthcare cost sharing implemented **Updated Worker’s Compensation July August Category 2023 2023 Monthly Workers Comp. Injuries 2 6 Workers Compensation Cost August 2023 4,540 310 $309 Department $496 $1,908 $25,748 $309 Total Cost (In thousands) = $35955.13 Page 168 Page 12

Item #12. Information Technology Department August 2023 Report Larry Josefowski, Director Network Security (Internal) The IT team completed an evaluation offered by MS-ISAC that gave a snapshot of several cyber defense areas, including the city’s digital footprint, the financial aspect, and several other areas. Results will continue to drive security measures and enhancements. We also started our quarterly phishing training for all users, with results looking very good through the first 2 weeks. Additionally, we are going to conduct short tabletop exercises on various cybersecurity elements and involve other directorates, with planning beginning for the first one for the third quarter on smart devices. Network Security (External): We continue to receive reports on any potential vulnerabilities through various tools that test our configuration and defenses, and we continue to improve our posture or review where areas are dependent on our vendors to make changes. Phone System: The phone system is nearing completion; we had to postpone one building due to the need for a replacement of the phone recording system. This part of the system should be installed in the late August-early September timeframe. Tyler/Munis: Upgrades and patching have resumed after the end of fiscal year freeze, with implementation of the next phase to start in late August/early September. Training: Looking for one or staff members to attend “Essentials of Community Cybersecurity” next month to evaluate it for possible broader participation. Other: The State of Delaware’s Local Cybersecurity Grant Focus Group, of which the City of Dover is a member, continues to work towards providing additional services and funding for cybersecurity purposes. Funds will likely be available, although the city would be responsible for an increasing cost share over the next couple of years. This may provide some additional equipment, hardening, or applications to increase our cybersecurity. Metrics: This month’s highlighted metrics: PII emails blocked (less is better): Personally identifiable information (PII) is often needed to be sent outside the network, but that was blocked by our software. We have workarounds that avoid sending this information in the clear, but there are better solutions that involve sending the data encrypted but allow the information to be recovered if needed for FOIA purposes that would be preferred. System Security Scores (more is better): These are measures of compliance with what are the latest recommendations from Microsoft. They generally involve additional measures that are “add ons” to their basic Office 365/Active Directory product. These are not what I would consider primary threats but would add additional levels of protection to the city’s environment. We should have enough budget dollars to increase our protection when we renew and upgrade our licensing later this year. Risk Score: (Less is better): Primarily a reflection of our training and phishing campaigns. This measurement takes into account how well key individuals do, so their performance has a greater impact on the organization’s score. Time to Close incidents: With a full staff and slightly fewer incidents, we have significantly decreased the time to close issues reported to IT. Page 169 Page 13

Item #12. Risk Score (From KnowBe4) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 February March April May June July Page 170 Page 14

Reference Transactions August 2023 Item #12. Adults 1,193 Teens 39 Children 397 0 250 500 750 1000 1250 1500 1750 2000 * Electronic Materials include Overdrive & Hoopla starting July 2022 Circulation August '23 FYTD '24 August '22 FYTD '23 Dover Residents 10,532 20,801 11,825 23,612 * Electronic Materials 5,207 10,476 4,826 9,261 Kent Residents Total - 9,925 19,235 8,183 16,197 ~Harrington 32 43 ~Milford 82 94 ~Smyrna 660 646 ~Unincorporated Kent Co. 9,151 7,400 Non-County Residents 1,486 2,541 1,505 2,753 New Registrations Dover Residents 293 503 275 576 Kent Residents Total - 178 375 117 270 ~Harrington 0 0 ~Milford 0 0 ~Smyrna 2 4 ~Unincorporated Kent Co. 176 113 Non-County Residents 10 13 3 13 Registered Library Users as of 08/31/23 Registered Library Users as of 08/31/22 City of Dover Residents 17,648 City of Dover Residents 18,070 Kent County Residents 7,525 Kent Co. Residents 6,522 Sussex County Residents 270 Sussex Co. Residents 255 New Castle Co. Residents 329 New Castle Co. Residents 356 Out of State 23 Other 22 TOTAL 25,795 25,225 Other Visitors 16,257 31,273 14,162 27,406 Meeting Room Attendance 3,003 5,487 1,204 1,910 Number of Photocopy Jobs 636 1,034 376 846 Number of Computer Print Jobs 3,260 5,896 3,070 5,443 Number of Computer Users 1,866 3,449 1,799 3,396 Number of Wireless Computer Users 1,617 3,127 1,472 2,861 Inter/Intralibrary - Loaned 57 48 Inter/Intralibrary - Borrowed 104 59 Holds Sent 3,230 3,185 Holds Received 1,980 2,132 TOTAL 5,371 10,507 5,424 10,881 Tech Services/Items Added 1,423 968 Tech Services/Items Deleted 367 1,363 Passport Services/Customers 259 435 210 420 Passport Services/Revenue $10,257 $17,099 $8,187 $17,013 Monthly Highlights ►342 attended / viewed 44 programs for adults. ►139 attended / viewed 18 program for teens. ►1,296 attended / viewed 34 programs for children. ► 0 volunteers. * Estimated Figure Page 171 Page 15

Item #12. Parks & Recreation Monthly Report - August Parks & RecreaƟon Highlights  Five Park Projects Update Dover Park Building and Spray Pad construc on is underway. MUNIS/Tyler processing issues have delayed some project payments. SchuƩe Park Dog Park has signage! Look for the ribbon cu ng date coming soon! Skate Park in progress as noted in the FY25 CIP list. As the former Dover Post Office site is no longer an op on, staff remains commi ed to comple ng this project. Skate park supporters have expressed their dissa sfac on with the city for not providing this facility for their ska ng pleasure. All Accessible Playground for Dover Park ameni es have been ordered! Staff has completed the grant applica on for the Congressional Grant award. The $500,000 will cover most of the new ADA playground equipment.  Inaugural Ride Out Event to raise awareness for motorcycle safety. The event hosted 10 merchandise vendors, three food vendors along with a representa ve from DelDot safety division. There were approximately 200 people that a ended throughout the day and about 50 motorcycles. We gave away 50 bookbags along with various school supplies as part of the event. We are looking forward to future years with the plan to host the event annually on the 4th Saturday of August. Recreation Revenue Breakdown Outdoor Sports & Leagues ParƟcipant & Spectator Count AcƟvity ParƟcipants Spectators LocaƟon Youth Soccer Camps 68 17 Schu e Park Senior Mens So ball 291 47 Schu e Park Youth Basketball (inside) 288 504 JWP Gym August 2023 August 2022 General Recrea on $1,180.00 General Recrea on $913.50 Sports $1,100.00 Camps $5,415.00 Camps $3,410.00 Leagues $7,140.00 Ride Out ‐ Motorcycle Safety Awareness Leagues $7,720.00 Sports & Trips 0 Bldg./Field/Pavilions $970.00 Park Permits/Rentals $950.00 Trips $240.00 Parks & RecreaƟon FYTD FYTD Aug 23 Aug 22 Programs 24 23 General Recrea on 297 274 171 320 Open Gym 55 102 75 160 Camps 664 1,639 575 1,904 Sports 0 88 0 85 Leagues (Inside) 1,999 5,736 2,526 5,894 Bldg., Facility & Park 7 17 n/a Page 172 Page 16

Item #12. Grounds Monthly Report Aug-23 Arborist Crew: Arborist Crew - Cleared walking path at Woodbrook Tree Work Completed - Cleaned fence line in Woodmill Tree's Trimmed 139 Tree's Removed 46 Beautification Crew: Root Pruning 0 - Watering and weeding is on schedule. Stumps Removed 0 - Sprayed curbs & gutters. Trees Planted 3 Mowing Crew: - Mowing routes are on schedule. - General clean up of mowing locations. Litter Removal: - Litter is being picked up on city property as per the weekly schedule. - Litter person has been diligent in the reporting of destruction in City parks. - 568 Total 90 gallon cans collected. - Removed 3 Shopping Carts. Parks Crew: - Completed parks route daily. - Prepped softball fields. - Set up stage for multiple events on The Green, Legislative Mall, and Williams Park. Miscellaneous: - 6 employees attended pesticide training. - Assisted volunteers from Macy's with painting picnic tables, spreading playground mulch and planting trees at Schutte Park. - Cleaned sidewalks on Loockerman St with assistance from Street Division. Page 173 Page 17

Item #12. Trees Trimmed 200 150 100 50 0 Jan Feb Mar April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec 2021 2022 2023 Trees Removed 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Jan Feb Mar April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec 2021 2022 2023 90 Gallon Litter Cans Collected 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Jan Feb Mar April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec 2021 2022 2023 Page 174 Page 18

Item #12. August 2023 Procurement & Inventory Report Measure FY 2024 FY 2023 DIFFERENCE Issue Effectiveness – How often the FY 2023 (To date) FY 2023 (Total) warehouse has what the departments [209/ (209+31)] *100 [1479/ (1479+325)] *100 5.1% need when it’s needed. 87.08% 81.98% [issues / (issues + back orders)] * 100 Turn Over Rate – Indicates that the material stocked is the material being -0.05 Turnovers per 0.82 Turnovers per year 0.87 Turnovers per year used. (2023-2024 Goal 1 per year) year WITHOUT TRANSFORMERS FUEL USE FY 2024 TO DATE FY 2023 TO DATE STOCK WITH OVER 60 MONTH SUPPLY (5 YEARS) Unleaded: 25,014 gallons 25,127 gallons Electric: $ 529,185.62 205 Line Items Diesel: 13,166 gallons 13,744 gallons Water: $ 15,037.21 37 Line Items Dollars Spent: $105,935.22 $149,736.89 General: $ 21,859.16 82 Line Items Total: $ 566,081.99 324 Line Items Purchase Orders for Stock by Fund Issues from Stock by Fund FY 2024 TO DATE FY 2023 TO DATE FY 2024 TO DATE FY 2023 TO DATE Electric: $128,748.84 $127,953.36 Electric: $252,989.35 $175,877.72 Water: $6561.26 $0.00 Water: $13,556.20 $2,062.71 Wastewater: $769.13 $0.00 Wastewater: $0.00 $0.00 General: $14,839.51 $20,727.49 General: $27,736.91 $27,567.61 Total: $150,918.74 $148,680.85 *Total: $294,282.46 $205,508.04 Warehouse Stock Money Spent for Postage/Postal Services FY2024 FY2023 FY 2024 TO DATE FY2023 TO DATE Total Dollar Value: $3,186,875.45 $3,237,992.38 $31,270.76 $32,894.92 Total Line Items: 987 988 * Total of Issues from Stock by Fund includes Issues from Electric Returns (ER) warehouse. Current Bid/RFP Status BID REQUESTING COMMODITY TERM Status as of September 1, 2023 NUMBER DEPARTMENT One Weyandt Hall HVAC Upgrade 23-0016FM Facilities Forwarded to Facilities on 7/12/2023 Time Pension and Other Post Employment One 23-0017FN Finance Forwarded to Finance on 6/13/2023 Benefits Actuarial Services Time One Wellhead Redevelopment Program 23-0018WW Water/Wastewater Forwarded to Water/Wastewater on 7/18/2023 Time Decontamination & Demolition of the One Electric 23-0019EL RFP opening is scheduled for August 4, 2023 @ 8:00 PM McKee Run Generating Station Time Department One FY2023C Street and Alley Program 23-0020PW Public Works Forwarded to Public Works on 7/26/2023 Time Turnberry Pump Station Replacement One 24-0002WW Water/Wastewater Bid opening scheduled for September 13, 2023 at 2:00 P.M. Project Time Water Street Flooding Improvements One RFP opening scheduled for September 14, 2023 at 2:00 24-0003WW Water/Wastewater Design Time P.M. US East Pump Station (Station #7) One 24-0004WW Water/Wastewater Bid opening scheduled for September 26, 2023 at 2:00 P.M. Repairs Time Electrical Substation Multiplexer One Electric RFP opening scheduled for September 20, 2023 at 2:00 24-0005EL Upgrade Time Department P.M. Page 175 Page 19

Item #12. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS July 2023 MONTHLY REPORT GIS GIS PROJECT HOURS Create Data Requests Printing Technical Support Updates Configure Training 17% 22% 8% 8% 2% 19% 24% GIS PROJECT HOURS Other City-Wide DWW DPW Tax Mayor IT Cust. Service Dover PD City Manager City Clerk Planning & Insp. Library Parks & Rec Electric 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 GIS Project Hours Page 176 Page 20

Item #12. SANITATION MONTHLY REFUSE (TONS) Bulk Rear Automated 932.49 947.38 919.01 885.75 875.96 843.85 853.95 846.3 830.2 828.39 816.65 798.79 804.09 116.32 113.92 134.19 113.94 117.42 127.77 95.93 91.5 85.64 120.63 60.86 162.61 135.88 146.31 127.28 71 175.41 141.87 142.5 162.42 133.5 60 108.22 104.93 98.65 80.2 AUG 22 SEPT 22 OCT 22 NOV 22 DEC 22 JAN 23 FEB 23 MAR 23 APRIL 23 MAY 23 JUNE 23 JULY 23 AUG 23 SANITATION HOURS 700 609 581 600 500 459 418 399.5 380.5 373 400 337 300 200 100 0 Bulk Automated Hand Trash Yard Waste Aug 2022 Aug 2023 SANITATION Aug 23 FYTD 24 Aug 22 FYTD 23 Trips to DSWA Sandtown Landfill 272 492 225 433 Total Tonnage to DSWA 1,237.57 2,355.37 1,171.21 2,286.61 90-gallon Containers Delivered 65 145 72 138 300-gallon Containers Delivered 1 1 0 0 Total Man Hours Containers Delivered 29 59 26 52 CURBSIDE RECYCLING TOTAL CANS COLLECTED TOTAL ACCOUNTS WEIGHT (LBS) AVE. WEIGHT (LBS) Aug 2023 24,019 10,153 274,180 12.1 Page 177 Page 21

Item #12. STREETS / STORMWATER MONTHLY STREET SWEEPING & LEAF COLLECTION Sweeper Waste (cu.yd.) Street Sweeping (miles) Leaf Collection (miles) Leaf Debris (cu.yd.) 6322 585 3279 1914 674 1765 970 0 1085 1234 0 132 133.5 0 0 817 1220 5 122 102 12.5 1630 122 3177 1528 0 12 0 2 0 31 0 1351 1430 AUG SEPT 144 470239 0 0 0 1312 Leaf Debris (cu.yd.) 22 OCT 555 0 0 0 Leaf Collection (miles) 22 NOV DEC 86 1201 94.5 22 22 JAN 4715.5 Street Sweeping (miles) 22 FEB 98 23 MAR APR 100 23 MAY Sweeper Waste (cu.yd.) 23 23 JUNE 23 JULY 23 AUG 23 23 STREETS / STORMWATER August 23 FYTD 24 August 22 FYTD 23 Signs Installed 22 47 8 9 Signs Repaired 18 25 13 36 Curbs Painted Yellow (ft) 860 1,125 40 445 New Posts Installed 3 28 4 11 Storm Catch Basins Repaired 2 2 4 6 Storm Catch Basin Repairs (hrs) 4 4 4 15.5 Storm Catch Basins Cleaned (l.f.) 1 2 0 0 Storm Catch Basin Cleaning (hrs) 4.25 4.25 0 2.75 Hot Mix Patching (tons) 7.5 7.5 7.3 23 Hot Mix Patching (hrs) 8 8 16 50.5 Cold Mix Patching (hrs) 14.25 35.25 11 29.5 Concrete Work (hrs) 31 56 106 134.5 Concrete Patching (cu.yd.) 1.46 6.27 26.46 28.77 Ditch Work (hrs) 0 20 4 4 Street and Alley Maintenance (hrs) 13.5 13.5 8 8 Street Sweeping (miles) 1,312 2,742 383 690.5 Street Sweeping (cu.yd.) 100 198 122 214 Leaf Collection (miles) 0 0 0 0 Leaves Collected (cu.yd.) 0 0 0 0 Page 178 Page 22

Item #12. CITY OF DOVER DEPARTMENT OF WATER & WASTEWATER MONTHLY REPORT Aug-23 Inflow & Infiltration Costs This chart indicates the amount of money the City is $200,000.00 spending on treating ground and / or rain water through Kent County. This cost is being offset by the Ground Water Inflow Adjustment rate passed on to the $150,000.00 customers. The September flow is showing as a negative cost due to the timing of the Kent County reporting vs the timing of the City billing. $100,000.00 $50,000.00 $- 1-Aug 1-Sep 1-Oct 1-Nov 1-Dec 1-Jan 1-Feb 1-Mar 1-Apr 1-May 1-Jun 1-Jul 1-Aug $(50,000.00) I & I Cost Water & Wastewater Repairs 6 Water mains and services are typically repaired at a higher rate when drastic change in temperature occurs. This freeze and thaw cycle expands and contracts the soil, causing cracks in the water 5 line. This was evident in the month of January 2022, 6 water main breaks. January of 2023 was milder by coparison, leading to less 4 breaks. July 2023 had 5 water service repairs, a majority was from a damage from outside excavators. 3 2 1 0 1-Aug 1-Sep 1-Oct 1-Nov 1-Dec 1-Jan 1-Feb 1-Mar 1-Apr 1-May 1-Jun 1-Jul 1-Aug Water Mains Repaired Water Services Repaired Wastewater Mains Repaired Wastewater Laterals Repaired Page 179 Page 23

Item #12. CITY OF DOVER DEPARTMENT OF WATER & WASTEWATER MONTHLY REPORT Aug-23 Number of Brown Water Complaints 20 18 This chart indicates the number of complaints the Department receives. 16 October and April on this chart are high due to the flushing operation. 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Aug-22 Sep-22 Oct-22 Nov-22 Dec-22 Jan-23 Feb-23 Mar-23 Apr-23 May-23 Jun-23 Jul-23 Aug-23 Number of Brown Water Complaints Linear (Number of Brown Water Complaints) Department Spotlight - August The Department of Water & Wastewater will be performing the bi- annual flushing program, starting October 1, 2023 through October 20, 2023. Our team has created a video that explains the reason for discolored water and what to do if you encounter it. Scan the QR code. Page 180 Page 24

Item #13. City Planner’s Monthly Report Department of Planning & Inspections AUGUST 2023 Planning & Inspections Highlights Some Items to Call to Your Attention For August 2023, Planning Staff was involved with the review of 102 Building Permits and 20 Certificates of Occupancy permits that were issued for a monthly total of 122 and a year-to-date total of 735. The number of permits in August increased back to levels seen in the Spring of 2023. The overall year-to-date tally is trend- ing higher than the last few years when compared to a year-to-date 2022 total of 716 Permits and COs and year-to-date 2021 total of 573 Permits and COs. In August 2023, Residential Building Permits were issued for two (2) Duplex units and four (4) single family detached dwellings in Eden Hill Farm TND, one single family dwelling in Oak Shadows, four (4) single family detached dwelling in Patriot Village, Phase III area, and a manufactured home placement in Kings Cliffe. Temporary Certificate of Occupancy were issued to three (3) single family detached dwellings on Ruth Way (Phase 1 – Chatham Bay) and one townhouse Unit on Little Eden Way (D.R. Horton) within the Eden Hill Farm TND. Certificates of Occupancy were issued to two (2) single family detached dwellings at Patriot Village (Phase III area); five (5) Townhouse units in Patriot Village, four (4) Townhouse Units on Little Eden Way (D.R. Horton) in Eden Hill Farm TND, a manufactured home placement in Dover East Estates, and a single family detached dwelling on Monroe Terrace. Demolition Permits were issued for the Scull Mansion Building at 625 S. State Street and the Gates Building at 605 S. State Street in preparation for the Bayhealth Staff Parking Lot Expansion. Building Permits issued in August included permits for a portico covered entry at Grace Church; tenant fit-out for Pizza Hut at 515 S. DuPont Highway; tenant fit-out for State Farm Insurance in Capital Station; renovations for Delaware Restaurant Association Offices; renovations for a commercial & teaching kitchen space at 217- 222 W Loockerman Street; other renovations activities; and new warehouse building at 300 Ridgely Street for East Carolina Supply Warehouse. A Temporary Certificate of Occupancy was issued to the New Dover Middle Schools project at 1 Pat Lynn Drive. The Fire Marshall , Building Inspections, and Planning Office Staff put in a lot of time with the new Mid- dle Schools to ensure that the building was code compliant prior to issuing a Temporary Certificate of Occu- pancy . Go team Dover! Certificates of Occupancy were issued for renovations for Marvis Discount Tire at 280 Cowgill Street and a tenant fit-out at 516 Jefferic Boulevard. Business license renewals were sent out on July 1, 2023. The FY 2024 anticipated revenue for business licenses is $1,450,000. By the end of August, Staff has collected 72% of the business license fees which, totals $1,039,061. The Fire Marshal’s Office staff investigated four(4) incidents during the month of August to include a fire loss at Bacon Ave. Staff also assisted with The Grande where occupants of a building needed to be relocated due to power loss and loss of the fire sys- tems. Fire at Bacon Ave. Page 181

Item #13. PROGRESS IN PICTURES 611/613 Ruth Way Eden Hill 538 Ruth Way Chattam Bay Homes Eden Hill, Chattam Bay Homes 611/613 Ruth Way Eden Hill 615 Ruth Way Chattam Bay Homes Eden Hill Chattam Bay Homes Page 182

Item #13. Planning & Inspections Revenue FY2024 Revenue Estimates from FY2024 Actual Revenue Stream Budget (YTD) August % of Budget Business License $1,450,000 $ 1,039,061 72% Manufactured Home License $16,000 $ 7,920 50% Building Permits $450,000 $ 75,209 17% Cert. of Occupancy $8,000 $ 2,630 33% Public Occupancy $45,000 $ 4,075 9% Lodging House $28,000 $ - 0% Plumbing/Heating/Air $105,000 $ 10,746 10% Rental Inspection Fee $750,000 $ 10,231 1% Miscellaneous $20,000 $ 1,875 9% Fire Protection Fees $70,000 $ 19,907 28% Code Enforcement Fines $100,000 $ 16,750 17% Vacant Building Reg. $70,000 $ 2,250 3% Total P&I Revenue $3,112,000 $ 1,190,654 38% Department Operations— Planning Office The Meetings of the Boards and Commission supported by the Planning Office are presented in the Hybrid format with both In-Person and Virtual (using WebEx) meeting options for participation. Electronic commu- nications and conducting Meetings and Trainings in virtual formats are commonplace due to realized effi- ciencies. PLANNING OFFICE—Operations The Planning Office is part of the review process for certain types of construction activity permits (Building Permits, Sign Permits, etc.) and Certificate of Occupancy permits in order to confirm compliance with the Zoning Ordinance provisions. For August 2023, Planning Staff was involved with the review of 102 Building Permits and 20 Certificates of Occupancy permits that were issued for a monthly total of 122 and a year-to- date total of 735. The number of permits in August increased back to levels seen in the Spring of 2023. The overall year-to-date tally is trending higher than the last few years when compared to a year-to-date 2022 total of 716 Permits and COs and year-to-date 2021 total of 573Permits and COs. Staff also reviews new ap- plications for Business Licenses and Rental Dwelling Permits. AUGUST 2023 (FY23) TOTAL FOR FY23 New Home Permits Issued 11 16 Value of Commercial Projects $3,537,516.00 $5,308,917.00 Downtown Incentives (Fees Waived) $261.00 $3,304.00 Page 183

Item #13. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IMPLEMENTATION 2019 Comprehensive Plan Implementation of the 2019 Comprehensive Plan continues as Departments citywide focus on the plan implementa- tion items as found in Implementation Plan (Chapter 15) items such as the projects, studies, code amendments, and other activities. A copy of the Final Plan (as amended) is available on the Comprehensive Plan website: https:// www.cityofdover.com/2019-comprehensive-plan Visit the Dover Parcel and Zoning Viewer on the City’s website to see zoning information for properties located in Dover. Use the Quick Link on the main page www.cityofdover.com. Other Activities • Downtown Dover Strategic Master Plan: The Downtown Dover Partnership’s Strategic Master Plan is known as “Transforming Downtown Dover: Capital City 2030” (January 2023). Various partners are focusing on Plan im- plementation. The Planning Office Staff Working Group continues to meet to review the plan recommendations related to land use and zoning activities and plan implementation for potential ordinance and policy changes fo- cused on the C-2 zoning district. See the project webpage for more information on activities and the Final Plan: https://www.downtowndoverpartnership.com/ddp/Downtown-Dover-Strategic-Master-Plan/ CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES • In August 2023, Residential Building Permits were issued for two (2) Duplex units and four (4) single family de- tached dwellings in Eden Hill Farm TND, one single family dwelling in Oak Shadows, four (4) single family de- tached dwelling in Patriot Village, Phase III area, and a manufactured home placement in Kings Cliffe. • Temporary Certificate of Occupancy were issued to three (3) single family detached dwellings on Ruth Way (Phase 1 – Chatham Bay) and one townhouse Unit on Little Eden Way (D.R. Horton) within the Eden Hill Farm TND. Certificates of Occupancy were issued to two (2) single family detached dwellings at Patriot Village (Phase III area); five (5) Townhouse units in Patriot Village, four (4) Townhouse Units on Little Eden Way (D.R. Horton) in Eden Hill Farm TND, a manufactured home placement in Dover East Estates, and a single family detached dwell- ing on Monroe Terrace. • Demolition Permits were issued for the Scull Mansion Building at 625 S. State Street and the Gates Building at 605 S. State Street in preparation for the Bayhealth Staff Parking Lot Expansion (S-20-10). • Building Permits issued in August included permits for a portico covered entry at Grace Church; tenant fit-out for Pizza Hut at 515 S. DuPont Highway; tenant fit-out for State Farm Insurance in Capital Station; renovations for Delaware Restaurant Association Offices; renovationsfor a commercial &teaching kitchen space at 217-222 W Loockerman Street; other renovations activities; and new warehouse building at 300 Ridgely Street for East Car- olina Supply Warehouse (S-23-01). • A Temporary Certificate of Occupancy was issued to the New Dover Middle Schools project at 1 Pat Lynn Drive (S-20-02/S-20-07). Certificates of Occupancy were issued for renovations for Marvis Discount Tire at 280 Cowgill Street and a tenant fit-out at 516 Jefferic Boulevard. BOARD AND COMMISSION ACTIVITY There were no August Meetings of the Boards and Commissions supported by the Planning Office; the Board of Ad- justment, Planning Commission, Historic District Commission did not meet due to lack of applications filed requiring their review. Board of Adjustment: The Board of Adjustment did not meet on August 16, 2023. The next Board of Adjustment meeting is scheduled for September 20, 2023. Historic District Commission: The Historic District Commission did not meet on August 17, 2023. The next Historic District Commission meeting is scheduled for September 21, 2023. Planning Commission: The Planning Commission did not meet on August 21, 2023. The next Planning Commission Page 184 meeting is scheduled for September 18, 2023.

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM Item #13. CDBG FY21 Projects • Homeownership Assistance Program CDBG funds will be used to provide homeownership assistance to first-time homebuyers who purchase affordable housing in the City of Dover. One family has purchased a home and one family is under contract to purchase a home in September. • Dover Interfaith Mission for Housing (DIMH) CDBG funds will be used to provide operations cost for the shelter. DIMH has purchased a building for its new shelter location that will be renovated with CDBG funds. The project is underway. • Central Delaware Housing Collaborative CDBG funds will be used to provide operations cost for a women’s shelter. This project is underway. • Milford Housing Homeowner Rehabilitation/Emergency Home Repair Pro- grams CDBG funds will be used to rehabilitate existing owner-occupied housing in the City that is in violation of the City’s Housing Code and complete emergency home repairs to elimi- nate housing conditions that threaten the health and safety of low-income homeowners. One owner occupied home is scheduled for rehab in late September. • American Rescue Act (ARPA) Funding City Council approved to award a little over $1.8 million in grant funding for Housing and Community Service projects. All projects are underway. A little over $1.3 million or 72% of funds have been spent on Round 1 of ARPA funding year to date. ARPA Round 2 fund- ing for a little under $500,000 was awarded to subgrantees in April. Projects are current- ly underway. Page 185

Item #13. CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITY Dangerous Buildings, Vacant Buildings & Demolitions  Vacant Buildings currently registered - 1150  Dangerous Buildings – 67  Active Rental Dwellings – 7,859 Page 186

Building Inspections & Licensing Summary Item #13. July 2022— July 2023– Current June 2024 AUGUST 2022 June 2023 PERMITTING AND LICENSING Permits Issued AUG (2023) AUG (2022) FY 24 FYTD 24 FY23 FYTD 23 Administrative Permit 6 9 11 16 Building Addition/Renovation Permits 39 64 24 58 Building Permits 26 38 40 76 Demolition Permits 13 14 0 1 Fence Permits 17 37 26 42 Fire Prevention Permits 7 18 9 17 Mechanical Permits 24 44 36 65 Plumbing Permits 34 48 29 68 Sign Permits 35 45 4 14 Swimming Pool Permits 2 4 1 4 Subtotal 321 361 Business Licenses 724 1453 912 1365 Merchant Licenses 158 252 171 236 Contractor Licenses 306 972 636 874 Subtotal 2677 2475 Lodging House Licenses 0 0 2 3 Public Occupancy 12 53 20 26 Rental Dwelling 31 67 35 52 Subtotal 120 81 Manufactured Homes 56 174 94 200 BUILDING INSPECTIONS Inspections AUG (2023) AUG (2022) FY 24 FYTD 24 FY23 FYTD 23 Building (Inspections/CBI/Site Meetings) 184 333 341 693 Plumbing/Mechanical 145 275 345 817 Certificate of Occupancy 21 38 22 44 Page 187

Item #13. Fire Marshal’s Office—At a Glance August 2023 The Fire Marshal’s Office staff investigated four(4) inci- dents during the month of August to include a fire loss at Bacon Ave. Staff also assisted with The Grande where occupants of a building needed to be relocated due to power loss and loss of the fire systems. Staff put in a lot of time with the new Middle Schools to ensure that the building was code compliant prior to issu- ing a C/O. Month Year to Date Previous Year to Date Annual Fire & Life Safety Inspections 19 74 88 Deficiencies From the Above Inspections 89 245 482 Fire Code Violations/Deficiencies/ 9 33 85 C/O & Fire Equipment Acceptance Tests 7 13 43 Meetings & Walk Through 23 42 57 Fire Plan Review & DAC 13 26 37 Staff is working on annual fire and life safety inspections at apartments and clubhouses. Month Year to Date Previous Year to Date Accidental 2 totaling $27,000 8 totaling $32,000 8 totaling $187,601 Undetermined 2 totaling $2,100 3 totaling $3,100 1 totaling $75,000 Incendiary 0 0 3 totaling $4,000,002 Arrest Made with DPD 0 0 1 Investigation Time 9 21 55 hours Injuries 0 1 0 Deaths 0 0 0 Page 188

Item #14. Page 189

Item #14. Finance Department Monthly Report August 2023 This page intentionally left blank Page 2 Page 190

Item #14. Finance Department Monthly Report August 2023 CITY OF DOVER ACTIVITY REPORTS August 2023 FINANCE DEPARTMENT ACTIVITY LEVELS FY23 YTD FY24 YTD BANK TRENDS Number of Deposits Made (Hand, ACH & Wire , Lock box) 1,158 1,187 Total Amount of All Deposits $ 49,108,159 $ 35,474,819 Other Activity Number of Pay Periods 5 4 Number of Direct Deposits Issued 2,120 1,663 Number of Pension Checks Issued 544 517 Total Pension Benefits Paid - Defined Benefit Plan $ 1,021,268 $ 1,019,496 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE Number of Check Vouchers 1,199 1,040 Number of EFT Vouchers 708 779 Vouchers Dollar Amount Disbursed $ 17,734,289 $ 17,263,777 PAYROLL Hours % Hours % Gross wages per registers 180,537 84.8% 145,972 83.5% Wages and Hours Worked Regular 123,788 68.6% 99,165 67.9% All over time 5,995 3.3% 4,796 3.3% Other Paid or Unpaid Wages and Hours Vacation 13,753 7.6% 10,442 7.2% Sick 4,340 2.4% 2,850 2.0% Terminal Leave - Retiree Vacation/Sick Payout 1,332 0.7% 852 0.6% Comp Time 680 0.4% 436 0.3% Personal 407 0.2% 278 0.2% Leave Without Pay 475 0.3% 250 0.2% Other (description below) 2,333 1.3% 2,798 1.9% Other includes: pay adjustments, military differential pay, training, committee meetings, worker compensation tracking/adjustments, etc. FY23 YTD Wages FY24 YTD Wages $3,478 $5,629 $20,168 $7,840 $72,459 $3,120 $133,951 $76,591 $43,862 $14,442 $291,712 $185,629 $215,832 $170,671 $2,110,788 $1,661,125 Regular Regular All over time All over time Vacation Vacation Sick Sick Terminal Leave - Retiree Vacation/Sick Payout Terminal Leave - Retiree Vacation/Sick Payout Personal Personal Other Comp Time Other Comp Time Page 3 Page 191

Item #14. Finance Department Monthly Report August 2023 City of Dover General Fund Summary Fiscal Year to Date (August 2023) Revenues Original Budget Actual % Property & Transfer Taxes $ 18,056,100 $ 16,417,859 91% Program Revenues 12,354,700 2,718,457 22% Utility Transfers 9,000,000 1,500,000 17% Grants 883,500 - 0% Interfund Services 6,236,400 1,047,395 17% 1 4,066,000 1,195,418 28% All Other $ 50,596,700 $ 22,879,130 45% Expenditures Original Budget Actual % Program Expenses $ 34,903,300 $ 4,513,369 13% Interfund Services 12,177,000 1,925,139 16% Debt Service 630,700 104,944 17% Post Retirement Benefits 2,548,000 424,667 17% Pension Fund Contributions 1,000,000 - 0% Capital Project Transfers 2,920,100 730,025 25% 2 3,052,800 242,029 8% All Other $ 57,231,900 $ 7,940,172 14% 1 Includes Cable Franchise Revenue, Miscellaneous Receipts, Garrison Farm Rent, Sales of Assets, Fund Invest Manager Cost. 2 Includes Bank and CC Fees, Street Lights Expense, DDP Contribution, Trf to Cable Franchise Reserve, Trf to Electric I & E, and Trf to Electric Revenue Fund, Trf to Uncollectible Reserve and Misc. Grant Expense and Trf to Economic Development Reserve Fund. Page 4 Page 192

Item #14. Finance Department Monthly Report August 2023 General Fund Revenues $20,000,000 $18,000,000 $16,000,000 $14,000,000 $12,000,000 $10,000,000 $8,000,000 $6,000,000 $4,000,000 $2,000,000 $- Property & Transfer Taxes Program Revenues Utility Transfers Grants Interfund Services All Other 1 Original Budget Actual General Fund Expenditures $40,000,000 $35,000,000 $30,000,000 $25,000,000 $20,000,000 $15,000,000 $10,000,000 $5,000,000 $- Program Expenses Interfund Services Debt Service Post Retirement Benefits Pension Fund Contributions Capital Project Transfers All Other 2 Original Budget Actual Page 5 Page 193

Item #14. Finance Department Monthly Report August 2023 City of Dover Water Fund Summary Fiscal Year to Date (August 2023) Revenues Original Budget Actual % Customer Sales $ 6,550,000 $ 1,378,521 21% Impact Fees 225,000 44,462 20% Rents 435,500 435,588 100% 1 Miscellaneous 75,200 56,549 75% $ 7,285,700 $ 1,915,120 26% Expenditures Original Budget Actual % Program Expenses $ 4,156,100 $ 465,659 11% Interfund Services 1,138,000 81,435 7% Debt Service 700,000 36,484 5% Post Retirement Benefits 226,900 37,817 17% Capital Project Transfers 1,536,700 384,175 25% Electric I&E Fund Transfer 25,000 - 0% General Fund Transfer 500,000 83,333 17% 2 All Other 32,000 2,338 7% $ 8,314,700 $ 1,091,241 13% 1 Includes Penalties, Income from Sale of Assets, Miscellaneous Income, and Reconnect Fees. 2 Includes Bank & CC Fees. Page 6 Page 194

Item #14. Finance Department Monthly Report August 2023 Water Revenues $7,000,000 $6,000,000 $5,000,000 $4,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,000,000 $- Customer Sales Impact Fees Rents Miscellaneous 1 Original Budget Actual Water Expenditures $4,500,000 $4,000,000 $3,500,000 $3,000,000 $2,500,000 $2,000,000 $1,500,000 $1,000,000 $500,000 $- Program Expenses Interfund Services Debt Service Post Retirement Capital Project Electric I&E Fund General Fund Transfer All Other 2 Benefits Transfers Transfer Original Budget Actual Page 7 Page 195

Item #14. Finance Department Monthly Report August 2023 City of Dover Wastewater Fund Summary Fiscal Year to Date (August 2023) Revenues Original Budget Actual % Customer Sales $ 10,326,000 $ 1,806,110 17% Impact Fees 225,000 42,129 19% Miscellaneous 1 50,200 57,309 114% $ 10,601,200 $ 1,905,548 18% Expenditures Original Budget Actual % Program Expenses $ 1,649,200 $ 230,457 14% Kent County Treatment Fee 4,730,000 324,990 7% Interfund Services 870,900 61,456 7% Debt Service 696,200 38,796 6% Post Retirement Benefits 110,000 18,333 17% Capital Project Transfers 2,270,900 567,725 25% Electric I&E Transfer 25,000 - 0% General Fund Transfer 500,000 83,333 17% All Other 2 15,000 - 0% $ 10,867,200 $ 1,325,090 12% 1 Includes Interest Income, Penalties, Loss on Disposal, and Miscellaneous Income. 2 Includes Bank & CC Fees. Page 8 Page 196

Item #14. Finance Department Monthly Report August 2023 Wastewater Revenues $12,000,000 $10,000,000 $8,000,000 $6,000,000 $4,000,000 $2,000,000 $- Customer Sales Impact Fees Miscellaneous 1 Original Budget Actual Wastewater Expenditures $5,000,000 $4,500,000 $4,000,000 $3,500,000 $3,000,000 $2,500,000 $2,000,000 $1,500,000 $1,000,000 $500,000 $- Program Expenses Kent County Interfund Services Debt Service Post Retirement Capital Project Electric I&E Transfer General Fund All Other 2 Treatment Fee Benefits Transfers Transfer Original Budget Actual Page 197 Page 9

Item #14. Finance Department Monthly Report August 2023 City of Dover Electric Fund Summary Fiscal Year to Date (August 2023) Revenues Original Budget Actual % Customer Sales $ 92,743,400 $ 16,053,080 17% All Other 1 2,299,000 880,388 38% $ 95,042,400 $ 16,933,468 18% Expenditures Original Budget Actual % Power Supply & Generation $ 82,658,600 $ 8,402,466 10% Electric Operating Div. Exp. 9,208,700 1,343,907 15% Interfund Services 4,227,500 288,057 7% Debt Service 1,482,600 233,950 16% Post Retirement Benefits 997,000 166,167 17% General Fund Transfer 8,000,000 1,333,333 17% All Other 2 3,004,900 246,983 8% $ 109,579,300 $ 12,014,864 11% 1 Includes Rental Revenue, Miscellaneous Service Revenue, Interest Earnings, Investment Management Fees, New Service Fees, Sale of Assets, Trf from Uncollectible Reserves, General Service Billing, Revenue from Rate Stabilization, Penalties, and Green Energy Charges. 2 Includes Utility Tax, Interest on Deposits, Bank & CC Fees, Bond Issuance Costs, Transfer to Uncollectible Reserve, and Green Energy. Megawatt Hours Sold & Purchased Rev. Budget Actual Sales to Customers MWh (excl. Street Light MWh) 760,876 140,233 Sales per MWh $119.74 $112.72 Purchased/Generated MWh 773,010- 154,116- All In MWh Supply & Generation $106.87 $54.51 Page 10 Page 198

Item #14. Finance Department Monthly Report August 2023 Electric Fund - Revenues Millions $- $10 $20 $30 $40 $50 $60 $70 $80 $90 $100 Original Budget Actual Customer Sales All Other 1 Electric Fund - Expenditures $90,000,000 $85,000,000 $80,000,000 $75,000,000 $70,000,000 $65,000,000 $60,000,000 $55,000,000 $50,000,000 $45,000,000 $40,000,000 $35,000,000 $30,000,000 $25,000,000 $20,000,000 $15,000,000 $10,000,000 $5,000,000 $- Power Supply & Electric Operating Post Retirement General Fund Interfund Services Debt Service All Other 2 Generation Div. Exp. Benefits Transfer Original Budget $82,658,600 9,208,700 4,227,500 1,482,600 997,000 8,000,000 3,004,900 Actual $8,402,466 1,343,907 288,057 233,950 166,167 1,333,333 246,983 Original Budget Actual Page 11 Page 199

Item #14. Finance Department Monthly Report August 2023 City of Dover Division Expense Summary (General Fund) Fiscal Year to Date (August 2023) Original Budget Actual % General Fund Divisions % of Budget City Clerk $ 414,200 $ 48,241 12% Council 260,000 44,590 17% Mayor Fire 851,600 154,319 18% Human Resources Grounds 1,741,100 206,737 12% Customer Services Library 2,040,700 255,265 13% Fleet Maintenance Recreation 1,549,600 261,971 17% Procurement & Inventory Life Safety 690,600 90,251 13% Code Enforcement 1,173,600 105,464 9% Engineering Planning 826,100 101,092 12% Facilities Management Public Inspections 800,800 102,126 13% Pub. Services Administration Police 21,550,900 2,846,422 13% Finance Police Extra Duty 405,000 43,005 11% Information Technology Streets 768,600 95,194 12% Sanitation 3,060,100 350,015 11% City Manager Stormwater 906,400 52,295 6% Stormwater City Manager 1,300,100 168,759 13% Sanitation Information Technology 874,100 208,229 24% Streets Finance 1,032,300 96,074 9% Police Extra Duty Pub. Services Administration 646,900 83,761 13% Police Facilities Management 822,100 101,259 12% Engineering 279,300 55,948 20% Public Inspections Procurement & Inventory 873,600 142,942 16% Planning Fleet Maintenance 1,078,600 181,939 17% Code Enforcement Customer Services 1,417,500 277,431 20% Life Safety Human Resources 501,300 48,715 10% Recreation Mayor 245,200 42,027 17% $ 46,110,300 $ 6,164,070 13% Library Grounds Fire Council Page 12 Page 200 City Clerk 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

Finance Department Monthly Report August 2023 Item #14. City of Dover Utilities Expenditure Summary Fiscal Year to Date (August 2023) Water Divison Original Budget Actual % Engineering & Inspection $ 386,500 $ 40,972 11% Water Department 862,100 95,965 11% Water Treatment Plant 2,907,500 328,722 11% $ 4,156,100 $ 465,659 11% Wastewater Divison Original Budget Actual % Engineering & Inspection $ 304,100 $ 17,781 6% Wastewater Department 1,345,100 212,675 16% $ 1,649,200 $ 230,457 14% Electric Division Original Budget Actual % Transmission/Distribution $ 4,893,100 $ 654,720 13% Electrical Engineering 1,826,600 215,529 12% Administration 1,020,200 306,402 30% Meter Reading 460,500 23,379 5% Systems Operations 1,008,300 143,878 14% $ 9,208,700 $ 1,343,907 15% Page 201 Page 13

Finance Department Monthly Report August 2023 Item #14. Water Division % of Budget Water Treatment Plant Water Department Engineering & Inspection 10% 10% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% Wastewater Division % of Budget Wastewater Department Engineering & Inspection 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% Electric Division % of Budget Systems Operations Meter Reading Administration Electrical Engineering Transmission/Distribution Page 202 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% Page 35% 14

Finance Department Monthly Report August 2023 Item #14. City of Dover Capital Outlay Summary (All Funds) Fiscal Year to Date (August 2023) General Fund Original Budget Actual % Fire $ 419,600 $ 47,363 11% Code Enforcement 34,600 - 0% Public Works Admin 30,000 - 0% Public Works Eng 48,300 - 0% Police 1,186,500 5,829 0% Streets 852,300 - 0% Sanitation 707,800 - 0% Stormwater 1,135,000 - 0% Grounds 214,500 233,533 109% Recreation 835,000 840 0% Information Technology 115,500 2,349 2% Facilities Management 80,000 - 0% Fleet Maintenance 30,000 5,700 1% General Fund Capital Projects $ 5,689,100 $ 352,979 6% Water Fund Water $ 4,579,300 $ 11,201 0% Water Engineering 48,000 - 0% Water Treatment Plant 56,500 - 0% Water Fund Capital Projects $ 4,683,800 $ 11,201 0% Wastewater Fund Wastewater $ 2,576,900 $ 42,872 2% Wastewater Fund Capital Projects $ 2,576,900 $ 42,872 2% Electric Fund Electric Generation $ 275,000 $ 62,090 23% Transmission/Distribution 2,497,400 29,757 1% Electrical Engineering 2,076,000 209,841 10% Electric Administration 2,000,000 - 0% Electric Fund Capital Projects $ 6,848,400 $ 301,688 4% TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS $ 19,798,200 $ 708,740 3% Page 203 Page 15

Finance Department Monthly Report August 2023 Item #14. Capital Outlay - All Divisions $5,000,000 $4,500,000 $4,000,000 $3,500,000 $3,000,000 $2,500,000 $2,000,000 $1,500,000 $1,000,000 $500,000 $- Original Budget Actual Capital Outlay - By Fund $8,000,000 $6,848,400 $7,000,000 $6,000,000 $5,689,100 $5,000,000 $4,683,800 $4,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,576,900 $2,000,000 $1,000,000 $352,979 $301,688 $11,201 $42,872 $- Original Budget Actual General Fund Capital Projects Water Fund Capital Projects Wastewater Fund Electric Fund Capital Projects Page 204 Page 16

Finance Department Monthly Report August 2023 Item #14. This page intentionally left blank Page 205 Page 17

Item #15. DOVER FIRE DEPARTMENT August 2023 FIRE CHIEFS REPORT Page 206

Item #15. Mayor and Council, The Dover Fire Department responded to 126 calls in the month of August consisting of 761 personnel hours. Members performed 41 hours of training consisting of 574 personnel hours. Total 1,335 personnel hours for the month of August. Major incidents On Saturday, August 12th, the Dover Fire Communications received a call for an electrical hazard in the Grande Apartment Complex. The Duty Officer and Engine 1 responded and found a primary electric transformer had collapsed into the base with no active fire. Buildings 100,200,300 had intermittent power loss and complete loss of power in building 400. City of Dover, Electric Department was requested and the scene was turned over to the line crew when they arrived. Later that evening, City of Dover Systems Ops requested the DFD Duty Officer and the City Fire Marshals Office to respond with a concern of life safety for the residents due to the extended duration in restoring power. The Duty Officer and Fire Marshals Office responded and assessed the situation noting the fire alarm and sprinkler system were affected by the loss of power in building 400. The city restored power on the primary side of the transformer supplying buildings 100, 200 and 300 but the secondary side that supplied building 400 was awaiting an electrician from the complex which was due to arrive 9am Sunday. Due to the life safety concerns of the fire alarm and sprinkler system being affected the Fire Marshals Office condemned building 400. 48 units and 75 residents, some with medical and mobility issues needed to be evacuated and relocated. Additional resources were requested from the DFD, Fire Marshals Office, Saint Francis EMS and the City of Dover Emergency Management. Squad 1, Ladder 2, an additional DFD Chief, STFEMS Shift Supervisor, MCI 2 and additional units from their Wilmington Division responded. Unified Command was established consisting of DFD, St. Francis EMS, City Fire Marshals Office and City of Dover Emergency Manager. A Task force of Firemen and EMTs were assigned to different floors and apartments to evacuate the residents. 75 residents were removed from building 400 in just over an hour and relocated to local hotels or with family/friends. The apartments were confirmed to be empty, and units were made available. Page 207

Item #15. The City of Dover FMO and Emergency Management continued to assist the residents through the night and into Sunday morning. Additional assistance was provided by DEMA and the Red Cross. At the time of this post building 400 was still condemned. We would like to take a moment to thank all the agencies involved. Volunteerism We are still struggling with staffing problems at both fire stations. We will need to discuss the new employment positions that were requested in the last budget cycle in the near future. We are continuing to recruit volunteer members. We are looking at other avenues to recruit members. Fire Prevention Several members attended the National Night Out at Dover High School. Firefighters performed a vehicle education DEMO and firefighters assisted children with squirting water with a fire hose. Kent County Electronic Communcations between Kent County and the City of Dover have been restored. We are working on interoperability between Kent County and the Fire Department. State of Delaware We are currently working with neighboring fire companies and the Delaware State Fire Commission on bringing annexed property that is outside of the Dover Fire District into our response area per the City Charter. Ladder 2 Replacement Ladder 2 is in queue for production. Members of the Fire Department attended 8-hour training class Mid Mount Tower Ladder operations in preparation of the arrival of Tower 2 in December. This class was taught by Traditions Training. We would like to thank the Goodwill Fire Company of New Castle for allowing us to train on their new ladder truck. City of Dover During the month of August, a CAF for the replacement of Engine 4was completed and submitted to Council of the Whole, thank you for your continued support. Currently waiting on approval of the Job description from Human Resources for the new employee position at the fire department. The Fire Chief attended the following: Attended Fire Department Company and Board meeting Attended the City Council meeting Attended Council of the Whole Attended Fire Department Training Attended Kent County Fire Chief’s meeting Page 208

Item #15. Page 209

Item #15. Page 210

Item #15. Page 211

Item #15. Page 212

Item #16. CITY OF DOVER DEPARTMENT OF POLICE 400 SOUTH QUEEN STREET DOVER, DELAWARE 19904 302-736-7111 Chief of Police Police Captains THOMAS A. JOHNSON, JR. RANDY ROBBINS Deputy Chief of Police KEVIN KOBER DAVID E. SPICER AARON DICKINSON October 9, 2023 Honorable Robin Christiansen, Mayor Members of Dover City Council City Hall Dover, DE 19901 Mayor Christiansen and Council Members: The following is the monthly report of Dover Police Department activities for August: COMPLAINTS/EVENTS YTD Totals compiled through August numbered 28,261 This represents an increase of 1,228 from the 27,033 reported over the same period in 2022. 30,000 27,830 27,033 28,261 26,064 25,000 21,791 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS Burglary: 10 cases reported, 6 cases cleared and 1 case was cleared from previous months. Robbery: 5 cases reported, 4 cases cleared and 0 case was cleared from previous months. Sex Assault: 5 cases reported, 4 cases cleared and 1 case was cleared from previous months. Homicide: 0 case reported, 0 cases cleared and 0 cases cleared from previous months. 1 Page 213

Item #16. There were 5 Non-Criminal Death Investigations, 5 cases cleared and 0 cases cleared from previous months. DRUG, VICE, & ORGANIZED CRIME / STREET CRIMES UNIT ENFORCEMENT Marijuana: 24.5 grams seized Cocaine: 65 grams seized Ecstasy: 2,189 doses seized Prescription Pills: 49 doses seized Heroin: 86.082 grams seized Methamphetamine: 0 grams seized Fentanyl: 0 grams seized Other Rx Drugs: 0 grams/doses seized Drug Proceeds: $6,137 seized FIREARM SEIZURES/INSIDE CITY LIMITS 15 11 10 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CI DVOC/STREET CRIMES PATROL SEU HANDGUN RIFLE SHOTGUN Firearms: 12 Handguns, 1 Rifle TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT YTD Citation Totals compiled through August numbered 5,117. This represents an increase of 1,162 from the 3,955 reported over the same period in 2022. 7,000 6,430 6,000 5,117 4,883 5,000 3,955 4,000 3,239 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 TRAFFIC CRASHES: YTD = 1,561 2 Page 214

Item #16. 911 CENTER ACTIVITY Total compiled during August numbered 7,546 calls. This represents a decrease of 716 from the 8,262 reported during the same period in 2022. 8,400 8,262 8,200 8,153 8,000 7,761 7,800 7,600 7,546 7,400 7,286 7,200 7,000 6,800 6,600 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 CITY ORDINANCE SUMMONS YTD Totals compiled through August numbered 1,472. This represents a decrease of 1,087 from the 2,559 reported over the same period in 2022. 4,000 3,334 3,500 3,000 2,623 2,559 2,333 2,500 2,000 1,472 1,242 1,500 898 793 1,000 635 484 500 0 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 ISSUED 3,334 2,333 2,623 2,559 1,472 PAID 1,242 898 635 484 793 3 Page 215

Item #16. COMMUNITY POLICING This proactive unit takes the lead on community engagement and supporting our community organizations. They have administrative responsibilities and also support other departmental units, such as patrol, during times of high work volumes or special operations with enforcement activities. In addition to those duties, the unit accomplished the following in August:  Supported Unity Day at Williams Park  Assisted Police Academy with recruit training (Domestic Violence)  Liaison with DelDot in reference to a homeless camp on State land on Scarborough Rd  Participated in delivering a SPARK Summer Camp presentation  Participated in Tracy Palmer Ministries “Night of Elegance” and Community Day events  Participated in the training of a newly hired Cadet  Participated in a “Shop with a Cop” event at Dick’s Sporting Goods (photo included)  Participated in the all National Night Out activities including support to Wyoming PD  K9 Roy supported a program at the Attorney General’s Office  K9 Roy made a visit to the BayHealth Day Care  K9 Roy made a presentation to Beginnings and Beyond  Participated in a “Back to School” event in Manchester Square  Helped address a warrant backlog and arrested several offenders as a result  Provided Community Outreach- Persimmon Park Place (ongoing issues with trespassing)  Distribution of School Book Bags in the Hamlet, Capital Green, Simon Circle, Whatcoat, and Manchester Square  Meeting with The Laurels Property Manager about crime prevention  Meeting with Capital School District related to PAL programs  Worked with Habitat for Humanity on Hometown Holiday Event  Attended Habitat for Humanity Dedications at 13 & 53 S. New Street  Continued Planning for Faith and Blue Weekend  Assisted Code Enforcement in clearing 132 S New Street and checking 100 Lakeview Dr.  Participated in the PAL Youth Academy trip to Washington DC (photo included)  Accepted a donation of bottled water (full pallet) from Home Depot for PAL programs  Participated in a “Touch a Truck” event @ All Beautiful Children Daycare  Supported a summer camp program on The Green (kickball participation)  Assisted Patrol Units during major incidents, high 911 call volume and/or low staffing  Training events included Aviles in SRO school & SORT members- monthly training  The BHU made contact with 87 individuals and took official action to provide services to 28 of them. 17 were mental health supports and 11 were substance abuse referrals. 4 Page 216

Item #16. Members of the CPU attend numerous meetings with community associations and organizations as a part of our ongoing liaison relationships. 5 Page 217

Item #16. CHIEF’S ADVISORY COMMITTEE The Police Chief’s Advisory Committee (PCAC) is comprised of nine (9) diverse stakeholders living/working in the City of Dover. It meets regularly to provide input/feedback to the Chief on the various operations of the agency.  The Committee met on August 10th as scheduled. The group reviewed the responses to the survey link distributed at National Night Out. This exercise tied into our ongoing discussions related to the 2022 public survey completed during our Accreditation review. In both instances, the results reveal that the public has unanswered questions about common law enforcement situations. After discussing the potential ways to respond to the most people, it was recommended to the Chief that a series of short videos be produced under the working title of “You asked, we answered”. The Committee reminded the Chief that technical terms and “cop- speak” should be removed from public communications whenever possible. PROGRAMS AND INITIATIVES As promised, a supplemental report is being provided to better inform Council on 2022 crime data (Attachment #1). There were several personnel and technical barriers to producing this data in time for the Annual Report presentation this past spring. Those issues have been resolved and should not be a problem for the foreseeable future. My compliments go out to Captain Aaron Dickinson, Records Manager Emily Waldridge and the rest of the Administrative Division staff who worked together to tackle this complex challenge. As anticipated, we fell 50% short of our attempt to fill vacant police officer positions. By the time this report is submitted, Council will have been fully briefed on market conditions, DPD efforts at addressing the shortfall, and projections for the next hiring cycle. The Police Cadet program now has one member as Cadet Turner has left us to begin his career with the Delaware State Police. This is an ideal part-time job for college-aged individuals with an eye toward public safety or criminal justice employment. Five positions remain vacant. The job is a 29-hour flexible schedule paying $18 per hour. We are preparing to take delivery of our first EV through the efforts of Matthew Brown and the grant program he is administering. While we are happy to participate in assessing the feasibility of this technology for use in public safety, Council should know that there are a significant number of factors that will make it VERY difficult to deploy this kind of vehicle into our 24/7 operational model. To respect the continuing concerns of persistent gun violence in the city, a year-to-date analysis is being offered for this month’s report (attachment #2). Several years ago, Dover PD focused its resources on offenses that involved firearms. It was a common sense shift in focus due to the increasing homicide rate and incidents of gun violence associated with street gangs. In a general alignment with emerging State and National data, we can report a noteworthy drop in firearms offenses as we move through 2023. Please refer to the attached summary. Please visit our website at www.doverpolice.org for up to date information on crimes and activities in the City of Dover. 6 Page 218

Item #16. Respectfully Submitted, Thomas A. Johnson, Jr. Chief of Police Attachment #1 – 2022 Supplemental Crime Data Attachment #2 - Gun Violence Year-to-Date Analysis 7 Page 219

August 2023 Monthly Report Attachment #1 Item #16. 2022 Dover PD Crime Data – Supplemental Report In preparation for the 2022 Annual Report to Dover City Council, there were several problems encountered in relation to staff turnover in both the Dover PD Records Unit and the State-level office charged with the responsibility of processing municipal crime data. Once our new staff members were in place, and trained, these fresh perspectives discovered certain data sets were routinely processed incorrectly and outputs were not necessarily accurate. The State team helped us out a lot with our reorganization. There is no specific place in the workflow where the wrong box was checked or an event was missed or counted twice. Tiny inconsistencies in process led to a few data sets coming out uneven. Dover PD then began to work more closely with State of Delaware professionals to correct the pending reports and audit the 2021 numbers. The result is that the 2022 data is now correct for publication and the 2021 data is modestly revised so a proper comparison can be made, if desired. It would appear that most crime categories required a revision to the 2021 report. In the Crime Clearance Comparison graphic included in this report, the reader can see the updated numbers for 2021. The new numbers are shown in either red or green font color. The originally published numbers remain in black font. In total, an equal number of categories required adjustment representing an increase or decrease in events. None of the adjustments, up or down, were dramatically large and they do not tend to re-define the characterization of crime for 2021 or 2022. On one hand, we are not happy that any data was determined to be inaccurate in the illustrated tables. On the other hand, we are pleased that the variances were low and manageable during our audit. This report is intended to supply the data that was missing in the 2022 Annual Report and provide the Mayor and Council with corrected information from 2021 for trend analysis. 1 Page 220

Item #16. August 2023 Monthly Report Attachment #1 CRIME CLEARANCE COMPARISON DOVER POLICE DEPARTMENT DOVER DOVER CLEARE TOTAL 2021 2022 D VIOLENT CRIME (TOTAL) 67% / 71% 74% 236 317 Murder 50% / 75% 33% 1 3 Forcible Rape 60% / 67% 72% 13 18 Robbery 77% / 67% 75% 18 24 Aggravated Assault 66% / 70% 75% 204 272 PROPERTY CRIME (TOTAL) 29% / 28% 27% 477 1796 Burglary 69% / 66% 70% 21 30 Theft 28% / 27% 27% 428 1595 Motor Vehicle Theft 22% / 15% 15% 26 169 Arson 50% / 100% 100% 2 2 FORCIBLE RAPE Rape by Force 60% / 67% 72% 13 18 Assault to Rape 100 100% 1 1 ROBBERY Firearm 64% / 60% 62% 8 13 Knife 100% 75% 3 4 Other Dangerous Weapon 80% / 60% 100% 2 2 Strong-arm 88% / 71% 100% 5 5 AGGRAVATED ASSAULT Firearm 48% / 55% 58% 59 101 Knife 89% / 88% 87% 45 52 Other Dangerous Weapon 77% / 82% 87% 80 92 Hands, Feet, Other 79% 74% 20 27 BURGLARY Forcible Entry 66% / 59% 68% 15 22 Unlawful Entry, No Force 80% / 83% 67% 4 6 Attempted Forcible Entry 67% 100% 2 2 MOTOR VEHICLE THEFT Autos 22% / 16% 16% 23 148 Trucks and Buses 38% / 17% 33% 2 6 Other Vehicles 0% 7% 1 15 ARSON Structural 0% / 100% 100% 2 2 Mobile 100% N/A 0 0 Other N/A N/A 0 0 Numbers in Green font represent rates published incorrectly lower than actual Numbers in Red font represent rates published incorrectly higher than actual 2 Page 221

Item August 2023 Monthly #16. Report Attachment #1 CRIMINAL SUMMARY OFFENSES ARRESTS Page 1 of 2 RECEIVED CLEARED ADULT JUVENILE GROUP A OFFENSES 2021 2022 2021 2022 2021 2022 2021 2022 HOMICIDE TOTAL 4 5 3 2 3 1 1 1 MURDER / NONNEGLIGENT MANSLAUTER 4 3 3 1 3 1 0 0 NEGLIGENT MANSLAUGHTER 0 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 KIDNAPPING AND ABDUCTION 14 15 10 14 9 13 0 0 SEXUAL OFFENSES, FORCIBLE 55 60 41 40 15 8 1 3 RAPE BY FORCE 18 18 12 13 4 2 0 1 RAPE BY FORCE - ATTEMPTED 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 1 FORCIBLE SODOMY 3 3 1 2 1 0 0 0 SEXUAL ASSAULT WITH AN OBJECT 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 FORCIBLE FONDLING 31 36 25 22 8 4 1 1 FORCIBLE FONDLING - ATTEMPTED 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ROBBERY TOTAL 24 24 16 18 16 13 5 1 FIREARM 10 13 6 8 7 6 4 0 KNIFE OR CUTTING INSTRUMENT 2 4 2 3 1 1 0 0 OTHER DANGEROUS WEAPON 5 2 3 2 4 1 0 0 STRONGARM 7 5 5 5 4 5 1 1 ASSAULT TOTAL 1329 1385 1051 1128 608 653 53 58 AGGRAVATED TOTAL 306 272 215 204 122 114 14 10 AGGRAVATED, FIREARM 139 101 76 59 35 27 7 3 AGGRAVATED, KNIFE/CUTTING INST 49 52 43 45 27 22 3 2 AGGRAVATED, OTHER WEAPON 99 92 81 80 46 48 2 3 AGGRAVATED, STRONG-ARM 19 27 15 20 14 17 2 2 NON-AGGRAVATED TOTAL 1023 1113 836 924 486 539 39 48 NON-AGG., SIMPLE/HARASSMENT 864 932 730 795 436 483 36 41 NON-AGG., INTIMIDATION 159 181 106 129 50 56 3 7 ARSON TOTAL 2 2 2 2 0 1 0 0 STRUCTURAL 2 2 2 2 0 1 0 0 MOBILE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 OTHER 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXTORTION/BLACKMAIL 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 BURGLARY TOTAL 47 30 31 21 18 10 1 0 FORCEFUL ENTRY 32 22 19 15 13 5 1 0 UNLAWFUL ENTRY, NO FORCE 12 6 10 4 4 4 0 0 ATTEMPTED FORCIBLE ENTRY 3 2 2 2 1 1 0 0 3 Page 222

Item August 2023 Monthly #16. Report Attachment #1 CRIMINAL SUMMARY OFFENSES ARRESTS Page 2 of 2 RECEIVED CLEARED ADULT JUVENILE 2021 2022 2021 2022 2021 2022 2021 2022 LARCENY - THEFT 1412 1595 381 428 289 323 4 11 PICK POCKET 14 7 3 1 0 0 0 0 PURSE SNATCH 5 7 4 1 2 1 0 0 SHOPLIFTING 608 825 221 277 200 240 2 5 THEFT FROM BUILDING 417 369 103 98 59 63 2 2 THEFT FROM COIN-OP MACHINE 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 THEFT FROM MOTOR VEHICLE 147 159 23 23 14 8 0 2 THEFT OF VEHICLE PARTS/ACC. 91 65 12 3 6 2 0 0 OTHER 129 163 15 25 8 9 0 2 MOTOR VEHICLE THEFT TOTAL 80 169 12 26 4 9 2 6 AUTOS 68 148 11 23 3 9 2 6 TRUCKS AND BUSES 6 6 1 2 0 0 0 0 OTHER VEHICLES 6 15 0 1 1 0 0 0 COUNTERFEIT/FORGERY 13 26 7 14 2 13 0 0 FRAUD 116 153 67 80 30 32 1 0 FALSE PRETENSE/SWINDLE 38 78 17 39 10 19 0 0 CREDIT CARD/ATM 39 38 17 18 5 6 0 0 IMPERSONATION 34 18 30 17 15 6 0 0 WELFARE FRAUD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 WIRE FRAUD 0 3 0 2 0 1 0 0 IDENTITY THEFT 5 16 3 4 0 0 0 0 HACKING/COMPUTER INVASION 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 EMBEZZLEMENT 13 12 11 8 9 9 0 0 STOLEN PROPERTY 31 46 30 44 27 33 6 26 DESTRUCTION/DAMAGE PROPERTY 645 652 256 251 83 98 6 8 DRUG/NARCOTIC OFFENSES 736 703 726 693 348 314 6 23 DRUG/NARCOTIC 458 469 452 460 311 275 5 23 DRUG EQUIPMENT 278 234 274 233 37 39 1 0 SEXUAL OFFENSES, NON-FORCIBLE 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 INCEST 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 STATUTORY RAPE 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 PORNOGRAPHY/OBSCENE MATERIAL 5 7 4 5 0 4 0 0 GAMBLING OFFENSES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PROSTITUTION 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 PROSTITUTION 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 PATRONIZE/PROMOTE PROSTITUTION 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 PURCHASING PROSTITUTION 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 BRIBERY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 WEAPONS LAW VIOLATIONS 183 240 159 215 33 40 9 25 CRUELTY TO ANIMALS 7 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 TOTAL GROUP A OFFENSES 4718 5129 2812 2989 1497 1574 94 161 4 Page 223

August 2023 Monthly Report Item #16. Attachment #2 2023 Dover Delaware YTD Shooting Analysis (January – September) Review of 2022 Data Month Shootings Weapons Total Homicide Assault Reckless Property Victim Discharge Events Endanger Damage Refused 67% 33% 100% 5% 32% 22% 3% 13% January 3 1 4 0 1 2 0 1 February 2 1 3 0 1 0 1 1 March 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 April 2 3 5 0 1 1 0 0 May 8 2 10 0 3 4 1 4 June 4 3 7 0 3 1 0 0 July 3 0 3 0 1 2 0 0 August 2 6 8 0 1 1 0 0 September 4 2 6 0 3 1 0 1 October 5 1 6 1 1 1 0 0 November 4 0 4 1 3 0 0 1 December 3 0 3 1 1 0 0 0 Total 40 20 60 3 19 13 2 8 Year To Date 2023 Data Month ShootingsWeapons Total Homicide Assault Reckless Property Victim Discharge Events Endanger Damage Refused 83% 17% 100% 0% 20% 44% 20% 5% January 4 0 4 0 1 3 0 0 February 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 March 2 0 2 0 0 1 1 1 April 4 1 5 0 1 0 3 0 May 8 0 8 0 1 5 2 0 June 4 3 7 0 1 2 1 0 July 5 1 6 0 1 3 1 0 August 3 1 4 0 0 3 0 0 September 3 1 4 0 2 1 0 0 October x x x x x x x x November x x x x x x x x December x x x x x x x x Total 34 7 41 0 8 18 8 2 1 Page 224

August 2023 Monthly Report Item #16. Attachment #2 Definitions: A Shooting is criminal conduct to persons or property. A Weapons Discharge is confirmation of a shot fired from a firearm without an identified victim, suspect, or proof of property damage. The Reckless Endangerment column represents persons placed at significant risk of harm by gunfire but are not necessarily the intended targets of the violence. This is a separate but serious crime category. For this report, Homicide is limited to firearms as the cause of death. Context: 1. It is difficult to reduce gun violence into a data illustration where the math is always perfect due to the many variables associated with a weapons discharge and how statutory law views the event. 2. Every attempt has been made to remove incidents of suicide and accidental discharges from this data but that is a challenge due to the complexity of cases and the multiple sources for information. 3. It is possible that shootings were missed due to the lack of a call to police or the inability to locate a crime victim/scene following a call for shots fired. (fireworks/loud noise) 4. These numbers are not in publication anywhere else. Most agencies do not track data the same way as Dover PD and to our knowledge, no police department is required to report victimless shootings to their respective States or the Federal Government. There is no graphic for 2021 as we were not collecting weapons discharge data before 2022. 5. 2021 Shooting Data did include 4 Homicides, 29 Assaults, and 47 total Shootings before the improvement in 2022 to 3, 19 and 40 respectively. Year to Date 2023 we stand at 0 Homicides, 8 Assaults, and 34 total Shootings at September’s end. This partial data set from 2021 does suggest that the focus on illegal guns is beginning to see the reduction in victimization we had hoped to see through a sustained effort. 6. The Dover PD has confiscated 460 illegal firearms since the beginning of 2021. 7. There is no illustrated data on clearance rates as many cases are still under active investigation and this data (to be accurate) often lags many months behind the initial report of the shooting. 2 Page 225

August 2023 Monthly Report Item #16. Attachment #2 Summary:  We are three-fourths of the way through 2023 and have only recorded two-thirds of the total number of shootings noted in all of 2022. At the current pace, we may finish the year at around 50 events or five-sixths of last year’s volume. That would be a 17% reduction of gunfire incidents.  Like last year, we have had no recorded incidents of homicide through the first nine months of this year. If the above data holds true for the last quarter, it would appear that we will finish somewhere between zero and two deaths for the current year. To be certain, one death is too many, but we appear to be going in the right direction.  It is still unclear as to why the proportion of shootings vs. weapons discharges have shifted so significantly in this year’s data. One likely possibility is the noteworthy improvement in the cooperation of victims in 2023. With a cooperating victim, the event is more likely to be logged as a crime against a person. (shooting category)  The reduction in the Assault category is a good signal as this category is associated with the criminal intent of the shooter. We are on pace to have less than a dozen of these and that is a welcome reduction from last year where we came close to 20.  We will be watching fourth quarter numbers closely in anticipation of the 2023 Annual Report presentation. 3 Page 226

Item #20. FIRST READING CITY OF DOVER PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2023-10 (City Council Amendments indicated in Yellow Highlights) Routine corrections are indicated in grey highlight 1 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, DE IN 2 COUNCIL MET: 3 4 That Chapter 114- Vegetation be amended by inserting the text indicated in bold, blue, and deleting 5 the text indicated in red strikeout as follows: 6 7 Sec. 114-1. Public trees generally. 8 9 (a) Intent; title. The intent of this section is to regulate the planting, maintenance and removal of 10 shade and ornamental trees on public areas in the city. 11 12 (b) Purposes. The purposes of this section are as follows, and they shall be liberally construed to 13 promote and advance the general welfare of the city: 14 15 (1) To guide and regulate the planting, maintenance, and removal of trees on the public 16 streets, parks, and other municipally owned property. 17 18 (2) To establish a city tree board charged with the administration of this section by 19 prescribing regulations relating to the planting, maintenance, and removal of trees in 20 public places. 21 22 (3) To protect the character and the social and economic value of both private and public 23 property in the city. 24 25 (4) To preserve and enhance the visual character and natural beauty of the city. 26 27 (c) Definitions. The following words, terms, and phrases, when used in this section, shall have the 28 meanings ascribed to them in this subsection, except where the context clearly indicates a 29 different meaning: 30 31 Board means the city tree board. 32 33 Park trees means trees in public parks having individual names, and all areas owned by the 34 city or to which the public has free access as a park. 35 36 Property line means any of the lines forming the front, rear and sides of lots as described in 37 the recorded title. 38 39 Public trees means trees located within public rights-of-way, parks or any other city property. Page 227

Proposed Ordinance #2023-10 Amending Chapter 114 Vegetation, Article II Weeds, Article II Bambo Item #20. and Appendix F – Fees and Fines, Chapter 114 Page 2 40 Street and highway means the entire width of every public way or right-of-way when any part 41 thereof is open to the use of the public as a matter of right for purposes of vehicular and pedestrian 42 traffic. 43 44 Street trees means trees on land lying between property lines on either side of all streets and 45 avenues within the city, usually located between the curb and sidewalk. 46 47 (d) City tree board. 48 49 (1) Establishment. Since the city has an existing governing body with jurisdiction over public 50 trees, there is no reason to create a new board. With the adoption of the ordinance from 51 which this section is derived, the parks, recreation and community enhancement 52 committee has the title and duties as the city tree board. 53 54 (2) Advice to city council. The council shall consider the advice of the city tree board on all 55 matters concerning the application of this section. 56 57 (3) Duties. The duties of the city tree board shall be as follows: 58 59 a. To study the problems and determine the needs of the city in connection with its tree 60 program. 61 62 b. To study and recommend to the council desirable legislation concerning the tree 63 program. 64 65 c. To ensure adequate funding for public tree planting and maintenance. 66 67 (e) Control of shade and ornamental trees. The city assumes complete control over all public tree 68 planting, maintenance, and removal. These functions shall be performed by city crews and 69 personnel or by contracts with qualified, licensed and ensured private tree companies. 70 71 (f) Superintendent of grounds. 72 73 (1) Duties. The superintendent of grounds shall have the authority to promulgate the rules 74 and regulations of the arboriculture specifications and standards of practice governing the 75 planting, maintenance, removal, fertilization and pruning of trees on the streets or other 76 public sites in the city and shall direct, regulate and control the planting, maintenance and 77 removal of all trees growing now or hereafter in any public area of the city. He shall cause 78 the provisions of this section to be enforced. (See section 114-2.) 79 80 (2) Relief from personal responsibility. 81 82 a. The superintendent of grounds or any employee charged with the enforcement of 83 this section, while acting for the city, shall not thereby render himself personally 84 liable, and he is hereby relieved from all personal liability for any damage that may 85 accrue to persons or property as a result of any act required or permitted in the Page 228

Proposed Ordinance #2023-10 Amending Chapter 114 Vegetation, Article II Weeds, Article II Bambo Item #20. and Appendix F – Fees and Fines, Chapter 114 Page 3 86 discharge of his duties. Any suit instituted against any city employee because of an 87 act performed by him in the lawful discharge of his duties shall be defended by the 88 city solicitor. 89 90 b. In no case shall the superintendent of grounds be liable for costs in any action, suit 91 or proceeding that may be instituted in pursuance of the provisions of this section 92 when he and/or his subordinates perform their duties in good faith and without 93 malice. 94 95 (g) Damage or abuse. Should any public tree be damaged by any person, the city may charge the 96 person causing such damage for repairs to the tree and/or its devaluation. Should any public 97 tree be destroyed by any person, the city may charge the person causing such destruction for 98 the appraised value of the tree, plus the cost of its removal and replacement. 99 100 (h) Care upon public grounds. The city shall have the right to plant, prune, maintain and remove 101 trees, plants and shrubs within the lines of all streets, alleys and public grounds as may be 102 necessary to ensure public safety or to preserve or enhance the symmetry and beauty of such 103 public grounds. 104 105 (i) Dead or diseased tree removal on private property. The city shall have the right to cause the 106 removal of any dead or diseased trees on private property within the city. wWhen such trees 107 constitute a hazard to life and property or harbor insects or disease which constitutes a potential 108 threat to other trees within the city., Tthe city will notify, in writing, the owners of such trees. 109 Removal shall be done by said owners at their own expense within 60 days after the date of 110 service of notice; however, a lesser time may be specified for removal when an imminent 111 hazard to life or property has been determined to exist. In the event of failure of the owners to 112 comply with such provisions, the city shall have the authority to remove such trees and charge 113 the cost of removal on the owners' property tax notice, enter the cost as a municipal lien or 114 utilize other methods of collection. 115 116 (Code 1981, § 21-1; Ord. of 3-12-1990; Ord. of 8-28-2000) 117 118 Charter reference(s)—Tree commission, subpart A, § 51; city solicitor, subpart A, § 54. 119 120 Sec. 114-2. Arboriculture specifications and standards of practice. 121 122 (a) Authority to promulgate rules and regulations. The superintendent of grounds shall have the 123 authority to promulgate the rules and regulations of the arboriculture specifications and 124 standards of practice governing the planting, maintenance, removal, fertilization and pruning 125 of trees on the streets or other public sites in the city. 126 127 (b) Policy. 128 129 (1) All work on public trees shall comply with this section. 130 (2) The arboriculture specifications and standards of practice shall be adhered to at all times, 131 but may be amended at any time that experience, new research or laws indicate improved Page 229

Proposed Ordinance #2022-10 Amending Chapter 114 Vegetation, Article II Weeds, Article II Item #20. Bambo and Appendix F – Fees and Fines, Chapter 114 Page 4 132 methods or whenever circumstances make it advisable with the approval of the 133 superintendent of grounds. 134 135 (3) The policy of the grounds division shall be one of cooperating with the public, property 136 owners and other city departments at all times. 137 138 (4) No trees shall be removed from public places unless they constitute a hazard to life or 139 property, a public nuisance or because a revision of planting plans necessitates. 140 141 (c) Street trees species to be planted. An official street tree species list has been approved by the 142 superintendent of grounds for tree plantings along streets and avenues of the city. (The official 143 list will be kept on file in the office of the city clerk.) No species other than those included in 144 this list may be planted as street trees without the written permission of the superintendent of 145 grounds. 146 147 (d) Planting. 148 149 (1) Size—Medium to large. Unless otherwise specified, all medium to large deciduous tree 150 species and their cultivars shall conform to American Association of Nurserymen 151 Standards and be at least 1¼—1½ inches in diameter at six inches above ground level 152 and at least eight—ten feet in height when planted. The crown shall be in good balance 153 with the trunk. 154 155 (2) Same—Small. All small deciduous tree species and their cultivars shall be at least five— 156 six feet or more in height and have six or more branches. 157 158 (e) Location and spacing. Spacing of trees shall be determined by the superintendent of grounds, 159 but, generally, all large trees shall be planted no closer than 35 feet, medium trees no closer 160 than 30 feet and small trees no closer than 25 feet, except in special plantings designed or 161 approved by a landscape architect. 162 163 (f) Distance from street corners and fireplugs. No street tree shall be planted closer than 30 feet 164 to any street corner and no closer than ten feet to any fireplug. 165 166 (g) Utilities. Only trees listed as small to medium shall be planted under power lines; and no trees 167 shall be planted within five feet of any underground water line, sewer line, transmission line 168 or other utility. 169 170 (h) Pruning and removal. 171 172 (1) It shall be unlawful as a normal practice for any person to top any street or public tree. 173 For the purposes of this subsection, the term "topping" means the severe cutting back of 174 limbs to stubs larger than three inches in diameter within the tree's crown to such a degree 175 so as to remove the normal canopy and disfigure the tree. Trees severely damaged by 176 storms or other causes or certain trees under utility wires may be exempted from this 177 subsection at the determination of the superintendent of grounds. 178 Page 230

Proposed Ordinance #2022-10 Amending Chapter 114 Vegetation, Article II Weeds, Article II Item #20. Bambo and Appendix F – Fees and Fines, Chapter 114 Page 5 179 (2) All large or established trees shall be pruned to the following sufficient heights to allow 180 the free passage of pedestrians and vehicular traffic: 181 182 a. Eight feet over sidewalks; and 183 184 b. Fourteen feet over streets. 185 186 (3) All cuts shall be made with a saw or pruner and only at the nodes or crotches. No stubs 187 shall be left. 188 189 (4) All dead, crossed, and rubbing branches shall be removed. 190 191 (5) All tools being used on a tree suspected to be infected with a contagious disease shall be 192 disinfected before being used on another tree. 193 194 (6) Whenever streets are to be blocked off to public service, the police and fire departments 195 shall be notified of the location and length of time the street will be blocked. 196 197 (7) The stumps of all removed trees shall be cut to at least three inches below ground level. 198 199 (i) Spraying. 200 201 (1) Suitable precautions shall be taken to protect the public when spraying is being done. 202 203 (2) Spraying shall be done only for the control of specific diseases or insects with the proper 204 materials in the necessary strength and applied at the proper time to obtain the desired 205 control. All spraying practices shall conform to federal and state regulations. 206 207 (j) Fertilization. 208 209 (1) Fertilization of public trees shall follow the Tree Care Industry Association standards or 210 other accepted arboriculture standards. 211 212 (2) Formulations, rates, and methods of application of fertilizers shall be specified by the 213 superintendent of grounds. 214 215 (k) Cabling and bracing. All cabling and bracing practices with screw rods shall follow the Tree 216 Care Industry Association standards or other accepted arboriculture standards. 217 218 (Code 1981, § 21-2; Ord. of 3-12-1990) 219 220 Sec. 114-3. Vegetation on or near streets. 221 222 (a) Prohibited in right-of-way. It shall be unlawful and a nuisance for any person to plant any 223 vegetation in any public right-of-way. Upon receipt of notice from the city to remove any 224 vegetation located in a public right-of-way, the owner of the abutting property shall remove 225 such vegetation at his own expense within the time limit provided in such notice. 226 Page 231

Proposed Ordinance #2022-15 Amending Chapter 114 Vegetation, Article II Weeds, Article II Item #20. Bambo and Appendix F – Fees and Fines, Chapter 114 Page 6 227 (b) Prohibited near curb line. It shall be unlawful and a nuisance for any person to plant any tree, 228 shrub, or bush within 16 feet of the curb line. Upon receipt of notice from the city to remove 229 any tree, shrub, or bush which is located within 16 feet of the curb line, the owner of the 230 property upon which such tree, shrub, or bush is located shall remove the same at his own 231 expense within the time limit fixed in such notice. 232 233 (c) Exceptions. Subsections (a) and (b) of this section shall not apply to city officers or employees 234 who are acting within the scope of their employment or official duties. 235 236 (d) Work by city. If a property owner fails to comply with a notice issued by the city pursuant to 237 this section, the city manager is authorized to proceed with the necessary work by means of 238 city personnel or authorized independent contractors, and the owner shall be billed for the 239 work and labor performed and materials furnished. In the event that If the property owner 240 fails to pay said bills or expenses within 30 days from the date the same are mailed to the 241 owner, then such bills shall be entered in the municipal lien docket as a lien owing the city, 242 and the same may be turned over to the city solicitor for collection. 243 244 (Code 1981, § 21-3; Ord. of 3-12-1990) 245 246 Charter reference(s)—Power of council to define nuisances, subpart A, § 18. 247 248 Secs. 114-4—114-30. Reserved. 249 250 ARTICLE II. WEEDS 251 252 Sec. 114-31. Definitions 253 254 The following words, terms, and phrases, when used in this article, shall have the meanings 255 ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning: 256 257 Weeds means grass, weeds, bushes, and any other vegetation, other than trees, ornamental 258 shrubbery, flowers, and garden vegetables that are properly tended. 259 (Code 1968, § 30-1; Code 1981, § 21-16) 260 261 Sec. 114-32. Maximum height. 262 263 It shall be unlawful and a nuisance for the owner, occupant or tenant of any premises, or any 264 agent caring for or in charge of the premises, to permit any weeds, underbrush, deleterious or 265 unhealthful growths, or other noxious matter to grow to a height of eight inches or more. 266 (Code 1968, § 30-4; Ord. of 9-13-1976; Code 1981, § 21-17; Ord. of 8-28-2000) 267 Charter reference(s)—Power of council to define nuisances, subpart A, § 18. 268 Sec. 114-33. Failure to maintain proper height; abatement by city; costs and lien. 269 270 (a) Notice of violation via door hanger: In the event that any owner, occupant or tenant 271 of any premises within the city, or any agent caring for or in charge of the premises, 272 shall permit any grass, weeds, underbrush, deleterious or unhealthful growths or 273 other noxious matter to grow to a height of eight inches or more as prohibited by this Page 232

Proposed Ordinance #2022-15 Amending Chapter 114 Vegetation, Article II Weeds, Article II Item #20. Bambo and Appendix F – Fees and Fines, Chapter 114 Page 7 274 article, then the Code Enforcement Officer, Fire Marshal, or their authorized agents 275 shall issue a notice of violation via door hanger . The door hanger shall state the 276 property is in violation of section 114-32, and said notice is to be served personally or 277 placed in a conspicuous place on the property in violation. Only (1) one door hanger 278 will be issued within a (18) eighteen-month rolling period. The (18) eighteen-month 279 period is reset every time a new violation of 114-32 issued. 280 281 (b) (a) Summons; action by city. In the event that any owner, occupant or tenant of any 282 premises within the city, or any agent caring for or in charge of the premises, shall permit 283 any grass, weeds, underbrush, deleterious or unhealthful growths or other noxious matter 284 to grow to a height of eight inches or more as prohibited by this article, then the code 285 enforcement officer or fire marshal or his authorized agents shall issue a summons showing 286 a violation of section 114-32, said summons to be served personally or by mail evidenced 287 by certificate of mailing upon the owner, occupant, or tenant of the premises, or any agent 288 caring for or in charge of the premises. The summons shall cite the violation of this article 289 and shall be accompanied by a letter or a copy of the relevant provisions of this article 290 stating what corrective action must be taken and shall state the consequences for failure to 291 take such corrective action. 292 293 (c) Action by the City If the violation is not corrected within three days from the date of 294 personal service of the summons or within seven days from the date of mailing of the 295 summons evidenced by certificate of mailing, then the city, at the direction of the code 296 enforcement officer or the fire marshal, or their authorized agents may remove the weeds, 297 grass, underbrush, deleterious or other unhealthful growths or other noxious matter 298 growing to a height in excess of eight inches or more in violation of section 114-32 and 299 charge the responsible person as provided for in Appendix F—Fees and Fines for such 300 work that must be done to render the property in compliance with this article. When the 301 owner, occupant, or tenant of any premises, or any agent caring for or in charge of the 302 premises, has received summonses, or been issued a summons evidenced by certificate of 303 mailing, and fails to take corrective action, and the city has corrected the violation in 304 accordance with this subsection, then no further notification shall be necessary for the city 305 to take any further corrective action on any subsequent violations within the following 12- 306 month period starting from the date of the first corrective action by the city. 307 308 (d) (b) Failure to pay charges. In the event that the owner of record is deemed to be in violation 309 of section 114-32, and in the event that the violation is corrected in compliance with 310 subsection (a) (b) of this section, and if the charges assessed by the city for correcting said 311 deficiency are not paid, then the city, after having corrected the deficiency and violation, 312 shall place its charges and expenses as specified in the municipal lien docket as a lien 313 against said property, and add the charges and expenses as specified to the tax duplicate 314 for the tax year said services were provided by the city and invoiced as part of the annual 315 property tax bill for said property and collected as part of the city property tax collection 316 process. In addition to the methods directed herein, the city solicitor shall be directed to 317 enforce said lien or to collect the charges imposed by the city by any other means that he 318 may deem desirable and most advantageous to the city. The violator shall be responsible 319 for all collection costs and expenses, including attorneys' fees. Page 233

Proposed Ordinance #2022-15 Amending Chapter 114 Vegetation, Article II Weeds, Article II Item #20. Bambo and Appendix F – Fees and Fines, Chapter 114 Page 8 320 321 (Ord. of 9-13-1976; Code 1981, § 21-18; Ord. of 7-27-1992; Ord. of 8-28-2000; Ord. No. 2009- 322 09, 6-22-2009; Ord. No. 2012-22, 11-13-2012) 323 324 Sec. 114-34. Fines. 325 326 (a) Generally. Any person convicted of a violation of section 114-32, regardless of corrective 327 actions taken, shall be punished for that violation by a fine as provided for in Appendix 328 F—Fees and Fines. Any such fine shall be in addition to any charges or assessments 329 imposed upon the violator pursuant to section 114-33 (a) (c). All fines imposed shall be 330 in accordance with the minimum fine schedule set out in subsection (c) herein. 331 332 (b) Each day. Every day that a violation of section 114-32 continues shall be considered a 333 separate offense, for which the violator may be tried and convicted without necessity of 334 further notice. 335 336 (c) Minimums. 337 338 (1) Any fine assessed pursuant to subsection (a) of this section shall be no less than the 339 minimum amount as provided for in Appendix F—Fees and Fines. 340 341 (2) In determining the applicable minimum fine, an offense shall be considered a recurring 342 offense only if the defendant has previously pleaded or been found guilty of causing or 343 permitting the same nuisance at the same location within the past 12 months, or for every 344 day that the violation of section 114-32 continues as per subsection (b) of this section. 345 346 (d) Lien. Any fines imposed pursuant to subsection (a) of this section which remain unpaid 347 shall: 348 349 (1) Be added to the tax duplicate for the tax year said services were provided by the city and 350 invoiced as part of the annual property tax bill for said property and collected as part of 351 the city property tax collection process, and 352 353 (2) Be placed by the city as specified in the municipal lien docket as a lien against the 354 property on which the violation occurred, and the procedures for enforcement or 355 collection of said lien shall be as set out in section 114-33 (b) (d). 356 357 (e) When not paid. Fines not paid within 14 days of the day the fine was issued, including the 358 day the fine was issued, shall be automatically doubled in amount. 359 360 (f) Fine exemption. Any fine pursuant to subsection (a) of this section can be exempted if 361 the person convicted of a violation of section 114-32 is hospitalized or otherwise has a 362 serious medical condition during the time of the conviction that would prohibit the grass 363 from being cut. 364 Page 234

Proposed Ordinance #2022-15 Amending Chapter 114 Vegetation, Article II Weeds, Article II Item #20. Bambo and Appendix F – Fees and Fines, Chapter 114 Page 9 365 (1) In order to be considered for the exemption, documentation in the form of a 366 doctor’s note or documentation from an authorized or certified medical provider, 367 shall be submitted to the Code Enforcement Office within 14 days of the receipt 368 of the citation. 369 370 (2) The Code Enforcement Officer, Fire Marshal, or their authorized agents shall 371 review the documentation per subsection (1) above and either grant or deny the 372 fine exemption in writing. A denial letter must include the reasons for denial. 373 374 (3) Should the fine exemption be denied, then the person convicted of the violation 375 has 30 days to appeal in writing to the City Council through the City Clerk's 376 Office. The City Clerk's Office shall put this item on the first available Council 377 agenda. 378 379 (Code 1981, § 21-19; Ord. of 3-23-1992; Ord. of 7-27-1992; Ord. of 9-22-2003; Ord. No. 2009- 380 09, 6-22-2009; Ord. No. 2012-22, 11-13-2012; Ord. No. 2022-09, 10-10-2022) 381 382 Sec. 114-35. Exceptions. 383 384 The following shall be considered exceptions to the eight-inch height maximum: 385 386 (a) Riparian areas. Areas within 75 feet of the bank of a perennial stream or lake or within 387 25 feet from the outer edge of a stormwater management pond shall be permitted to 388 include stream bank vegetation, including grasses, shrubs and/or trees. 389 390 (b) Agricultural areas. Areas that are actively used for the cultivation of fields, including 391 seasonal cover crops, shall be exempt from this requirement. 392 393 (c) Approved natural and/or meadow areas. Areas that have been planted as meadow areas 394 or areas that are being allowed to revert to natural vegetation, with approval of the city 395 planner and the city manager, shall be permitted in accordance with the approvals 396 granted by these offices. 397 398 (Ord. No. 2009-10, 5-11-2009) 399 400 Secs. 114-36—114-55. Reserved. 401 402 ARTICLE III. BAMBOO 1 403 404 Sec. 114-56. Unlawful to plant or grow bamboo. 405 406 It shall be unlawful to plant or grow bamboo on any lot or parcel of ground within the city 407 unless: 1 Editor's note(s)—Ord. No. 2012-16, adopted July 9, 2012, set out provisions intended for use as §§ 114-36—114- 39. To preserve the style of this Code, and at the editor's discretion, these provisions have been included as §§ 114- 56—114-59. Page 235

Proposed Ordinance #2022-15 Amending Chapter 114 Vegetation, Article II Weeds, Article II Item #20. Bambo and Appendix F – Fees and Fines, Chapter 114 Page 10 408 409 (1) The root system of such bamboo plant(s) is entirely contained within an above-ground- 410 level planter, barrel, or other vessel of such design, material, and location as to entirely 411 prevent the spread/growth of the bamboo plant'(s) root system beyond the container in 412 which it is planted; or 413 414 (2) The root system is contained within a barrier, constructed in accordance with the 415 following specifications, and only after a compliance inspection is performed, and a 416 building permit is issued by the City of Dover: 417 418 a. The barrier itself shall be composed of high-density polypropylene or polyethylene, 419 40 mil or heavier;. 420 421 b. Each portion or sheet of the barrier shall be secured or joined together by the use of 422 stainless-steel clamps or stainless-steel closure strips designed for such barriers;. 423 424 c. The barrier shall be installed not less than 30 inches deep;. 425 426 d. The barrier shall be circular or oblong shaped;. 427 428 e. Not less than three inches of the barrier shall protrude above ground level around 429 the entire perimeter of the barrier;. 430 431 f. When installed, the barrier shall slant outward from the bottom to the top. 432 433 (3) Whether planted or growing in a container (under subparagraph a. above) or contained 434 within a barrier (under subparagraph b. above), all bamboo plants shall be located, 435 trimmed, and maintained so that no part of the plant (including stalks, branches, leaves, 436 and/or roots) shall extend nearer than ten feet from any property line. 437 438 (Ord. No. 2012-16, § 114-36, 7-9-2012) 439 440 Sec. 114-57. Exemptions. 441 442 Section 114-56 shall not apply to any landowner or possessor who, prior to the effective date 443 of this article, has planted or caused to grow any bamboo on any property within the limits of the 444 city unless a city code enforcement official determines that any portion of such bamboo has been 445 allowed to grow upon, extend roots across, or extend branches, stalks or leaves over any public 446 way or any private property not owned by or in the possession of such landowner or possessor. 447 (Ord. No. 2012-16, § 114-37, 7-9-2012) 448 449 Sec. 114-58 57. Complaint/order for removal, repair, and compliance. 450 451 When it has been determined by the city that any bamboo plant or root is encroaching on the 452 property of an adjacent or abutting landowner, or public way, the city shall, prior to taking any Page 236

Item #20. 453 other action to enforce compliance with this article, give written notice to be delivered by certified 454 mail, to the person(s) or legal entity(s) causing such condition to exist, which notice shall: 455 456 (1) Specify the nature and location of the violation;. 457 458 (2) Provide notice of the need to remove and/or correct such condition within 30 days from 459 the effective date of such notice;. 460 461 (3) Require that the removal and/or correction of such condition includes: 462 463 a. The removal and eradication of any bamboo plant or root from any adjoining or 464 nearby lot(s) or public way to which it has spread from its original planting site, 465 and the correction and repair of any property damage sustained to said adjoining or 466 nearby lot(s) or public way, in removing such bamboo; and 467 468 b. The containment of the bamboo plant causing said encroachment, by mandatory 469 and full compliance with section 114-56(1) or (2); 470 471 (4) State that upon failure to comply with the notice and order for removal and/or 472 containment, the city may remove and eradicate the bamboo upon the land of any nearby 473 or abutting property owner, public way and/or upon the property of the person(s) or 474 entity(s) planting or causing such bamboo to grow, as provided in section 114-33 114- 475 58. 476 477 (Ord. No. 2012-16, § 114-38, 7-9-2012) 478 479 Sec. 114-59 58. Abatement of bamboo. 480 481 (a) If the violation is not remedied within the time set forth in the notice and order as outlined 482 above, the city is hereby authorized to remove or have removed any encroaching bamboo and 483 to take all reasonable steps to eradicate its re-growth from said adjacent or nearby property 484 or public way, and to restore any such lands to its natural condition prior to such removal and 485 eradication (including fill, grading, and seeding). 486 (b) The city shall also be authorized to remove and eradicate the plant(s) causing the 487 encroachment, upon the responsible party(s)' failure to properly contain the plant after notice. 488 489 (c) The cost of corrective action taken by the city shall be billed to the property owner whose 490 property was the source of the encroachment. 491 492 (d) If the charges assessed by the city for removal or eradication of the bamboo are not paid, then 493 the city, after having corrected the deficiency and violation, shall place its charges and 494 expenses as specified in the municipal lien docket as a lien against said property, and the city 495 solicitor shall be directed to enforce said lien or to collect the charges imposed by the city by 496 any other means that he may deem desirable and most advantageous. 497 498 (Ord. No. 2012-16, § 114-39, 7-9-2012) 499 Page 237

Item #20. 500 That Appendix F – Fees and Fines, Chapter 114- be amended by inserting the text indicated in 501 bold, blue, and deleting the text indicated in red strikeout as follows: 502 503 Chapter 114. Vegetation Chapter 114. Vegetation Fees and Fines Article II. Weeds Every day that a violation of section 114-32 continues shall be considered a separate offense, for which the violator may be tried and convicted without necessity of further notice. Fines not paid within 14 days of the day the fine was issued, including the day the fine was issued, shall be automatically doubled in amount. Sec. 114-33. Failure to maintain proper height; abatement by city; costs and lien Subsec. (a) Summons; (c) A action by city $50.00 minimum per hour for such work that must be done to render the property in compliance with this article City contracted rate. Sec. 114-34. Fines Subsec. (a) Generally In addition to charges or assessments imposed, a fine of not less than $50.00, nor more than $250.00 in accordance with minimum fine schedule in Subsec. (c)(1) In determining the applicable minimum fine, an offense shall be considered a recurring offense only if the defendant has previously pleaded, or been found guilty of causing or permitting the same nuisance at the same location within the past 12 months, or for every day that the violation of section 114-32 continues as per subsection (b) of this section. Subsec. (c)(1) Minimums—Any fine assessed pursuant to subsection (a) of this section shall be no less than the following minimum: First offense $50.00 Second offense $100.00 Third and subsequent offenses $250.00 504 ( Ord. No. 2022-09, 10-10-2022) Page 238

Item #20. 505 SYNOPSIS 506 This is a text amendment to the Weeds Ordinance that allows for a 48-hour notice to property 507 owners of a violation of the weeds ordinance without penalty. This revision also adds a provision 508 for a fine exemption to a violation of the weeds ordinance by city staff due to hospitalization or 509 illness and an appeal process to Council should this exemption be denied by city staff. This revision 510 also revises Appendix F – Fees and Fines for this Chapter to set a minimum payment for the City’s 511 mowing contractors due to rising costs. This revision also includes some clarification of the 512 bamboo ordinance. 513 514 515 Actions History 516 10/09/2023 – Scheduled for First Reading - City Council 517 09/12/2023 – Introduced - Council Committee Meeting of the Whole/Legislative, Finance and Administration 518 Committee 519 06/13/2023 – Concepts for ordinance revisions discussed at Council Committee of the Whole/Legislative Finance, 520 and Administration Committee Page 239

Item #20. Page 240

Item #20. Page 241

Item #20. ACTION FORM PROCEEDING: Regular Council Meeting DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN: Planning, Inspections and Community Development DATE SUBMITTED: October 5, 2023 PREPARED BY: Mary Ellen Gray and Eddie Kopp SUBJECT: Code Revision: Chapter 114- Vegetation, Article II- Weeds, Article III Bamboo, Appendix F – Fees and Fines, Chapter 114 Vegetation REFERENCE: N/A RELATED PROJECT: N/A REVIEWED BY: EXHIBITS: Ordinance Number 2023-10 EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: n/a AMOUNT BUDGETED: n/a FUNDING SOURCE (Dept./Page in CIP & Budget): n/a TIMETABLE: Review of ordinance language September 12, 2023; First Reading October 9, 2023; Public Hearing and Final Action October 23, 2023 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Amend Code as requested BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS The proposed revisions to ordinance change to Chapter 114 Vegetation, Article II Weeds, Article II Bamboo and Appendix F – Fees and Fines, Chapter 114 were discussed at the September 12, 2023 Council Committee meeting of Whole, Legislative, Finance and Administration Committee. The changes are discussed in the enclosed October 4, 2023 memo to Council and articulated in the First Reading Ordinance dated October 9, 2023. Dates First Reading City Council: October 9, 2023 Final Reading City Council: October 23, 2023 Attachments: • October 4, 2023 Memo to Council • First Reading Ordinance #2023-10 dated October 9, 2023 Page 242

FINAL READING Item #21. CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2023‐09 2023‐2024 BUDGET ORDINANCES 1 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 2 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Fifty‐Nine Million Four Hundred Eighteen Thousand 3 Six Hundred dollars ($59,418,600) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated 4 from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal 5 Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2023 and ending June 30, 2024: 6 GENERAL FUND 7 CASH RECEIPT SUMMARY FOR 2023‐2024 8 2023/24 2023/24 9 BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 10 BEGINNING BALANCE $ 8,666,900 $ 8,666,900 11 RECEIPTS 12 FINES AND POLICE REVENUE 521,600 521,600 13 LIBRARY REVENUES 122,200 122,200 14 BUSINESS LICENSES 1,400,000 1,400,000 15 PERMITS AND OTHER FEES 1,702,000 1,702,000 16 MISCELLANEOUS RECEIPTS 3,139,000 3,294,000 17 POLICE EXTRA DUTY 240,000 240,000 18 PROPERTY TAXES 16,056,100 16,056,100 19 RECREATION REVENUE 126,500 126,500 20 FRANCHISE FEE 610,000 610,000 21 SANITATION FEES 3,842,400 3,842,400 22 RENT REVENUE ‐ GARRISON FARM 117,000 117,000 23 COURT OF CHANCERY FEES 3,500,000 3,500,000 24 INVESTMENT INCOME 200,000 200,000 25 RECEIPTS SUBTOTAL 31,576,800 31,731,800 26 INTERFUND SERVICE RECEIPTS 27 INTERFUND SERVICE RECEIPTS GENERAL GOV 1,538,600 1,538,600 28 INTERFUND SERVICE RECEIPTS PUBLIC WORKS 697,100 697,100 29 INTERFUND SERVICE RECEIPTS CENT SRVCS 989,800 989,800 30 INTERFUND SERVICE RECEIPTS FIN ADMIN 3,010,900 3,010,900 31 INTERFUND SERVICE RECEIPTS SUBTOTAL 6,236,400 6,236,400 32 GRANTS: 33 POLICE EXTRA DUTY 165,000 165,000 34 POLICE PENSION GRANT 620,000 620,000 35 GREEN ENERGY GRANT 98,500 98,500 36 GRANTS SUBTOTAL 883,500 883,500 37 TRANSFERS FROM: 38 TRANSFER TAX 2,000,000 2,000,000 39 MUNICIPAL STREET AID 750,000 750,000 40 CIVIL TRAFFIC PENALTIES 150,000 150,000 41 WATER/WASTEWATER 1,000,000 1,000,000 42 ELECTRIC 8,000,000 8,000,000 43 TRANSFERS FROM SUBTOTAL 11,900,000 11,900,000 44 TOTAL REVENUES 50,596,700 50,751,700 45 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCE & REVENUE $ 59,263,600 $ 59,418,600 Page 243 1

FINAL READING Item #21. 46 2023‐2024 BUDGET ORDINANCES 47 GENERAL FUND ‐ EXPENDITURES AND BUDGET BALANCE FOR 2023‐2024 48 2023/24 2023/24 49 DEPARTMENT EXPENSES BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 50 CITY CLERK $ 414,200 $ 414,200 51 COUNCIL 260,000 260,000 52 PLANNING 826,100 826,100 53 CITY MANAGER 1,300,100 1,300,100 54 HUMAN RESOURCES 501,300 501,300 55 MAYOR 245,200 245,200 56 FIRE 851,600 851,600 57 LIFE SAFETY 690,600 690,600 58 CODE ENFORCEMENT 1,173,600 1,173,600 59 INSPECTIONS 800,800 800,800 60 POLICE 21,550,900 21,550,900 61 POLICE EXTRA DUTY 405,000 405,000 62 PUBLIC WORKS ‐ ADMINISTRATION 646,900 646,900 63 STREETS 768,600 782,500 64 SANITATION 3,060,100 3,060,100 65 GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 1,741,100 1,741,100 66 STORMWATER 906,400 906,400 67 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT 822,100 822,100 68 PUBLIC WORKS ‐ ENGINEERING 279,300 279,300 69 LIBRARY 2,040,700 2,040,700 70 RECREATION 1,549,600 1,549,600 71 PROCUREMENT & INVENTORY 873,600 873,600 72 FLEET MAINTENANCE 1,078,600 1,078,600 73 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 874,100 874,100 74 FINANCE 1,032,300 1,032,300 75 CUSTOMER SERVICE 1,417,500 1,417,500 76 DEPARTMENT SUBTOTALS 46,110,300 46,124,200 77 OTHER EXPENSES 78 DEBT SERVICE 630,700 630,700 79 CONTRIBUTION TO DDP 150,000 150,000 80 INSURANCE 970,000 970,000 81 RETIREES HEALTH CARE 2,548,000 2,548,000 83 BANK & CREDIT CARD FEES 32,000 32,000 84 STREET LIGHTS 850,000 850,000 85 OTHER EXPENSE SUBTOTAL 5,180,700 5,180,700 86 TRANSFERS 87 TRANSFER TO CAPITAL FUND ‐ PROJECTS 2,920,100 2,920,100 88 APPROP. TO THE POLICE PENSION FUND 350,800 350,800 89 APPROP. POLICE PENSION ‐ STATE GRANT 620,000 620,000 90 APPROP. TO TE GENERAL PENSION FUND 1,000,000 1,000,000 91 TRANSFER TO ECONOMIC DEV. RESERVE 1,000,000 1,000,000 92 TRANSFER TO ELECTRIC FUND (ERP) 25,000 25,000 93 TRANSFER TO INVENTORY RESERVE 25,000 25,000 94 TRANSFERS SUBTOTAL 5,940,900 5,940,900 95 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 57,231,900 57,245,800 96 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 2,031,700 2,172,800 97 TOTALS $ 59,263,600 $ 59,418,600 98 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 99 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 100 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. Page 244 2

FINAL READING 101 CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2023‐09 Item #21. 102 GOVERNMENTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND 103 REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2023‐2024 104 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 105 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Fifteen Million Two Hundred and Twenty‐Six Thousand Three Hundred 106 dollars ($15,226,300) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues 107 and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year 108 beginning July 1, 2023 and ending June 30, 2024: 109 REVENUES 110 2023/24 2023/24 111 BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 112 BEGINNING BALANCE ‐ PROJECTS $ 676,900 $ 6,536,900 113 REVENUES 114 LINE OF CREDIT (HEAVY DUTY VEHICLES) 1,731,000 1,731,000 115 STATE GRANTS ‐ Other 588,000 2,511,000 116 TRANSFER FROM GENERAL FUND 2,920,100 2,920,100 117 TRANSFER FROM PARKLAND RESERVE ‐ 1,077,300 118 TRANSFER FROM LODGING TAX 450,000 450,000 119 SUBTOTAL PROJECT RECEIPTS 5,689,100 8,689,400 120 TOTAL FUNDING SOURCES 5,689,100 8,689,400 121 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCE AND REVENUES $ 6,366,000 $ 15,226,300 122 EXPENSE SUMMARY 123 2023/24 2023/24 124 EXPENDITURES BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 125 FIRE $ 419,600 $ 419,600 126 GROUNDS 214,500 249,300 127 LIBRARY ‐ 87,300 128 RECREATION 835,000 2,900,600 129 CODE ENFORCEMENT 34,600 63,600 130 INSPECTIONS ‐ 30,100 131 POLICE 1,186,500 1,320,500 132 STREETS 852,300 3,667,100 133 STORMWATER 1,135,000 3,388,100 134 SANITATION 707,800 1,464,400 135 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 115,500 115,500 136 PUBLIC WORKS ‐ ADMINISTRATION 30,000 30,000 137 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT 80,000 159,300 138 GENERAL FUND ENG 48,300 48,300 139 PROCUREMENT & INVENTORY ‐ 70,000 140 FLEET MAINTENANCE 30,000 535,700 141 DEPARTMENT SUBTOTAL 5,689,100 14,549,400 142 BUDGET BALANCE 676,900 676,900 143 TOTAL BUDGET BALANCE & EXPENDITURES $ 6,366,000 $ 15,226,300 144 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 145 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 146 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. Page 245 3

FINAL READING 147 CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2023‐09 Item #21. 148 GENERAL FUND CONTINGENCY 149 CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2023‐2024 150 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 151 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Seven Hundred Fifty‐Seven Thousand Two Hundred dollars ($757,200) 152 or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the 153 use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2023 and ending 154 June 30, 2024: 155 CASH RECEIPTS 156 2023/24 2023/24 157 BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 158 BEGINNING BALANCE $ 747,700 $ 747,700 159 INTEREST EARNED 9,500 9,500 160 TOTALS $ 757,200 $ 757,200 161 EXPENSE SUMMARY 162 2023/24 2023/24 163 BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 164 CARRY FORWARD TO NEXT YEAR $ 757,200 $ 757,200 165 TOTALS $ 757,200 $ 757,200 166 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 167 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 168 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. Page 246 4

FINAL READING 169 CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2023‐09 Item #21. 170 GOVERNMENTAL CAPITAL ASSET RESERVE 171 CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2023‐2024 172 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 173 The amount hereinafter named aggregating One Million Three Hundred Thirty‐Nine Thousand dollars 174 ($1,339,000) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues 175 and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year 176 beginning July 1, 2023 and ending June 30, 2024: 177 CASH RECEIPTS 178 2023/24 2023/24 179 BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 180 BEGINNING BALANCE $ 1,309,000 $ 1,309,000 181 INTEREST EARNINGS 30,000 30,000 182 TOTALS $ 1,339,000 $ 1,339,000 183 EXPENSE SUMMARY 184 2023/24 2023/24 185 BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 186 CARRY FORWARD TO NEXT YEAR 1,339,000 1,339,000 187 TOTALS $ 1,339,000 $ 1,339,000 188 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 189 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 190 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. Page 247 5

FINAL READING Item #21. 191 CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2023‐09 192 PARKLAND/RECREATION RESERVE 193 CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2023‐2024 194 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 195 The amount hereinafter named aggregating One Hundred and Eighty‐Five Thousand Three Hundred dollars 196 ($185,300) much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other 197 funds for the use other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the 198 fiscal year beginning July 1, 2023 and ending June 30, 2024: 199 OPERATING REVENUES 200 2023/24 2023/24 201 BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 202 BEGINNING BALANCE $ 105,300 $ 185,300 203 TOTALS $ 105,300 $ 185,300 204 OPERATING EXPENSES 205 2023/24 2023/24 206 BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 207 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 105,300 185,300 208 TOTALS $ 105,300 $ 185,300 209 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 210 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 211 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. Page 248 6

FINAL READING Item #21. 212 CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2023‐09 213 WATER FUND 214 REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2023‐2024 215 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 216 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Nine Million Three Hundred Sixty‐Eight Thousand Six 217 Hundred dollars ($9,368,600) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from 218 current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for 219 the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2023 and ending June 30, 2024: 220 2023/24 2023/24 221 BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 222 BEGINNING BALANCE ‐ WATER $ 2,082,900 $ 2,082,900 223 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES 2,082,900 2,082,900 224 BASE REVENUE 225 WATER SERVICES 6,550,000 6,550,000 226 WATER TANK SPACE LEASING 435,500 435,500 227 WATER IMPACT FEES 225,000 225,000 228 INTEREST ‐ WATER 50,000 50,000 229 MISCELLANEOUS SERVICE FEE 25,200 25,200 230 TOTAL REVENUES 7,285,700 7,285,700 231 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES AND REVENUES $ 9,368,600 $ 9,368,600 Page 249 7

FINAL READING Item #21. 232 2023‐2024 BUDGET ORDINANCES 233 WATER FUND ‐ EXPENSES AND BUDGET BALANCE FOR 2023‐2024 234 2023/24 2023/24 235 DIRECT EXPENSES BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 236 ENGINEERING & INSPECTION $ 386,500 $ 386,500 237 WATER DEPARTMENT 862,100 862,100 238 WATER TREATMENT PLANT 2,907,500 2,907,500 239 DIRECT EXPENDITURE SUBTOTAL 4,156,100 4,156,100 240 OTHER EXPENSES 241 DEBT SERVICE ‐ WATER 700,000 700,000 242 RETIREES HEALTH CARE 226,900 226,900 243 INTERFUND SERVICE FEES 1,138,000 1,138,000 244 BANK & CREDIT CARD FEES 27,000 27,000 245 OTHER EXPENSES SUBTOTAL 2,091,900 2,091,900 246 TRANSFER TO: 247 GENERAL FUND FROM WATER 500,000 500,000 248 WATER IMP AND EXT 1,536,700 1,536,700 249 ELECTRIC FUND (ERP) 25,000 25,000 250 TRANSFER TO INVENTORY WRITE‐OFFS 5,000 5,000 251 TRANSFER TO SUBTOTAL 2,066,700 2,066,700 252 TOTAL EXPENSES 8,314,700 8,314,700 253 BUDGET BALANCES 254 BUDGET BALANCE WATER 1,053,900 1,053,900 255 BUDGET BALANCE SUBTOTALS 1,053,900 1,053,900 256 TOTAL CURRENT YEAR BALANCES AND EXPENSES $ 9,368,600 $ 9,368,600 257 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 258 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 259 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. Page 250 8

FINAL READING Item #21. 260 CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2023‐09 261 WATER IMPROVEMENT & EXTENSION FUND 262 CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2023‐2024 263 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 264 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Eight Million Five Hundred and Eighty‐Five Thousand 265 One Hundred dollars ($8,585,100) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated 266 from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal 267 Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2023 and ending June 30, 2024: 268 CASH RECEIPTS 269 2023/24 2023/24 270 BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 271 BEGINNING BALANCE ‐ WATER $ 3,630,700 $ 4,851,300 272 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES 3,630,700 4,851,300 273 REVENUES 274 STATE GRANT ‐ WATER 2,072,000 2,072,000 275 TRANS FR OPERATING FUND ‐ WATER 1,536,700 1,536,700 276 TRANSFER FR WATER IMPACT FEE 75,100 75,100 277 INTEREST INCOME 50,000 50,000 278 TOTAL REVENUES 3,733,800 3,733,800 279 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES & REVENUES $ 7,364,500 $ 8,585,100 280 EXPENSE SUMMARY 281 2023/24 2023/24 282 EXPENSES BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 283 ENGINEERING $ 48,000 $ 48,000 284 WATER 4,579,300 6,299,000 285 WATER TREATMENT PLANT 56,500 217,300 286 TOTAL EXPENSES 4,683,800 6,564,300 287 BUDGET BALANCE ‐ WATER 2,680,700 2,020,800 288 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE SUBTOTALS 2,680,700 2,020,800 289 TOTAL BUDGET BALANCES & EXPENSES $ 7,364,500 $ 8,585,100 290 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 291 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 292 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. Page 251 9

FINAL READING Item #21. 293 CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2023‐09 294 WASTEWATER FUND 295 REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2023‐2024 296 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 297 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Fifteen Million One Hundred and Thirty‐Five Thousand Six 298 Hundred dollars ($15,135,600) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from 299 current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government 300 for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2023 and ending June 30, 2024: 301 2023/24 2023/24 302 BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 303 BEGINNING BALANCE ‐ WASTEWATER $ 4,534,400 $ 4,534,400 304 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES 4,534,400 4,534,400 305 BASE REVENUE 306 WASTEWATER SERVICES 4,600,000 4,600,000 307 WASTEWATER TREATMENT SERVICES 3,526,000 3,526,000 308 GROUNDWATER INFLOW ADJUSTMENT 2,200,000 2,200,000 309 WASTEWATER IMPACT FEES 225,000 225,000 310 INTEREST ‐ WASTEWATER 50,000 50,000 311 MISCELLANEOUS SERVICE FEE 200 200 312 TOTAL REVENUES 10,601,200 10,601,200 313 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES AND REVENUES $ 15,135,600 $ 15,135,600 Page 252 10

FINAL READING 314 Item #21. 2023‐2024 BUDGET ORDINANCES 315 WASTEWATER FUND ‐ EXPENSES AND BUDGET BALANCE FOR 2023‐2024 316 2023/24 2023/24 317 DIRECT EXPENSES BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 318 ENGINEERING & INSPECTION $ 304,100 $ 304,100 319 WASTEWATER DEPARTMENT 1,345,100 1,345,100 320 DIRECT EXPENDITURE SUBTOTAL 1,649,200 1,649,200 321 OTHER EXPENSES 322 DEBT SERVICE ‐ WASTEWATER 696,200 696,200 323 RETIREES HEALTH CARE 110,000 110,000 324 KENT COUNTY TREATMENT CHARGE 4,730,000 4,730,000 325 INTERFUND SERVICE FEES 870,900 870,900 326 BANK & CREDIT CARD FEES 10,000 10,000 327 OTHER EXPENSES SUBTOTAL 6,417,100 6,417,100 328 TRANSFER TO: 329 GENERAL FUND FROM WASTEWATER 500,000 500,000 330 WASTEWATER IMP AND EXT 2,270,900 2,270,900 331 ELETRIC FUND (ERP) 25,000 25,000 332 TRANSFER TO INVENTORY WRITE‐OFFS 5,000 5,000 333 TRANSFER TO SUBTOTAL 2,800,900 2,800,900 334 TOTAL EXPENSES 10,867,200 10,867,200 335 BUDGET BALANCES 336 BUDGET BALANCE WASTEWATER 4,268,400 4,268,400 337 BUDGET BALANCE SUBTOTALS 4,268,400 4,268,400 338 TOTAL CURRENT YEAR BALANCES AND EXPENSES $ 15,135,600 $ 15,135,600 339 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 340 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 341 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. Page 253 11

FINAL READING CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2023‐09 Item #21. 342 343 WASTEWATER IMPROVEMENT & EXTENSION FUND 344 CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2023‐2024 345 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 346 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Five Million Two Hundred and Sixty‐Five Thousand Nine 347 Hundred dollars ($5,265,900) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated 348 current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government 349 for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2023 and ending June 30, 2024: 350 CASH RECEIPTS 351 2023/24 2023/24 352 BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 353 BEGINNING BALANCE ‐ WASTEWATER $ 806,300 $ 2,664,000 354 REVENUES 355 TRANS FR OPERATING FUND ‐ WW 2,270,900 2,270,900 356 TRANSFER FR WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE 306,000 306,000 357 INTEREST INCOME 25,000 25,000 358 TOTAL REVENUES 2,601,900 2,601,900 359 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES & REVENUES $ 3,408,200 $ 5,265,900 360 EXPENSE SUMMARY 361 2023/24 2023/24 362 EXPENSES BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 363 WASTEWATER $ 2,576,900 $ 4,428,600 364 TOTAL EXPENSES 2,576,900 4,428,600 365 BUDGET BALANCE ‐ WASTEWATER 831,300 837,300 366 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE SUBTOTALS 831,300 837,300 367 TOTAL BUDGET BALANCES & EXPENSES $ 3,408,200 $ 5,265,900 368 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 369 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 370 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. Page 254 12

FINAL READING Item #21. 371 CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2023‐09 372 WATER CAPITAL ASSET RESERVE 373 CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2023‐2024 374 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 375 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Five Hundred Eighty‐Seven Thousand Seven Hundred dollars 376 ($587,700) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues 377 and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year 378 beginning July 1, 2023 and ending June 30, 2024: 379 CASH RECEIPTS 380 2023/24 2023/24 381 BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 382 BEGINNING BALANCE ‐ WATER $ 582,700 $ 582,700 383 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES 582,700 582,700 384 RECEIPTS 385 INTEREST EARNINGS ‐ WATER 5,000 5,000 386 TOTAL RECEIPTS 5,000 5,000 387 TOTALS $ 587,700 $ 587,700 388 EXPENSE SUMMARY 389 2023/24 2023/24 390 BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 391 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE ‐ WATER $ 587,700 $ 587,700 392 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE SUBTOTALS 587,700 587,700 393 TOTALS $ 587,700 $ 587,700 394 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 395 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 396 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. Page 255 13

FINAL READING Item #21. 397 CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2023‐09 398 WASTEWATER CAPITAL ASSET RESERVE 399 CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2023‐2024 400 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 401 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Five Hundred Eighty‐Six Thousand Three Hundred dollars 402 ($586,300) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues 403 and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year 404 beginning July 1, 2023 and ending June 30, 2024: 405 CASH RECEIPTS 406 2023/24 2023/24 407 BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 408 BEGINNING BALANCE ‐ WASTEWATER $ 581,300 $ 581,300 409 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES 581,300 581,300 410 RECEIPTS 411 INTEREST EARNINGS ‐ WASTEWATER 5,000 5,000 412 TOTAL RECEIPTS 5,000 5,000 413 TOTALS $ 586,300 $ 586,300 414 EXPENSE SUMMARY 415 2023/24 2023/24 416 BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 417 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE ‐ WASTEWATER $ 586,300 $ 586,300 418 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE SUBTOTALS 586,300 586,300 419 TOTALS $ 586,300 $ 586,300 420 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 421 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 422 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. Page 256 14

FINAL READING Item #21. 423 CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2023‐09 424 WATER IMPACT FEE RESERVE 425 CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2023‐2024 426 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 427 The amount hereinafter named aggregating One Million Eight Hundred Fifty‐Nine Thousand Eight Hundred 428 dollars ($1,859,800) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues 429 and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal 430 year beginning July 1, 2023 and ending June 30, 2024: 431 CASH RECEIPTS 432 2023/24 2023/24 433 BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 434 BEGINNING BALANCE ‐ WATER $ 1,072,600 $ 1,845,800 435 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES 1,072,600 1,845,800 436 RECEIPTS 437 INTEREST EARNINGS ‐ WATER 14,000 14,000 438 TOTAL RECEIPTS 14,000 14,000 439 TOTALS $ 1,086,600 $ 1,859,800 440 EXPENSE SUMMARY 441 2023/24 2023/24 442 BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 443 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE ‐ WATER $ 1,011,500 $ 1,784,700 444 TRANSFER TO I & E FUND FROM WATER IMPACT FEES 75,100 75,100 445 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE SUBTOTALS 1,086,600 1,859,800 446 TOTALS $ 1,086,600 $ 1,859,800 447 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 448 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 449 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. Page 257 15

FINAL READING Item #21. 450 CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2023‐09 451 WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE RESERVE 452 CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2023‐2024 453 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 454 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Five Million Five Hundred Ninety‐Three Thousand Nine Hundred 455 dollars ($5,593,900) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current 456 revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal 457 year beginning July 1, 2023 and ending June 30, 2024: 458 CASH RECEIPTS 459 2023/24 2023/24 460 BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 461 BEGINNING BALANCE ‐ WASTEWATER $ 5,075,300 $ 5,553,900 462 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES 5,075,300 5,553,900 463 RECEIPTS 464 INTEREST EARNINGS ‐ WASTEWATER 40,000 40,000 465 TOTAL RECEIPTS 40,000 40,000 466 TOTALS $ 5,115,300 $ 5,593,900 467 EXPENSE SUMMARY 468 2023/24 2023/24 469 BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 470 TRANSFER TO I & E FUND FROM WASTEWATER IMPACT FEES $ 306,000 $ 306,000 471 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE ‐ WASTEWATER $ 4,809,300 $ 5,287,900 472 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE SUBTOTALS 5,115,300 5,593,900 473 TOTALS $ 5,115,300 $ 5,593,900 474 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 475 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 476 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. Page 258 16

FINAL READING Item #21. 477 CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2023‐09 478 WATER CONTINGENCY RESERVE 479 CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2023‐2024 480 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 481 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Two Hundred Eighty‐One Thousand Two Hundred dollars 482 ($281,200) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and 483 other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year 484 beginning July 1, 2023 and ending June 30, 2024: 485 CASH RECEIPTS 486 2023/24 2023/24 487 BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 488 BEGINNING BALANCE ‐ WATER $ 278,200 $ 278,200 489 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES 278,200 278,200 490 RECEIPTS 491 INTEREST EARNINGS ‐ WATER 3,000 3,000 492 TOTAL RECEIPTS 3,000 3,000 493 TOTALS $ 281,200 $ 281,200 494 BUDGET SUMMARY 495 2023/24 2023/24 496 BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 497 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE ‐ WATER $ 281,200 $ 281,200 498 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE SUBTOTALS 281,200 281,200 499 TOTAL EXPENSES AND CURRENT YEAR BALANCES $ 281,200 $ 281,200 500 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 501 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 502 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. Page 259 17

FINAL READING Item #21. 503 CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2023‐09 504 WASTEWATER CONTINGENCY RESERVE 505 CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2023‐2024 506 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 507 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Three Hundred Ten Thousand Six Hundred dollars 508 ($310,600) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and 509 other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning 510 July 1, 2023 and ending June 30, 2024: 511 CASH RECEIPTS 512 2023/24 2023/24 513 BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 514 BEGINNING BALANCE ‐ WASTEWATER $ 307,600 $ 307,600 515 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES 307,600 307,600 516 RECEIPTS 517 INTEREST EARNINGS ‐ WASTEWATER 3,000 3,000 518 TOTAL RECEIPTS 3,000 3,000 519 TOTALS $ 310,600 $ 310,600 520 BUDGET SUMMARY 521 2023/24 2023/24 522 BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 523 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE ‐ WASTEWATER $ 310,600 $ 310,600 524 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE SUBTOTALS 310,600 310,600 525 TOTAL EXPENSES AND CURRENT YEAR BALANCES $ 310,600 $ 310,600 526 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 527 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 528 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. Page 260 18

FINAL READING CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2023‐09 Item #21. 529 530 ELECTRIC REVENUE FUND 531 REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2023‐2024 532 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 533 The amount hereinafter named aggregating One Hundred Nineteen Million Six Hundred Twenty‐Six 534 Thousand Five Hundred dollars ($119,626,500) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby 535 appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal 536 Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2023 and ending June 30, 2024: 537 2023/24 2023/24 538 BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 539 BEGINNING BALANCE $ 24,584,100 $ 24,584,100 540 DISTRIBUTION OF EARNINGS ‐ PCA CREDIT ‐ ‐ 541 BEGINNING BALANCE ‐ ADJUSTED 24,584,100 24,584,100 542 BASE REVENUE 543 DIRECT SALES TO CUSTOMER 91,107,000 91,107,000 544 UTILITY TAX 1,636,400 1,636,400 545 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 528,000 528,000 546 RENT REVENUE 136,000 136,000 547 GREEN ENERGY 135,000 135,000 548 INTEREST EARNINGS 525,000 525,000 549 TRANSFER FROM RATE STABILIZATION 900,000 900,000 550 TRANSFER FROM OTHER FUNDS (ERP) 75,000 75,000 551 TOTAL REVENUES 95,042,400 95,042,400 552 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCE & REVENUES $ 119,626,500 $ 119,626,500 Page 261 19

FINAL READING 2023‐2024 BUDGET ORDINANCES Item #21. 553 554 ELECTRIC REVENUE FUND EXPENSES AND BUDGET BALANCE FOR 2023‐2024 555 2023/24 2023/24 556 EXPENSES BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 557 POWER SUPPLY $ 31,630,700 $ 31,630,700 558 SOLAR ENERGY 3,468,200 3,468,200 559 SOLAR RENEWAL ENERGY CREDITS 376,100 376,100 560 POWER SUPPLY MANAGEMENT 660,200 660,200 561 REC'S (Renewable Energy Credits) 5,250,400 5,250,400 562 RGGI (Regional Greenhouse Gas Init.) 55,500 55,500 563 PJM CHARGES ‐ ENERGY 18,237,300 18,237,300 564 PJM CHARGES ‐ TRANSMISSION & FEES 14,912,800 14,912,800 565 CAPACITY CHARGES 10,742,300 10,742,300 566 SUB‐TOTAL POWER SUPPLY 85,333,500 85,333,500 567 PLANT OPERATIONS 2,159,400 2,159,400 568 GENERATIONS FUELS 26,100 26,100 569 PJM SPOT MARKET ENERGY (48,600) (48,600) 570 PJM CREDITS (705,000) (705,000) 571 CAPACITY CREDITS (4,206,800) (4,206,800) 572 GENERATION SUBTOTAL (2,774,900) (2,774,900) 573 POWER SUPPLY & GENERATION SUBTOTAL 82,558,600 82,558,600 574 DIRECT EXPENDITURES 575 TRANSMISSION/DISTRIBUTION 4,893,100 4,893,100 576 ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING 1,826,600 1,826,600 577 ADMINISTRATION 1,020,200 1,020,200 578 METER READING 460,500 460,500 579 SYSTEMS OPERATIONS 1,008,300 1,008,300 580 DIRECT EXPENDITURE SUBTOTALS 9,208,700 9,208,700 581 OTHER EXPENSES: 582 UTILITY TAX 1,636,400 1,636,400 583 ALLOW FOR UNCOLLECTIBLES 300,000 300,000 584 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES ‐ RFP'S 50,000 50,000 585 LEGAL EXPENSES 50,000 50,000 586 RETIREES HEALTH CARE 997,000 997,000 587 GREEN ENERGY GRANT 135,000 135,000 588 INTERFUND SERVICE FEES 4,227,500 4,227,500 589 INTEREST ON DEPOSITS 20,000 20,000 590 BANK & CREDIT CARD FEES 635,000 635,000 591 DEBT SERVICE 1,482,600 1,482,600 592 STORM EXPENSE 150,000 150,000 593 OTHER EXPENSES SUBTOTAL 9,683,500 9,683,500 594 TRANSFER TO: 595 GENERAL FUND 8,000,000 8,000,000 596 OTHER RESERVES 28,500 28,500 597 TRANSFER TO INVENTORY WRITE‐OFFS 100,000 100,000 598 TRANSFER TO SUBTOTAL 8,128,500 8,128,500 599 TOTAL EXPENSES 109,579,300 109,579,300 600 BUDGET BALANCE ‐ WORKING CAPITAL 10,047,200 10,047,200 601 TOTALS $ 119,626,500 $ 119,626,500 602 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 603 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 604 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. Page 262 20

FINAL READING Item #21. 605 CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2023‐09 606 ELECTRIC UTILITY IMPROVEMENT AND EXTENSION FUND 607 CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2023‐2024 608 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 609 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Forty Million Fifty‐Seven Thousand Seven Hundred 610 dollars ($40,057,700) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from 611 current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government 612 for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2023 and ending June 30, 2024: 613 REVENUES 614 2023/24 2023/24 615 BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 616 BEGINNING BALANCE $ 16,645,900 $ 24,414,800 617 REVENUES 618 GRANT/BOND/LOAN ‐ 5,000,000 619 GENERAL SERVICE BILLING 200,000 200,000 620 TRF FROM DEPRECIATION RSV ‐ 8,442,900 621 TRF FROM FUTURE CAPACITY 2,000,000 2,000,000 622 TOTAL REVENUES 2,200,000 15,642,900 623 TOTALS $ 18,845,900 $ 40,057,700 624 EXPENSE SUMMARY 625 2023/24 2023/24 626 EXPENSES BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 627 ELECTRIC ADMINISTRATION $ 2,000,000 $ 2,000,000 628 ELECTRIC GENERATION 275,000 13,163,600 629 TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION 2,497,400 2,501,400 630 ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING 2,076,000 8,539,200 631 ERP SYSTEM ‐ 1,856,000 632 TOTAL EXPENSES 6,848,400 28,060,200 633 BUDGET BALANCE 11,997,500 11,997,500 634 TOTAL BUDGET BALANCE & EXPENSES $ 18,845,900 $ 40,057,700 635 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 636 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 637 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. Page 263 21

FINAL READING Item #21. 638 CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2023‐09 639 ELECTRIC UTILITY CONTINGENCY RESERVE 640 CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2023‐2024 641 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 642 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Nine Hundred Sixty‐One Thousand Two Hundred dollars 643 ($961,200) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues 644 and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year 645 beginning July 1, 2023 and ending June 30, 2024: 646 CASH RECEIPTS 647 2023/24 2023/24 648 BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 649 BEGINNING BALANCE $ 953,200 $ 953,200 650 RECEIPTS 651 INTEREST EARNINGS 8,000 8,000 652 TOTAL RECEIPTS 8,000 8,000 653 TOTALS $ 961,200 $ 961,200 654 EXPENSE SUMMARY 655 2023/24 2023/24 656 BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 657 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE $ 961,200 $ 961,200 658 TOTALS $ 961,200 $ 961,200 659 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 660 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 661 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. Page 264 22

FINAL READING Item #21. 662 CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2023‐09 663 ELECTRIC UTILITY DEPRECIATION RESERVE 664 SOURCES AND USE OF FUNDS FOR 2023‐2024 665 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 666 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Twelve Million Five Hundred Eighty‐One Thousand Three 667 dollars ($12,581,300) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from 668 current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government 669 for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2023 and ending June 30, 2024: 670 CASH RECEIPTS 671 2023/24 2023/24 672 BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 673 BEGINNING BALANCE $ 12,481,300 $ 12,481,300 674 INTEREST EARNINGS 100,000 100,000 675 TOTALS $ 12,581,300 $ 12,581,300 676 BUDGET SUMMARY 677 2023/24 2023/24 678 BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 679 TRANSFER TO ELECTRIC I & E $ ‐ $ 8,442,900 680 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 12,581,300 4,138,400 681 TOTALS $ 12,581,300 $ 12,581,300 681 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 682 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 683 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. Page 265 23

FINAL READING Item #21. 684 CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2023‐09 685 ELECTRIC UTILITY FUTURE CAPACITY RESERVE 686 SOURCES AND USE OF FUNDS FOR 2023‐2024 687 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 688 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Twelve Million Seven Hundred Sixteen Thousand Nine 689 Hundred dollars ($12,716,900) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated 690 from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal 691 Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2023 and ending June 30, 2024: 692 CASH RECEIPTS 693 2023/24 2023/24 694 BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 695 BEGINNING BALANCE $ 14,581,900 $ 14,581,900 696 INTEREST EARNINGS 135,000 135,000 697 TOTALS $ 14,716,900 $ 14,716,900 698 BUDGET SUMMARY 699 2023/24 2023/24 700 BEGINNING CARRY FORWARD 701 TRANSFE