ANNUAL COUNCIL Packet- REVISED

CITY OF DOVER, DELAWARE ANNUAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, May 13, 2024 at 6:30 PM City Hall Council Chambers, 15 Loockerman Plaza, Dover, Delaware AGENDA THIS AGENDA AND PACKET HAVE BEEN REVISED BY REMOVING EAST DOVER ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2ND-GRADE CLASS FROM PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND THE PRESENTATION OF COLORS. 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/yz71pl Event number: 2531 530 6411 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. PRELUDE - Madison Skelley (Caesar Rodney High School) INVOCATION - Bishop Carol Boggerty PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - South Dover Elementary School 4th Grade Spanish Immersion Class NATIONAL ANTHEM - Izabella Raughley (Dover High School) ADOPTION OF AGENDA Page 1

ANNUAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING - May 13, 2024 PAGE 2 ELECTION OF COUNCIL PRESIDENT/VICE-MAYOR 1. Election of Council President/Vice Mayor 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 so requests, in which event the matter shall be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered a separate item. PROCLAMATIONS 2. Community Action Month 3. Economic Development Week 4. National Police Week 5. Public Works Week STATE OF THE CITY MESSAGE - MAYOR ROBIN R. CHRISTIANSEN 6. State of the City Message - Mayor Robin R. Christiansen PUBLIC HEARING 7. Removal of certain parcels (22 Acres) from the Downtown Development District RESOLUTIONS 8. Resolution No. 2024-06 - Supporting the Application for a Five-Year Extended Designation as a Downtown Development District PUBLIC HEARING/FINAL READING - The First Reading of the Proposed Ordinances was accomplished during the Council meeting of MARCH 25, 2024. The ordinance is available at the entrance of the Council Chambers and 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. 9. Proposed Ordinance #2024-09-Lands of Linda Duncan at 600 Forest Street Ordinance 2024-09 Review and Action on a rezoning application for a parcel of land consisting of 0.51 acres+/-. The property is zoned IO (Institutional and Office Zone) and subject to the H (Historic District Zone) and the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone). The proposed zoning for the property is C-2A (Limited Central Commercial Zone) and remaining subject to the H (Historic District Zone) and the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone). The property is located on the south side Forest Street and near the west end of Loockerman Street. Page 2

ANNUAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING - May 13, 2024 PAGE 3 (The owner of record is Linda Duncan. The equitable owner is Erin Barrett. Property Address: 600 Forest Street. Tax Parcel: ED-05-076.12-02-44.00-000 and ED-05-076.12-02- 45.00-000. Council District 4.) 10. Proposed Ordinance #2024-10-Lands of White Marsh Environmental Systems Inc at 1100 & 1110 S Little Creek Rd Ordinance 2024-10 Review and Action on a rezoning application for a parcel of land consisting of 10.7146 acres +/-. The property is zoned CPO (Commercial and Professional Office Zone). The proposed zoning for the property is IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing Zone). The property is located on the south side of South Little Creek Road and west of State Route 1. The owner of record is White Marsh Environmental Systems Inc. c/o Tidewater Utilities. Property Addresses: 1100 and 1110 S. Little Creek Road. Tax Parcel: ED-05-077.12-01- 03.00-000. Council District 2. CONSENT AGENDA ADOPTION OF MINUTES 11. Regular City Council Meeting of April 22, 2024 COMMITTEE REPORTS 12. Council Committee of the Whole Report April 23, 2024 Utility Committee 13. Discussion and Update on Customer Service Utility Policies (Allison Haines, Interim Customer Service Director) (Committee Action Not Required) Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee 14. Proposed Ordinance #2024-07 - Amending Chapter 80 - Personnel, Article IV - Pension Plans and Retirement Benefits, Division 3 - General Employee Pension Plan (Councilman Anderson and Councilwoman Dr. Pillsbury)(On April 19, 2024, the General Employee Pension Plan Board held a Special Meeting to review the proposed ordinance as presented at the April 09, 2024, Legislative, Finance, and Administration meeting.) (Committee Recommendation: Recommended deferring action until the legal review is completed.) 15. Discussion - Information Technology Improvements and Council Support (Larry Josefowski, Information Technology Director) (Committee Action Not Required) Page 3

ANNUAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING - May 13, 2024 PAGE 4 16. Enterprise Fund for BLS Emergency Transportation Costs (David S. Hugg, III, City Manager) (Committee Recommendation: Approval of Proposed Ordinance #2024-12.) MONTHLY REPORTS - March 2024 17. City Council’s Community Enhancement Fund Report 18. City Manager’s Report 19. Controller/Treasurer's Budget Report 20. Fire Chief's Report 21. Police Chief's Report APPOINTMENTS/REAPPOINTMENTS RECOMMENDED BY CITY COUNCIL 22. 2024/25 Annual Staff Appointments A. Interim Chief Building Inspector - Sharon Duca B. Assistant City Clerk - Arielle M. Rivera C. Assistant Treasurer - Andria L. Bennett D. Assistant Treasurer - Arielle M. Rivera E. Fire Marshal - Jason Osika F. City Solicitor - Nicholas Rodriguez G. Deputy City Solicitor - Gary Junge APPOINTMENTS/REAPPOINTMENTS RECOMMENDED BY MAYOR CHRISTIANSEN 23. Election Board - Three-Year Term to Expire May 2027 A. First District B. Second District 24. Construction and Property Maintenance Code Board of Appeals - One-Year Term to Expire May 13, 2025 A. Representative of Homeowners B. Representative of Local Real Estate Industry Association Page 4

ANNUAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING - May 13, 2024 PAGE 5 APPOINTMENTS/REAPPOINTMENTS RECOMMENDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT 25. 2024/25 Annual Committee Appointments Recommended by Council President A. City/County Committee (Liaison to Kent County) B. Council Committee of the Whole Subcommittees (Recommended by the Council President and Committee Chairs) C. Downtown Dover Partnership Board of Directors D. Economic Development Committee E. General Employee Pension Plan Board F. Kent County Tourism Board of Directors (Voting Liaison) G. Kent Economic Partnership Board of Directors (Voting Liaison Member) H. Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) Board I. Police Pension Plan - Retirement Committee RESOLUTIONS 26. Resolution No. 2024-07 - Authorizing Signatures for Banking Services on Behalf of the City of Dover, Delaware-Controller/Treasurer, Assistant Controller/Treasurer, and Assistant Treasurers SPECIAL ELECTION TO FILL VACANCIES - ROBBINS HOSE COMPANY-FIRE LINE OFFICERS (TERM TO EXPIRE DECEMBER 10, 2024) 27. Deputy Fire Chief - Brian Bashista 28. First Assistant Fire Chief - Jason Boc 29. Second Assistant Fire Chief - James Iannucci 30. Third Assistant Fire Chief - Brian Cullen 31. Fourth Assistant Fire Chief - Christopher Riale 32. First Fire Line Captain - Drew Kuntzi 33. Second Fire Line Captain - Nickolas Senne ITEMS NOT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA ORDINANCES FIRST READING - The First Reading is offered on the Proposed Ordinance. Final action by Council will take place during the Second Reading on JUNE 10, 2024. The ordinance is available at Page 5

ANNUAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING - May 13, 2024 PAGE 6 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. 34. Proposed Ordinance #2024-12 - Amending Chapter 38 - Emergencies by adding Article III - Emergency Services FINAL READING - The First Reading of the Proposed Ordinance was accomplished during the Council Meeting of APRIL 22, 2024. The ordinance is available at the entrance of the Council Chambers and on the City's website at www.cityofdover.com under "Government." 35. Committee Amendment #1 - Proposed Ordinance #2024-13 - Chapter 80 - Personnel, Article IV - Pension Plans and Retirement Benefits (except Police), Division 3 - General Employee Pension Plan 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 6

Item #2. Page 7

Item #3. Page 8

Item #4. Page 9

Item #5. Page 10

Item #7. City of Dover Downtown Development District Renewal Application May 2024 Page 11

Item #7. Downtown Development Districts Application for District Renewal District Renewal Application for Expiring DDD Districts Application Period and Deadlines: The application period opens three years prior to expiration. Applications for extensions must be submitted within 6 months of the current DDD program expiration. Applications are accepted on a rolling basis and reviewed by the Cabinet Committee on State Planning Issues (CCSPI) at their next scheduled meeting. Application must be accompanied by a Resolution from the legislative body supporting the application for a DDD District Designation Extension, and an updated District Plan. Review and Approval: Applications for five-year DDD District Renewal are reviewed by OSPC and agency partners. OSPC will prepare a report and recommendation which will be presented to the CCSPI which will in turn make a recommendation to the Governor. The Governor may renew Districts for up to two 5-year renewal periods. Completed applications should be sent to OSPC@delaware.gov Completeness: Applications for District Renewal will be evaluated by the Office of State Planning Coordination for completeness upon receipt. Incomplete applications will not be reviewed and will not be forwarded to the Cabinet Committee on State Planning Issues for their consideration. Applicants are encouraged to meet with the OSPC early in the process, and work with the OSPC Principal Planners throughout the application process to ensure a complete and accurate application. Municipality / County: City of Dover, Kent County, Delaware DDD Program expiration date January 2025 Check list: □ Application Form □ Legislative Body Resolution □ Updated District Plan If proposing the removal of parcels from the original District Boundary: □ Certified Mail Receipts, to owners of all parcels to be removed □ Public Hearing Minutes, revised boundary meeting Page 12

Item #7. Downtown Development Districts Application for District Renewal Contact Person for Application District Administrator (if different) Name: David Hugg, III, City Manager Name: Address: 15 Loockerman Plaza Address: Dover, DE 19901 Phone: (302) 736-7005 Phone: Email: dhugg@dover.de.us Email: Signature Date Signature Date Legislative Body Resolution: The resolution must affirmatively indicate that the legislative body supports the application for the extension of Downtown Development District designation and is willing to adhere to the District Plan and the Local Incentives for the extended duration. Date of Resolution in support of DDD Extension Application: May 13, 2024 Resolution number: 2024-06 Program Administration: Describe any proposed changes in how the DDD program will be administered (such as new organizational structure or personnel to enhance implementation of the DDD program). Dover’s Downtown Development District (DDD) program is administered out of the Department of Planning and Inspections. From 2017 until October 2023, a City Planner/Planning Director within the Department served as the administrator of the program, with other planning staff support. The Downtown Dover Partnership (DDP) assisted with marketing the program. In October 2023, this planner left the City. In the interim, the City Manager has been filling the role of program administrator. The City is recruiting to fill this planner position vacancy, along with the Director of Planning and Inspections position. Once these vacancies are filled, the program administration will be transferred back to the Department of Planning and Inspections. As the Main Street organization and downtown redevelopment organization, the Downtown Dover Partnership (DDP) has been an important partner in administering and Page 13

Item #7. Downtown Development Districts Application for District Renewal promoting the Downtown Development District program. Tina Bradbury, the DDP’s Operations Manager, is often the first point of contact for business prospects looking to invest in downtown Dover. Ms. Bradbury is well-versed on the DDD program, including the City’s incentives. Additionally, the DDP offers its own incentives to prospective businesses, including façade grants, architectural assistance, and critical improvement grants. With the DDD designation renewal, Dover will renew efforts to market the program and will update the program materials and website. The City proposes developing a memorandum of understanding with the DDP to formalize the DDP’s role as an program partner and with program administration. Page 14

Item #7. Downtown Development Districts Application for District Renewal Need and Impact: Describe the impact the DDD program has had on your downtown thus far. In the response, please consider the program’s effectiveness in creating capital investment, creating jobs, improving housing stock, increasing residents and visitors, providing enhanced retail and entertainment opportunities, and otherwise improving the quality of life within such district. Refer to the Key Priority Projects identified in the initial DDD program application; Was the District successful in implementing these projects? Provide justification as to why the program should be extended. The Dover DDD has been instrumental in the success of transforming Downtown Dover’s residential neighborhoods by demolishing inadequate buildings and replacing them with new, affordable, owner-occupied homes during the first 10 years of the program. However, Dover has faced, and continues to face, significant challenges to downtown revitalization efforts due to the deterioration of existing building stock, the costs associated with renovating buildings that have been vacant or underutilized for decades, and fragmented neighborhoods resulting from neglected housing stock, low homeownership rates, and crime. At the time of the initial application, beginning in 2014/2015, investing in housing was identified as being pivotal to revitalization efforts, because perceptions of safety and crime, high home rental rates, and the deteriorated condition of much of the housing stock deterred potential investors. These conditions resulted in a considerable number of marginally compliant rental properties owned by absentee or unresponsive landlords. Efforts for infill on vacant lots and replacing vacant and demolished buildings with new, owner-occupied homes or other structures was key to the Restoring Central Dover Plan, which was led by NCALL, now known as NeighborGood Partners. At the time, it was clear that revitalization of the Central Business District could not be realized without addressing the deterioration of the downtown neighborhoods. This was a strong focus of the past ten years of the program. The transformation of neighborhood blocks was the key project for the program to date. Central Delaware Habitat for Humanity has constructed 34 new homes so far, and NeighborGood Partners has completed 17. In addition, Milford Housing Development Corporation constructed two homes and several small, private developers built homes as well, for a total of more than 60 new homes. There are additional need and impact details included on pages 1-2 of the Updated District Plan attached, as well as detailed demographic data on pages 8-14. As a result of the DDD program, the City of Dover has been able to achieve significant improvements in terms of: 1. Housing: According to decennial census data, in census blocks that intersect with the DDD, the number of vacant housing units as a percentage of total housing units fell from 13% in 2014 to 10% in 2020. Additionally, homeownership rates improved. Based on block level data from the 2010 Decennial Census, of all occupied housing units, 82% were rentals and 18% were owner- Page 15

Item #7. Downtown Development Districts Application for District Renewal occupied, with or without a mortgage. As of 2020, 25% of all occupied housing units within the DDD were owner-occupied and just 75% were rented. While clear progress has been made in terms of stabilizing housing and increasing homeownership in the DDD, homeownership rates in the City of Dover as a whole, are significantly higher at 47% in 2020, and vacant housing units comprise only 6% of all units. This indicates that there is still need for ongoing investment in housing stock to continue increasing homeownership in Dover’s DDD. Please refer to the housing and population demographic data on pages 8-12 of the Updated District Plan for more information, as well as Appendix B of the plan. Maps 7 and 8 illustrate the block level change in homeownership rates from 2010 to 2020, and Map 9 shows 2020 block level vacancy rates. 2. Vacant and Dangerous Buildings In 2010, the DDD contained 49 registered vacant buildings, 7 buildings that had been declared dangerous, and 25 lots where buildings had been demolished due to a dangerous building declaration. Today, the number of registered vacant buildings has been reduced to 42. Additionally, there are 35 properties where a building has been repaired by the owner. While progress has been made in reducing blight within the DDD boundary, there is ongoing need. Even with the reduced number of vacant buildings, a disproportionate number of neglected buildings and lots are located within the district and immediately surrounding areas. The City continues to take a strong stance on code enforcement. As of May 2024, there are 17 buildings that have been declared dangerous, and 38 lots where buildings have been demolished by the City or by the Owner. Please refer to the housing and population demographic data on pages 8-12 of the Updated District Plan for more information, as well as Appendix B of the plan. Maps 10 and 11 illustrate the locations of vacant and dangerous buildings. 3. Crime According to data provided by the Dover Police from 2019-2023, crime density remains highest along S. New Street within the DDD, as it was in 2010; however, the intersection in Loockerman and State St. now shows as a crime a hot spot based on recent data. Please see Appendix B of the Updated District Plan. Maps 12-15 provide more information about crime patterns within the DDD. 4. Poverty & Income Based on available census data, it is challenging to draw any conclusions about the impact of the DDD on income and poverty thus far. There is not block level data for most income and poverty measures included in the U.S. Census. Block group shapes have changed significantly between 2010 and 2020, meaning direct comparisons of block groups over time are not useful. Therefore, we have used tract level data though census tract shapes have changed slightly, and significant portions of each census tract that intersects with the DDD fall outside of the district boundary. Please see Appendix B of the Updated District Plan. Maps 3 and 4 outline current Page 16

Item #7. Downtown Development Districts Application for District Renewal tract, block group, and block shapes. Maps 5 and 6 demonstrate how those shapes changed between 2010 and 2020. According to 5-Year American Community Surveys (ACS), the median household income increased in three of the four census tracts that intersect with the DDD between 2010 and 2020. Census Tracts are illustrated on Map 5 of Appendix B. Tracts 409 and 413 saw increases as much as 15%-16%. At the same time, median income in DDD census tracts ranged from $33,846 to $45,545, which is lower than the 2020 median of $48,500 in the City of Dover and $60,117 in Kent County. The percentage of the population living below the poverty level in census tracts that intersect with the DDD is higher than it is in Kent County. The percentage of the population living below the poverty level fell from 44.1% to 25.7% in tract 413 and from 27.2% to 20.1% in tract 414 between 2010 and 2020. At the same time, the percentage increased in tracts 409 and 433. It is unclear what impact the COVID-19 pandemic had on these ACS estimates. Please refer to the income and poverty data on pages 13-14 of the Updated District Plan for more information. The notable housing improvements that occurred in the first nine years of the DDD program were a critical first step in revitalizing downtown Dover. At the time the initial application was submitted, the 2008 Dover Comprehensive Plan called for the creation of a downtown plan. The Transit Center Neighborhood Plan and Restoring Central Dover Plan met that objective and served as the heart of the District Plan in the City’s initial DDD application Since that time, the City, in collaboration with the Downtown Dover Partnership and others, worked with Mosaic Development Partners to create the Capital City 2030: Transforming Downtown Dover Strategic Master Plan for the downtown district and downtown gateways. The creation of Capital City 2030 Plan, along with track record of improvements to housing stock and neighborhood stabilization have spurred significant investment from the State, and several key projects are moving forward. This plan, along with the State’s planned investment to support it, will be a catalyst for even further investment in downtown Dover. The DDD designation is essential to the realization of this plan. For the current momentum created by Capital City 2030 and the recently announced State investment to generate the anticipated success and other investment, the City of Dover must maintain its DDD designation for an additional five years. In the process of conducting an evaluation of the programs’ first ten years, stakeholders made it abundantly clear that the investment to date would not have occurred without the incentives afforded by the program. Ongoing incentives are needed to spur the transformational capital investment needed to return Dover to the thriving hub of activity that it once was. The costs of revitalization remain high. Developers, builders, and potential property owners are often deterred from investing in the downtown area because the cost of renovating or building on a property may exceed the value of the property with the improvements, and the return on investment is uncertain. Prospective businesses are often undercapitalized and cannot complete the building renovations necessary to bring their shops up to code, purchase equipment and inventory, and pay expenses until they Page 17

Item #7. Downtown Development Districts Application for District Renewal are able to turn a profit. Without the DDD incentives, there is a sense that it is easier and less expensive to locate elsewhere, such as in a shopping center on Route 13 or Route 8. With the many overlapping challenges creating hurdles to revitalization, Dover needs this additional time to achieve its goals. The City is just now on the precipice of seeing real capital investment, with the needed assistance of the DDD designation and the State of Delaware’s investment. Within the next five years, Dover has tangible plans to leverage its DDD designation with other public and private funds to spur transformational capital investment, create jobs, and providing enhanced retail and entertainment opportunities, as well as transportation, culture, and quality of life improvement that will attract visitors to the area. District Plan: Revise the current District Plan to include the listed items below. The revised plan is intended to supersede the existing one and must be included with the Extension Application. The updated plan should assess progress made since program implementation, reflect relevant changes that may have occurred since plan adoption, and provide up-to-date guidance for redevelopment for the next 5 years and beyond. District Plan update must include the following: 1. Rationale as to why the five-year extension is necessary and/or desirable to achieve redevelopment goals stated in the District Plan. 2. An evaluation and self-assessment of past program implementation and performance. 3. Updated demographic and redevelopment data, and analysis of that data in the current plan. 4. An evaluation, and revision if necessary, of the vision, goals and strategies for downtown redevelopment. 5. Updated maps that reflect current conditions. Note any changes (within the District) to zoning or to the Future Land Use Map in the adopted comprehensive plan. Briefly summarize changes made to the plan here: At the time of the initial DDD application in 2014, Dover was utilizing the Restoring Central Dover Plan to inform its vision, goals, and strategies. Since that time, the City partnered with the Downtown Dover Partnership and Mosaic Development Partners to create the Capital City 2030: Transforming Downtown Dover Strategic Master Plan. While many core goals and strategies from the original plan remain intact, several additional key projects have been proposed, and modernized strategies have been identified to revitalize downtown Dover and achieve the vision developed with citizens. To date, through local, county and state incentives, $13,297,542 of private funds were leveraged and 59 projects were completed since the program’s implementation. The City of Page 18

Item #7. Downtown Development Districts Application for District Renewal Dover contracted the Rossi Group to conduct a thorough program evaluation to assess implementation and performance to date, and recommend program changes moving forward as part of this application. Information and feedback gathered through the program evaluation process resulted in a series of recommendations that informed the updated district plan. The attached Updated District Plan includes a summary of the Capital City 2030 Plan on pages 15- 19 and a full copy is included in Appendix A. In addition, the Updated District Plan includes the full program evaluation on pages 3-7. Page 19

Item #7. Downtown Development Districts Application for District Renewal Local Incentives: List the local incentive package currently in place and briefly assess the effectiveness of each using data from completed projects. Please note any changes proposed to these incentives and describe why the change is needed. List any new incentive options being proposed and explain how these new incentives will address the goals of the District Plan for the next 5-year period. The City of Dover offers five (5) different incentives to encourage investment in the DDD. They include waivers of Building Permit Fees and City Impact Fees. New Business License Fees are waived for three (3) years. There is also an abatement of property taxes on the value of improvements for ten (10) years, and a rebate of buyer’s City Transfer Tax when a Certificate of Occupancy is issued within five (5) years of property transfer. From 2018 to 2023, the total value of local incentives utilized was $73,134.20. In addition, the Downtown Dover Partnership offers a number of grants to incentivize development. These include: an architectural grant that reimburses up to $5,000 for architectural services, a façade improvement matching grant of up to $5,000, and a new critical improvements grant program offering rebates of up to 20% for priority projects, such as those that address critical life-safety and ADA compliance, preparing for commercial kitchens, or ensuring that properties become leased. The DDP also offers a business retention/expansion assistance program that provides small grants of up to $2,000. The most frequently utilized incentive is the Building Permit Fees Waiver which covers Building, Plumbing, Mechanical, and Fire Protection Permit fees. With the exception of one (1) project, every DSHA-rebated project from fiscal year 2019 to 2023 was also provided Permit Fee waivers. The estimated value of Permit Fees ranged from $1,518 to $8,387, which can have a significant impact on the purchaser or builder. As larger transformative projects move forward, the value of the Permit Fee Waiver will increase. City Impact Fee waivers cover Water and Sewer Impact Fees. They are utilized less often than Permit Fee waivers because some projects redevelop lots with preexisting water and wastewater services. Applicable projects greatly benefit from this incentive, which has been valued up to $4,000 per project. In the fiscal years 2022 and 2023, City Impact Fees waivers were provided for every applicant. As more high density, mixed use developments gets underway, the use of City Impact Fee Waivers is expected to increase. The New Business License Fee Waiver attracts commercial development to the Dover Downtown Development District. It waives New Business License Fees for three (3) years. As most of the projects in the past six (6) years were residential, this incentive was not as frequently utilized as the other fee waivers; however, numerous businesses have received its benefits. In 2019, it was utilized 19 times. Page 20

Item #7. Downtown Development Districts Application for District Renewal Abatement of property taxes on the value of improvements for ten (10) years is an incentive that offers effective and longer-term benefits for participants in the Downtown Development District program. While other incentives alleviate some of the upfront costs to developing, the ten (10) year property tax abatement offers continual support for remaining in the DDD. From 2015 to 2020, it was eligible for use 63 times and was provided for nearly every project in the years following. This incentive is effective in ensuring that the development is completed after the property is transferred because it is only offered when a Certificate of Occupancy is issued within five (5) years of property transfer. It was most frequently utilized in 2018 where it was used 17 different times. Aside from one (1) project, it was provided for every project from 2021 to 2023. During the entire Downtown Development District program in Dover (2015 to 2023), projects received $1,619,563 in Rebates through the state administered program by the Delaware State Housing Authority, thereby leveraging $13,297,542 in private investments. The City does not propose changes to the local incentives; however, the proposed expansion of the DDD boundary will result in an increase in the applicability of those incentives. Key Priority Projects: The DDD application was updated in 2019 to include discussion of Key Priority Projects. These projects were to be identified in the District Plan as potential catalysts for other redevelopment activity or as examples of superior urban design. Key Priority Projects are specific projects expected to provide significant impact to the District when implemented. See DDD Program Guidelines for more information. ddd-program-guidelines-2022.pdf (delaware.gov) With this definition in mind, please describe the Key Priority Projects that were implemented during the past 10-year period. Briefly assess their impact and/or describe any barriers to implementation. Moving forward, what are the Key Priority Projects for the 5-year extension? Key projects and implementation strategies identified in the initial application included the addition of new housing units in the Central Dover neighborhoods within the district and expanded access to housing repair programs. Partnerships with Central Delaware Habitat for Humanity, NeighborGood Partners (Formerly NCALL), and Milford Housing Development Corporation resulted in more than 60 new homes built to date. Housing improvements have been a catalyst for new investment; New establishments like the Rail Haus and Stonerail Market would not exist without DDD incentives. However, Dover has had a slow start in terms of realizing truly transformational commercial and mixed-use projects. Several businesses have closed during the past ten years of the program. The challenges of attracting and retaining businesses were exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Page 21

Item #7. Downtown Development Districts Application for District Renewal Unfortunately, the key projects identified in the initial DDD plan have not come to fruition. Most of these projects remain part of the vision in Capital City 2030, and with new momentum and funding opportunities, these projects are well-positioned to move forward. Governor John Carney recently announced plans to allocate a total of $25 million in State funding to the City of Dover and Downtown Dover Partnership (DDP) to support implementation of Capital City 2030. Please see Appendix F of the attached Updated District Plan for the Governor’s press release and other relevant press coverage. This funding will be used for critical water and wastewater infrastructure upgrades as well as two key projects identified in the plan. The DDP will focus on five major projects from Capital City 2030 in the next few years, several of which will utilize this funding. The DDP notes that significant, visible changes will begin to take place in Downtown Dover in the next two to three years as they begin to implement the strategic plan. The three most transformational projects, identified as key projects for the DDD renewal application, include the following. Key Projects: Old Post: This city-owned parcel at 55 Loockerman Plaza, home to the former Dover Post Office, is currently under contract with a developer. The City selected a developer to redevelop the site through an RFP process. The Capital City 2030: Transforming Downtown Dover Strategic Master Plan initially re-envisioned this lot as a new building with commercial and office space as well as an outdoor courtyard. The developers selected through the City’s RFP process have proposed a 4-story mixed-use building with space for 2 retail establishments on the ground floor, parking, a courtyard, office space, and 30 apartment units. 120 South Governors Avenue: This is the site of the former Acme grocery store. It is currently owned by the DDP and occupied by Auto Plus and a day care center. This site represents DDP’s priority redevelopment project with Mosaic Development Partners and Colonial Parking Inc. Capital City 2030 proposed constructing a 6-story mixed-use complex on this lot with a ground level grocery store, a parking garage, and more than 100 residential units. Additional amenities included in current planning efforts include a coffee shop, fitness center, and daycare facility. The State plans to utilize a portion of their investment on this project, which will cost $80 million in total. 129 South Governors Avenue: The Bradford Street Parking Lot, at 129 South Governors Avenue and several adjacent parcels are currently owned by the city and used for public parking. Capital City 2030 envisions Bradford Street as a multi-modal connector between Delaware State University’s (DSU) downtown campus and Loockerman Street To that end, Capital City 2030 proposes replacing this lot with a parking deck and mobility hub. This property is directly across the street from the 6-story building planned for 120 South Governors Avenue and will complement that project. A mobility hub is a place where people can park, access travel information, and connect to multiple modes of transportation. This may include a car and/or bikeshare program, bicycle parking, and rideshare access. The State Page 22

Item #7. Downtown Development Districts Application for District Renewal intends to utilize a portion of their investment on this proposed $14 million mobility hub between South Governors Avenue and South Bradford Street. The DDP notes that the hub will feature a parking garage, bike share, and micro-transit bus service. Local news sources note that the hub will include EV charging stations and additional amenities proposed by Capital City 2030. The target completion date for the transit hub is 2026. This transit hub complements the Downtown Dover Pathways Plan, being completed by the Dover/Kent County MPO in collaboration with the City of Dover and the DDP, to better connect activity centers and downtown anchors and create a more walkable district with multi-modal transit options like bikes and scooters. Once these have been successfully implemented, State investment in infrastructure improvements take place, and marketing and program administration efforts are improved to spread awareness of DDD incentives and program successes, Dover expects to see greater interest in commercial development downtown and will have an easier time leveraging incentives to attract investors. Page 23

Item #7. Downtown Development Districts Application for District Renewal District Boundary Revisions: As a part of the District Renewal process the local jurisdiction may revise the original District Boundary to meet the redevelopment goals of the next five-year period. The updated District Plan must fully describe the rationale for the revised boundary. The revised boundary must meet all guidelines and criteria for the District Boundary as described in Chapter 5 of the DDD Program Guidelines. It is permissible to remove parcels from the original District Boundary and reallocate that acreage to other areas of the downtown as a part of the boundary revisions during the District Renewal process. Should the local jurisdiction propose removing parcels from the original boundary, the following is required:  The owners of all parcels that are proposed to be removed from the District Boundary must be noticed of the change via Certified Mail or similar method. The local jurisdiction shall keep receipts or other documentation of this notice and submit it with the District Renewal application.  All property owners that are proposed to be removed from the District Boundary must be given an opportunity to speak at a public hearing hosted by the local jurisdiction, to be held before the final decision has been reached regarding the revised boundary that is to be proposed as a part of the District Renewal application. Minutes of this public hearing or hearings must accompany the District Renewal application. If the revised District Boundary proposes to remove any parcels from the original District Boundary, please briefly describe the rationale for removing the parcels and where the acreage has been reallocated to: Since the initial establishment of the DDD Boundary, the City completed expansions in the 200-300 Blocks of South State Street and on the south side of West Water Street. Additionally, there have been changes in property ownership, most notably in the southwest edge. Of the 22 acres in the District’s southwest corner, 20 acres are owned by either the State, City of Dover or US Postal Service and are therefore ineligible to receive the Downtown Development District program benefits. To maximize the program’s potential, the boundary has been revised to remove this portion and redistribute that acreage to properties eligible for the program. In accordance with the State requirements, the Dover City Council held a public hearing on May 13, 2024, regarding the removal of properties from the DDD boundary. The City of Dover notified affected property owners via certified mail about public hearing and ran a public notice in the Delaware State News on May 3, 2024 advertising the public hearing. Page 24

Item #7. Downtown Development Districts Application for District Renewal The DDD Program now allows DDDs to encompass up to 275 acres, an increase of 50 acres since the initial application. The City has strategically reviewed areas adjacent to the current District boundary to identify areas that meet the need and impact criteria and would benefit from the Downtown Development District Program. The revised District Boundary adds the following areas in an effort to capture parcels prime for larger redevelopment projects and to enhance gateways to the City. Additions include the following:  A 12-acre area north of Mary Street: Includes some of the former Wesley College athletic program lands (Now DSU) and the land of the former National Guard armory. This area is positioned for future redevelopment and may provide more opportunities for housing development and vacant property improvements.  A 14-acre area to the West of the district on the north side of Loockerman Plaza was already approved by the City of Dover and the State of Delaware in February of 2024.  A 7 acre area to the West of the district between Kings Highway and W. Division St.: Along with the 14-acre addition, this area provides opportunities for redevelopment along the western gateway to Downtown Dover.  A 21-acre area to the east: This small area along S. State St./Division St./Kings Highway includes the former Dover Public Library building, which has been vacant since the opening of the new library. The addition of this area to the District will improve the opportunity for investment in this building and the surrounding area. The proposed expansion utilizes the updated allotted Downtown Development District acreage to maximize the potential of program incentives and investments. Please see Appendix B of the attached Updated District Plan as Map 16 illustrates the proposed boundary changes. If the revised District Boundary proposes to remove any parcels from the original District Boundary, please include the receipts or other documentation of the public notice to all property owners to be removed, as well as the minutes of the public hearing where the boundary revisions were discussed in the District Renewal application. Page 25

Item #7. City of Dover, DE Updated District Plan Downtown Development District April 2024 Table of Contents Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Need and Impact ............................................................................................................................. 1 Program Evaluation ........................................................................................................................ 3 Stakeholder Interviews and Focus Groups ................................................................................................................3 Dover DDD Program Beneficiaries .......................................................................................................................4 DDD Administering Bodies ..................................................................................................................................6 Other DDD’s..........................................................................................................................................................7 DSU .......................................................................................................................................................................7 Key Takeaways..........................................................................................................................................................7 Demographic Data .......................................................................................................................... 8 Housing & Population Data .......................................................................................................................................8 Income & Poverty Data ........................................................................................................................................... 13 Employment Data .................................................................................................................................................... 14 Vision, Goals, and Strategies ........................................................................................................ 15 The Capital City 2030: Transforming Downtown Dover Plan ................................................................................ 15 Key Projects............................................................................................................................................................. 18 Appendix Appendix A – Capital City 2030: Transforming Downtown Dover Strategic Master Plan Appendix B – Maps Appendix C – Interview Summaries Appendix D – Census Data Appendix E – OnTheMap Inflow/Outflow Analysis Appendix F – Dover Downtown Investments Press Coverage Appendix G- Public Notice Documentation Page 26

Item #7. City of Dover, DE Updated District Plan - DRAFT Downtown Development District Introduction The Downtown Development Districts Act was enacted by the Delaware General Assembly in 2014 to spur private capital investment, stimulate job growth and improve commercial vitality, build a stable community of long-term residents by improving housing opportunities, and strengthen neighborhoods while harnessing the attraction that vibrant downtowns hold. The City of Dover applied to the Office of State Planning Coordination, which included a proposed district, documentation of need, proposed program impact, and available local incentives, as well as a plan for downtown revitalization. The Cabinet Committee on State Planning Issues reviews applications and makes recommendations to the Governor, who ultimately designates downtown development districts. Governor Jack Markell designated the City of Dover’s Downtown Development District (DDD) in the first round of designations in January of 2015. This designation entitles private construction projects within the District to receive rebates from the State of Delaware to offset up to 20% of their capital construction costs as well as other benefits. The initial designation is for ten years, after which time the City may apply for two consecutive five-year extensions. Currently, the City of Dover is applying for its first five-year renewal. Dover initially submitted two plans developed in coordination with other partners in the community. These plans include Restoring Central Dover: Our Vision for Vitality, which was developed by a steering committee led by NCALL (now NeighborGood Partners), a housing and community development non-profit; and Dover Transit Center Neighborhood Plan and Design Book, developed through the Dover/Kent County MPO. A 4-page plan summary described the role of the plans in comprising the plan for Dover’s DDD. Dover outlined incentives predating the DDD designation including building permit fee waivers, impact fee waivers, and a tax abatement on the value of improvements. Additionally, the Downtown Dover Partnership, Dover’s Main Street organization, managed a façade grant program to assist business owners and property owners in upgrading their building facades. In creating the DDD, the City of Dover and the Downtown Dover Partnership added new incentives. In addition to the municipal incentives, qualifying projects were eligible to receive a grant from Kent County and a rebate from the State of Delaware for investment within the DDD. Once designated, Dover moved forward with implementation of the program, promoting the municipal, county, and State incentives to developers locally and outside of the area. The following plan includes updated need and impact data, details of the comprehensive program evaluation conducted, updated demographic data, and revised visions, goals, and strategies informed by The Capital City 2030: Transforming Downtown Dover Plan. Need and Impact The City of Dover is seeking a five-year extension to its Downtown Development District (DDD) designation. A five-year extension will allow Dover the opportunity to meet goals and objectives outlined in the initial district plan of 2015 that include:  Mixed use development  Retail uses within the Central Business District Page 1 of 19 Page 27

Item #7. City of Dover, DE Updated District Plan - DRAFT Downtown Development District  Increase the number/percent of owner occupied homes  Increase the density of development  Build on vacant lots  Bring buildings close to the street to line the sidewalk  Strategic location of open spaces, parks and gateways These goals were products of the Dover Transit Center Neighborhood Plan and Restoring Central Dover Plan. The Capital City 2030: Transforming Downtown Dover Strategic Master Plan (Appendix A) is Downtown Dover’s newest master plan that builds on the previous vision and outlines key projects and strategies to achieve this vision. The DDD designation allows those investing in downtown Dover to receive a rebate on the cost of improvements of up to twenty (20) percent from the State. In addition, the City of Dover offers five different incentives to encourage investment, and the Downtown Dover Partnership (DDP) offers four incentive programs. City incentives include a Building Permit Fee Waiver, sewer and water Impact Fee Waiver, Business License Fee Waiver for new businesses, and an abatement on tax on the value of improvements. The DDP incentives include architectural grants, façade grants, critical infrastructure grants, and business retention/expansion grants. In addition, investors have leveraged other grant funds including the EDGE grant administered by the Delaware Division of Small Business and the Strong Neighborhood Housing Fund administered by the Delaware State Housing Authority. Federal, State and local historic preservation tax credits can further leverage investments for qualifying properties. The layering of these various incentives has been instrumental in realizing the nearly sixty (60) projects that have occurred since the program was implemented. See Appendix B for maps that provide additional information about the DDD in Dover. Over the past nine (9) years, the DDD program has been successful in building affordable owner-occupied housing and reducing blight within the City of Dover. According to the DDD FY2023 Annual Report, since the program’s implementation, $13,297,542 in private funds were leveraged through local, county and state incentives, and 59 projects were completed. The City of Dover hired Rossi Group in 2024 to conduct an independent program evaluation as part of the renewal application. Rossi Group analyzed program data, conducted interviews, and held a focus group meeting with stakeholders to assess program implementation and performance thus far. The information gathered was used to identify program strengths and areas for improvement, informing the development of this updated district plan. The program evaluation confirmed that Dover’s DDD has successfully improved housing stock and reduced blight, particularly in the residential areas. A review of relevant census data demonstrates that homeownership rates within this area have increased, but the need for additional affordable homes persists. Stakeholders who invested in projects within the Dover DDD noted that their projects would not have been possible without available incentives. The program evaluation indicated that there is an interest in ongoing investment, provided the incentives continue. The program evaluation made suggestions for improved program implementation such as hiring a designated program liaison, streamlining processes, and increasing marketing efforts. A five-year extension to Dover’s Downtown Development District (DDD) designation would allow for the implementation of these suggestions, ensuring increased program benefits moving forward. Page 2 of 19 Page 28

Item #7. City of Dover, DE Updated District Plan - DRAFT Downtown Development District At year ten of the DDD program, Dover is starting to see momentum pick up rapidly with the beginning stages of the Capital City 2030 plan kicking off. In February 2024, Governor Carney and state legislators announced plans to invest a total of $25 million in Downtown Dover revitalization. Please see Appendix E for relevant press coverage, including the Governor’s press release. Through the Governor’s proposed 2025 capital budget and a portion of the state’s American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds, the City of Dover and the DDP will proceed with three key projects from the Capital City 2030 strategic plan, including: critical water and wastewater infrastructure upgrades, a six-story muti-use building, and a mobility hub. Mayor Robin Christiansen remarked that downtown revitalization efforts have been ongoing since the early 1990’s and the City now has a solid roadmap for success. As a result, City officials are hopeful that meaningful change will be realized by 2030. Figure 1: DDP Newsletter Blast about Downtown Investment The DDD incentives will play a vital role in supporting these initial projects, which are expected to be transformational in the community and a catalyst for future investment. The state investment in water and wastewater improvements will reduce the cost of renovating older buildings and increasing residential density in the area, providing added incentive for investment. Program Evaluation In the process of updating the district plan, Rossi Group completed an evaluation of Dover’s DDD program by soliciting perspectives from a range of stakeholders along with available program data to assess areas of success and areas for improvement. Stakeholders included City and State staff, organizations within Dover, program beneficiaries, and other DDD administrators. Stakeholders were engaged through a series of interviews and a moderated focus group session. Stakeholder Interviews and Focus Groups Stakeholder interviews were guided by pre-written questionnaires tailored to the different roles of stakeholders. Interviews were conducted between January 11 and February 7, 2024, and Page 3 of 19 Page 29

Item #7. City of Dover, DE Updated District Plan - DRAFT Downtown Development District detailed notes were collected to document responses. For detailed interview summaries please see Appendix C. Dover DDD Program Beneficiaries Rossi Group interviewed stakeholders identified as downtown redevelopment partners in the 2014 District application. Interviewees included representatives of NeighborGood Partners (formerly NCALL), Central Delaware Habitat for Humanity, City of Dover Departments, Delaware State University, the Office of State Planning Coordination, and members of City Council representing the area encompassed by the District. NeighborGood Partners and Central Delaware Habitat for Humanity both benefited from the program as they redeveloped properties. In addition, program beneficiaries were invited to participate in a more in-depth focus group, which took place on February 6, 2024. Eight (8) individuals attended including Theresea Owens (owner of Stonerail Market), Trish Kelleher of NeighborGood Partners, Todd Stonesifer (President of DDP and downtown property owner), Donny Legans (owner of Rail Haus), Reverand Hodge of The People’s Church, Ashley Robinson of The Wedding Boutique, and property owners Doug Ferris and Michael Harrington, Sr. A list of questions was prepared containing the prompts listed below. The resulting conversation was not strictly guided by the question list, but organically touched on all the focus points. Focus Group Questions: 1. Please identify your role as it relates to a project in Downtown Dover. Raise your hand if you: a. Opened a new business b. built a new home c. renovated a home d. renovated an existing commercial space e. built a new commercial building f. other (explain) 2. Program Value a. Was the availability of incentives important in your decision to invest downtown? b. Were the incentives helpful in making the numbers work with your investment? c. Are there additional incentives you feel would be helpful? d. Were the incentives easy to understand and apply for? e. Did the City and DDP help to make your investment worthwhile? f. Would you recommend downtown Dover investment to a friend or colleague? If not, why? 3. Program Administration a. How easy was it to navigate the incentives? b. How easily accessible was the information about the program? c. How did you hear about the program? d. Were City/DDP staff knowledgeable about the program? Were they responsive? e. Were the website and brochures helpful? Page 4 of 19 Page 30

Item #7. City of Dover, DE Updated District Plan - DRAFT Downtown Development District f. If you needed information about the program, where did you go to find it? 4. Review Process a. Did you find the City’s review process straightforward and easy to understand? b. If not, what did you find difficult? 5. Going forward a. What suggestions do you have to help make the downtown revitalization efforts more successful? b. Is there anything you wish you’d known before applying for DDD program incentives? c. Do you see yourself investing in future downtown Dover projects? 6. Final Exercise: SWOT Analysis (Strengths-Weaknesses-Opportunities-Challenges) Across all organizations, the DDD incentive package was considered very helpful for encouraging downtown development. Some participants went so far as to assert that their housing efforts would be crippled had they not had access to the financial incentives made available through the DDD program. The City Impact Fee Waiver and 20% State Rebate were noted to be especially beneficial, and participants benefited from the ability to stack incentives with other funding sources. The Downtown Dover Partnership (DDP) was also said to be instrumental in helping individuals navigate the development process. Participants utilized the DDD program at different stages of the program’s implementation, therefore their experiences varied. For example, some of the first individuals to use the program did not receive the guidance that later participants had. The DDP, particularly Tina Bradbury, was unanimously named as a resource for navigating incentives; however, that expertise had been refined after the initial phases of the program and was not available to the early applicants. Most participants expressed enthusiasm for the DDD program and its potential to improve Dover’s downtown. Multiple participants identified opportunities for improvement in administering the program. Participants perceived City departments as disconnected from one another which complicated program participation. Feedback indicated that City Planning and Inspections, Public Works, and Water and Wastewater departments appeared to be disconnected and staff turnover rates did not help. Multiple participants expressed frustration with the City due to prolonged Building Permit wait times. Several mentioned that they received vacant building fees while improving properties. Others received grass cutting fines. Some felt the need to continuously advocate for themselves because permit issuing agencies did not know they are part of the program. There was additional frustration with upgrading buildings to meet code requirements. Curb cut and sidewalk upgrades were mentioned numerous times as a reliable challenge. A few participants mentioned changes to fire suppression requirements were not communicated by the City in the initial stages of their projects. The necessary upgrades were a large and unexpected expense. Multiple people mentioned that the age of buildings downtown complicates site plans, renovations, and their corresponding code requirements. To avoid surprise costs, one developer suggested that proactive efforts such as walkthroughs and onsite meetings with Public Works could help to identify construction requirements in earlier stages of projects. Additionally, there Page 5 of 19 Page 31

Item #7. City of Dover, DE Updated District Plan - DRAFT Downtown Development District was some confusion about Impact Fee Waivers because they are only applicable to City Impact Fees, not the County Portion of the fee. All the focus group attendees suggested that the City create a program liaison to help guide applicants and coordinate among City departments. An allowance or waiver for code-required upgrades was also suggested. Additionally, some individuals believed the City should stay in touch with completed projects. A few participants stated they would appreciate a gesture of gratitude while others suggested longer term incentives to assist remaining downtown. DDD Administering Bodies Rossi Group interviewed representatives across City Departments including Public Works, Electric, Water and Wastewater, Planning and Inspections, and City Council Members. Acknowledging DDP’s role in the DDD administration, DDP leadership was also interviewed. The success of the program was most evident within the residential realm. Multiple participants noted converting vacant lots into affordable housing has improved the area, especially north of West Division Street. Commercial success has not been as prolific, however, there have been several successful businesses. Navigating various incentives and their corresponding requirements was mentioned to be confusing for applicants. Participants across City Departments and the DDP felt that an official point of contact or program liaison would help applicants optimize the program and better coordinate downtown improvement efforts across City departments. It was noted that the DDP is often the first point of contact for applicants, and it may be beneficial to formally establish their role in program administration through a memorandum of understanding between the City and DDP. Interviewees also noted that City staff needed better process education to adequately to answer applicant questions or direct them to someone who can. Multiple participants acknowledged that staff turnover rates within City government make that difficult. In addition to improving communication about incentives, some interviewees identified a need to lay out code requirements for projects. Some suggested providing a flow chart or check list that walks applicants through the whole process, thereby reducing the frequency of surprise construction costs. City staff also suggested having internal training on the program on a regular (annual) basis. In response to recommendations within Capital City 2030 to accelerate approvals, City officials stated there are multiple factors that influence the approval process. Receipt of code-compliant plan submissions would be key to expediting approval. Participants stated submissions could be better coordinated to expedite approvals. Some projects require review and approval by multiple entities; for example, plans for new construction or building exterior improvements in the Historic District require review by the Historic District Commission in addition to traditional code-compliant review. Other projects require external agency review and approval, such as DelDOT, Kent Conservation District, or DNREC, which may result in delays. Page 6 of 19 Page 32

Item #7. City of Dover, DE Updated District Plan - DRAFT Downtown Development District Other DDD’s Rossi Group also interviewed Rob Pierce from the City of Milford and Sheldon Hudson and Jeremy Rothwell from the Town of Smyrna. Commercial façade grants funded most of the façade improvements in downtown Smyrna. City of Milford representatives noted building permits take one to two weeks to be issued and cautioned offering expedited services. Interviews confirmed that neighboring communities have similarly had more success with the residential development and have struggled to see significant mixed-use projects come online. Each town placed emphasis on the importance of having someone act as a champion for the DDD program, promoting incentives. Milford noted that they use their code enforcement process to spread awareness of the program. Smyrna indicated that they help applicants layer historic preservation tax credits with DDD incentives to create generous packages. DSU Rossi Group met with Delaware State University (DSU) representatives, Marlena Gibson, Bernard Pratt, and Anas Ben Addi, to discuss the DDD program’s impact on the University. When asked if there have been any benefits to the campus following the programs implementation, representatives were neutral. Higher education is not eligible for the DDD Program; therefore, the university cannot take advantage of it. There have been indirect benefits as a result of the improvements downtown, but they feel Dover could better attract investors and engagement. Students and their families are still more inclined to spend their money outside of downtown Dover. The discussion with DSU was helpful in determining where the City may be interested in expanding the District boundary. As DSU recently acquired the former Wesley College campus, it is possible that some of their lands in the downtown could be identified as excess and available for redevelopment. Key Takeaways Dover’s DDD program has successfully attracted investment in historically neglected areas. Residential projects have improved the area by converting vacant buildings and lots into affordable housing. These projects would not have been possible without the support of the DDD program’s incentive package. While the program is instrumental in encouraging improvements within Dover, there are areas to improve its implementation. Based on input received during nearly all stakeholder interviews and the focus group, there is a clear need for a designated point of contact or program liaison. Due to staff turnover within the City, this role has been left vacant. Program beneficiaries and administrators agreed that hiring someone who could assist program applicants and communicate projects between City departments would enhance and encourage the use of the program. In addition to a program liaison, stakeholders suggested that a user- friendly resource, such as a flow chart or series of checklists, to clearly communicate program and code requirements to applicants would be beneficial. Participants mentioned that marketing efforts for the program should be more robust and that City staff may play a role in spreading awareness of the program and its incentives. Page 7 of 19 Page 33

Item #7. City of Dover, DE Updated District Plan - DRAFT Downtown Development District Demographic Data A lack of quality housing stock in Downtown Dover was identified as an impediment to downtown redevelopment in the Restoring Central Dover Plan submitted with Dover’s initial 2015DDD application. Since that time, the DDD program has had a significant impact on improving housing stock in downtown Dover. As a result of the available incentives, Central Delaware Habitat for Humanity constructed 34 new homes, and NeighborGood Partners was able to complete 17 homes. This means that, in the first decade of the program, Dover’s DDD saw a total of more than 50 new homes constructed, transforming entire street blocks in Dover. Appendix B Map 1 shows the locations of all projects within the DDD and Map 2 shows the locations of Central Delaware Habitat for Humanity and NeighborGood Partners projects. Figure 2: 18, 22, 26, & 29 N. Kirkwood St. Housing & Population Data Block level census data supports the narrative that Dover’s DDD has seen decreased vacancy rates and increased homeownership. Below, Tables 1 and 2 include population and housing data at the county, city, tract, and block level from the 2010 and 2020 decennial census. The tables include all blocks that either fall within the DDD boundary or intersect with the DDD boundary. Note, census block shapes and numbers changed between 2010 and 2020. This resulted in the land area being larger in 2010 and smaller in 2020. Please see Appendix B Maps 3 and 4 for details of current shapes of census tracts, block groups, and blocks. Maps 5 and 6 illustrate the changes that occurred between 2010 and 2020. It is unclear what impact the COVID-19 pandemic had on 2020 census data. Ultimately, this means that the data is not a perfect measure of what has taken place within the Dover DDD boundary from 2010 to 2020. That said, this census data is still a helpful tool in terms of indicating that some improvements have taken place, and that ongoing need exists in the area encompassing the DDD. Figures 3 and 4 further illustrate how homeownership and vacancy rates have changed from 2010 to 2020 within DDD census blocks and the surrounding areas. Overall, in the Dover DDD Census Blocks:  The number of vacant housing units as a percentage of total units decreased from 13% in 2010 to 10% in 2020.  In 2010, only 18% of housing units were owner-occupied (owned free and clear or with a mortgage/loan). In 2020, that percentage increased to 25%. Page 8 of 19 Page 34

Item #7. City of Dover, DE Updated District Plan - DRAFT Downtown Development District  Census blocks that intersect with the Dover DDD include areas that are not inside of the DDD.  As depicted in Map 4, census block boundaries changed between 2010 and 2020; the area encompassed in 2010 is larger, possibly explaining the reduced population and number of housing units. As such, percentages are a better measure for comparing data. Table 1: Dover Block Level Housing & Population Data 2010 Table 2: Dover Block Level Housing & Population Data 2020 Additional information regarding block level census data is available in Appendix D. Page 9 of 19 Page 35

Item #7. City of Dover, DE Updated District Plan - DRAFT Downtown Development District Percentage of Homeownership in DDD Blocks 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 2010 20% 2020 10% 0% Kent Dover Tract 409 Tract 413 Tract 414 Tract 433 Blocks that County Intersect with DDD Figure 3: % Homeownership in DDD Blocks Bar Chart The percentage of owner-occupied homes (with or without a mortgage), as opposed to a renter, increased from 18% in 2010 to 25% in 2020 in census blocks that intersect with the Dover DDD boundary. Meanwhile, homeownership rates appear to have remained the same or fallen in surrounding areas. Percentage of Vacant Housing Units in DDD Blocks 16% 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 2010 4% 2020 2% 0% Kent Dover Tract 409 Tract 413 Tract 414 Tract 433 Blocks that County Intersect with DDD Figure 4: % Vacant Housing Units in DDD Blocks Bar Chart The percentage of vacant housing units decreased from 13% in 2010 to 10% in 2020 in census blocks that intersect with the Dover DDD boundary. The percentage of vacant housing units appears to have decreased in surrounding areas as well. Page 10 of 19 Page 36

Item #7. City of Dover, DE Updated District Plan - DRAFT Downtown Development District Table 3 illustrates that the number of registered vacant buildings has decreased since the DDD program launched in 2010. Dover has maintained a strong stance on code enforcement, and while improvements have been made, there are still a disproportionately high number of neglected buildings and lots within the district and immediate surrounding areas, indicating a strong need for ongoing investment. Figure 5 provides examples of some of the vacant and blighted buildings within the DDD boundary as of March 2024. Table 3: Vacant & Dangerous Buildings Within Dover’s DDD Vacant & Dangerous Buildings within Dover’s DDD 2010 2024 Registered Vacant Buildings 49 42 Buildings Declared Dangerous 7 17 Lots where Dangerous Buildings 25 38 were Demolished 58 S. New St. 120 W. Water St. 53 S. New St. 45 S. New St. 56 S. New St. Figure 5: Vacant & Blighted Buildings Within the DDD Boundary Page 11 of 19 Page 37

Item #7. City of Dover, DE Updated District Plan - DRAFT Downtown Development District Tables 4 and 5 include additional housing data, while Tables 6 and 7 address income and poverty data at the County, City, and Tract levels. Data comes from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 5-Year American Community Survey (ACS) from the years 2006-2010 and 2016-2020 to provide an accurate comparison to the original application which also utilized ACS data. Block level data is unavailable for these measures. The Dover DDD boundary spans four census tracts, though each tract contains land that falls outside of the district. Census tract shapes changed somewhat between 2010 and 2020 as well, as illustrated in Appendix B Map 5. Tract level data still provides some insight into the progress that has occurred from 2010 to 2020 as well as need that still exists in census tracts that intersect with Dover’s DDD. The ACS contains estimates with a margin of error, and it is unclear what impact the COVID-19 pandemic had on 2020 data. Table 4: Tract Level Housing Data 2010 Table 5: Tract Level Housing Data 2020  According to 5-Year ACS estimates from 2010 and 2020, the percentage of housing built in 1940 or earlier is currently higher in census tracts that intersect with the DDD than in the City of Dover or Kent County, though that percentage has declined in two of the four tracts that intersect with the DDD.  Median home values in Kent County increased 8% from 2010 to 2020, but in Dover they fell 6% in that same time. Census tracts 409 and 413 saw median home values increase, though tracts 414 and 433 saw decreases.  Census tract shapes have changed slightly between 2010 and 2020.  Significant portions of each census tract that intersects with the DDD lie outside of the district boundary. Page 12 of 19 Page 38

Item #7. City of Dover, DE Updated District Plan - DRAFT Downtown Development District Income & Poverty Data Table 6: Tract Level Income & Poverty Data 2010 Table 7: Tract Level Income & Poverty Data 2020 Page 13 of 19 Page 39

Item #7. City of Dover, DE Updated District Plan - DRAFT Downtown Development District  According to 5-Year ACS, the median household income increased in three of the four census tracts that intersect with the DDD between 2010 and 2020. Tracts 409 and 413 saw increases as high as 15%-16%, which is higher than the 8% increase in Kent County.  Median income in these tracts remained lower than the 2020 median of $38,800 in the City of Dover and $48,039.60 for Kent County.  The 2020 percentage of the population living below poverty level in all census tracts that intersect with the DDD is higher than the 13.2% level in Kent County.  The percentage of the population living below the poverty level fell in tracts 413 and 414 between 2010 and 2020 and increased in tracts 409 and 433.  The percentage of low- or moderate-income households is based on the percentage of households who earn less than 80% of median household income. In all census tracts that intersect with the DDD, the percentage of low- or moderate-income households is higher than the 2020 percentage in Kent County of 28%.  The percentage of low or moderate-income households fell in census tract 414, but increased in other census tracts that intersect with the DDD.  Census tract shapes have changed slightly between 2010 and 2020.  Significant portions of each census tract that intersects with the DDD lie outside of the district boundary. Employment Data OnTheMap, a tool developed by the US Census Bureau for analyzing employment data, was utilized to analyze the flow of employees into and outside of the proposed DDD boundary. The full report produced is attached in Appendix E. As demonstrated in Figure 6, 1,501 employees are employed within the proposed DDD boundary, but live outside the boundary; 425 individuals live within the proposed DDD boundary, but work outside of it; only 11 individuals are both employed within the proposed DDD boundary and work Worker Flows 1,501- within it as well. Overall, the DDD Employed in benefits from a net-migration of Selection Area, Live Outside employees to the district. There is not a 425- Live in significant overlap between individuals Selection Area, Employed who both live and work within the Outside district boundaries. 11- Employed and Live in Selection Area Selection Area Figure 6: Worker Inflow and Outflow Page 14 of 19 Page 40

Item #7. City of Dover, DE Updated District Plan - DRAFT Downtown Development District Vision, Goals, and Strategies Dover has been active in its efforts to revitalize the downtown since the 1990s. While the words used to describe the vision for downtown Dover have changed over the years, the vision has remained unchanged. All previous efforts undertaken by the City of Dover and many partner organizations have been striving for a strong, vibrant downtown with a thriving commercial district, a safe and attractive environment for walking, and housing that meets the needs of the Dover community. In 2014, when applying for the DDD designation, the City of Dover submitted two plans to articulate this vision. These were Restoring Central Dover: Our Vision for Vitality (2014) and the Dover Transit Center Neighborhood Plan and Design Book (2011). Together these plans established a roadmap for downtown revitalization while mitigating the gentrification that often accompanies reinvestment in an area. The Dover Transit Center Neighborhood Plan and Design Book sought to capitalize on the State’s investment in a new transit center on Water Street. Restoring Central Dover sought to improve housing stock, bolster homeownership, and build community in an area that had lacked investment. The Capital City 2030: Transforming Downtown Dover Plan The vision articulated in prior plans remains relevant, but the strategies and approaches outlined in The Capital City 2030: Transforming Downtown Dover reflect the time and the circumstances of Dover in 2023 (Appendix A, January 2023). This plan was a collaborative effort between the DDP, City of Dover, and Mosaic Development Partners as well as other private firms. Throughout 2022, the team worked to gather information and public input, assess current conditions, identify needs and opportunities for redevelopment and investment, and create implementation and investment strategies to guide the community toward an equitable and sustainable future. The target date by which Dover’s commerce and housing will reach its full potential is the year 2030. This plan builds upon many of the initial goals and strategies outlined in the Transit Neighborhood Plan and the Restoring Central Dover Plan, while bringing these plans up to date, adding additional expert and community input, and incorporating lessons learned in the first decade of the DDD program. Through a public process, barriers to capital investment were identified. These include the following key issues:  Homelessness, vagrancy, and safety,  The lack of pedestrian activity on Loockerman Street,  Street design and streetscapes fail to support a destination retail street and thriving downtown,  Condition of infrastructure,  Scarce amenities,  Streets prioritize vehicle movement over other modalities,  Regional anchors are disconnected,  Too few businesses to attract new residents,  Not enough regular foot traffic for food and beverage establishments,  Lack of parking, Page 15 of 19 Page 41

Item #7. City of Dover, DE Updated District Plan - DRAFT Downtown Development District  Limited housing stock- insufficient to support retail programming, and  More pro-business regulations and incentives are needed to spur private investment. Vision:  Transform Downtown Dover and the surrounding area into a vibrant, thriving community and regional destination, with Loockerman Street serving as the spine for the downtown district, with wide sidewalks, trees, vibrant store fronts, food and retail options, outdoor seating, and traffic calming strategies.  A multi-modal Dover that welcomes people who walk, cycle, use a scooter, take a bus, or drive and offers connection to existing key anchors and major hubs in the area.  A vibrant community built on the principles of equitable development that becomes a model for people to live, work, and play.  A thriving economy, commercial center, and destination that attracts residents and visitors while honoring Dover’s heritage. Goals: Figure 7: Capital City 2030 Plan Projected Outcomes  New Developments offering residential units to increase population density downtown, a boutique hotel, centralized parking, contemporary architecture upgraded building structures, and programmed public spaces.  The projected outcomes of the Plan include 97,700sf of commercial space, a hotel, a grocery store, 792 parking spaces, and 927 residential units across 6 sites.  Achieve an annual economic impact of 360 full time jobs per year offering $11.8 million in compensation.  Revive Loockerman and create 3,674 linear feet of commercial road.  21.6 acres of green space, a River Walk, and a community amphitheater.  A multi-modal transit hub, streetscape improvements, and improved lighting systems to promote safety.  Art installations, trees, and preservation of historic architecture to promote culture and preserve community character. Page 16 of 19 Page 42

Item #7. City of Dover, DE Updated District Plan - DRAFT Downtown Development District Strategies: Important strategies identified in the strategic master plan include:  Installing monuments at entry points to the downtown and implementing a crosswalk art program, which has already launched. Local artists have created painted crosswalks at 1 W. Figure 8: Capital City 2030 Plan Loockerman Street and 394 W. Loockerman Monumental Signage Street.  Create a Multi-Modal Dover by ensuring that the downtown core is accessible from all directions by car, bike, and foot. This involves creating street typologies, bike lanes and bike networks, widening sidewalks, adding traffic calming infrastructure, installing raised intersections, and creating more centralized parking. It also includes a transportation hub and strategically placed wayfinding signage directing visitors to shopping, dining, and attractions. Figure 9: Painted Crosswalks o The Dover/Kent County Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) is currently conducting a Downtown Dover Pathways study to identify means to better connect key activity centers within downtown Dover by walking, cycling, scooter, other active transportation and micromobility options. Activity centers include facilities such as Bayhealth, legislative mall, Delaware State University, Dover Transit Center, Figure 10: Capital City 2030 Plan Rendering of the and Dover Air Force Base. Intersection of East Loockerman St. and Park Dr o Additional strategies for creating a connected community may include the use of pedestrian only alleyways and bikeshare programs, increased public transit options to fill gaps, and sidewalk improvements.  Revive Loockerman Street so it is a pedestrian and activity corridor with wider sidewalks, narrower roads, room for outdoor dining and sidewalk planters, improved lighting systems, Figure 11: Capital City 2030 Plan and a tree preservation program. The Rendering of Recommended Streetscape pedestrian experience will be improved with Typologies on W. Loockerman St. Page 17 of 19 Page 43

Item #7. City of Dover, DE Updated District Plan - DRAFT Downtown Development District extended store hours and engaging consumer experiences that encourage visitors to spend time in the area.  Adjust the intersection design at State Street, Kings Highway, and Loockerman to improve safety and pedestrian access.  Address parking issues by creating a mobility hub with structured parking, bike or car share access, travel information, and more.  Preserving the architecture and historical character of downtown. Provide clear design standards that clarify which design elements should be encouraged or discouraged in renovations and in new construction.  Develop a community density plan that seeks to add residential units at various price points. Key Projects Capital City 2030 identifies target sites where implementing targeted strategies will have the greatest impact. The key projects have been identified with the goal of increasing density downtown and growing amenities in a manner that is equitable, sustainable, and in line with the goals and values of the City and its stakeholders. As the first decade of the DDD program ends, several of these key projects are taking shape. Capital City 2030 includes a financial framework to achieve the plan’s goals, and the incentives provided by DDD designation are instrumental. As it relates to the DDD District Plan, three major projects are expected to begin development within the next couple of years and will serve as catalysts for other redevelopment activity identified in Capital City 2030. These include the 120 and 129 South Governors Avenue projects and the Old Dover Post Office project. Availability of DDD incentives have played a major role in getting these projects off the ground. Figure 18 includes images of current sites on Governors Avenue and the project renderings from the Capital City 2030 Plan. This figure also includes the Old Dover Post Office location, and the rendering created by the private developer who is working to renovate the space. In addition, critical upgrades to the sewer and water infrastructure will ensure that the infrastructure can support the increase in density.  120 S. Governors Avenue- Construct a multi-level building with parking, residences, a grocery store, and outdoor space to increase downtown amenities.  129 S. Governors Avenue and other adjacent parcels- Construct a parking deck to replace the existing surface lot. Create a transit hub and nearby residential units and town homes.  The Old Post - The City is currently working with a developer on a proposal to create a 4- story mixed-use building with space for 2 retail establishments, parking, office space, and 30 apartment units.  Critical Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Upgrades – The City will replace aging water and sewer lines needed to support downtown development. Appendix F features the Governor’s Press Release on the investment as well as subsequent news articles about the forthcoming investments. Capital City 2030 identifies additional key projects in the “Our Plan: Project Sites” section beginning on page 74. These projects are also important to the vision for downtown Dover and Page 18 of 19 Page 44

Item #7. City of Dover, DE Updated District Plan - DRAFT Downtown Development District will likely move forward after the initial key projects are underway. DDD incentives are important to the feasibility of all these key projects. Figure 12: Current Lots and Renderings Page 19 of 19 Page 45

Item #7. Page 46

Item #7. Appendix A Please see the Transforming Downtown Dover Capital City 2030 Master Plan: https:// www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/zot7m23o8us1b4rzd4edh/DOVER_Masterplan_January.pdf? rlkey=fy132lnwpvwmfohyxiyiebkdy&dl=0 Page 47

Item #7. Page 48

Item #7. Appendix B Page 49

Item #7. City of Dover, DE Updated District Plan: Appendix Downtown Development District Appendix B: Maps 1. Project Locations 2. CDHH and NeighborGood Project Locations 3. Census Tracts & Block Groups 4. Census Blocks 5. Census Tract Changes 6. Census Block Group Changes 7. Percent Homeownership 2010 8. Percent Homeownership 2020 9. Percent Vacant Units (2020) 10. Vacant Building 11. Dangerous Buildings 12. Total Crime 13. Violent Crime 14. Drug Crime 15. Property Crime 16. Proposed Boundary 17. Current Zoning 18. Current Land Use (2019 Comprehensive Plan) 19. Planned Land Use (2019 Comprehensive Plan) 20. FEMA Floodplain 21. National Historic Districts Page 50

Item #7. Page 51

Item #7. Page 52

Item #7. Page 53

Item #7. Page 54

Item #7. Page 55

Item #7. Page 56

Item #7. Page 57

Item #7. Page 58

Item #7. Page 59

Item #7. Page 60

Item #7. Page 61

Item #7. Page 62

Item #7. Page 63

Item #7. Page 64

Item #7. Page 65

Item #7. Page 66

Item #7. Page 67

Item #7. Page 68

Item #7. Page 69

Item #7. Page 70

Item #7. Page 71

Item #7. Rossi Transportation Group, Inc. 555 E. Loockerman Street, Suite 220 Dover, DE 19901 Page 72

Item #8. City of Dover MAYOR AND COUNCIL PROPOSED COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2024-06 1 A RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF THE APPLICATION FOR A FIVE-YEAR 2 EXTENDED DESIGNATION AS A DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 3 WHEREAS, under the Downtown Development Districts Act, 22 Del.C. §§ 1901 et seq. (the "Act"), 4 the State of Delaware may designate districts within Delaware's cities, towns, and unincorporated areas 5 that will qualify for significant development incentives and other State benefits; and 6 WHEREAS, these districts are known as Downtown Development Districts ("Districts"); and 7 WHEREAS, in 2015, the downtown area of the City of Dover was designated as a Downtown 8 Development District for an initial ten-year period; and 9 WHEREAS, the Act allows the Governor to renew existing Districts for up to two five-year 10 renewal periods, upon recommendation of the Cabinet Committee on State Planning Issues; and 11 WHEREAS, the Office of State Planning Coordination has developed a renewal application 12 process to evaluate the performance of district responsibilities by the municipality, the continued 13 need for the district, and its effectiveness in achieving program goals, with such applications being 14 due six months prior to expiration; and 15 WHEREAS, application materials must include an updated district plan including updated goals, 16 objectives, strategies, and key priority projects, a program evaluation, and a discussion of the 17 continued need for the District designation supported by data, and information about the proposed 18 incentive package to achieve the purposes set forth in the Act (the “Local Incentives”) and; 19 WHEREAS, Applicants may revise the original District Boundary as a part of the renewal process 20 to meet the redevelopment goals of the next five-year period; and 21 WHEREAS, if the renewal application is successful and the City receives a five-year extension of 22 its District designation, the District Plan and Local Incentives proposed by the City shall be binding; 23 and 24 WHEREAS, the incentives associated with designation as a Downtown Development District have 25 and are expected to continue to greatly benefit current and future residents, businesses, non-profit 26 organizations, and others within the City of Dover; and 27 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Dover strongly believes that it is in the best interest of 28 the City of Dover to apply for a renewal of the District designation. P.O. Box 475 ❖ Dover, Delaware ❖19903 Page 73 Community Excellence Through Quality Service

COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2024-06 PAGE 2 Item #8. 29 NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT: 30 1. The City Council supports the Application for a five-year extension of District Designation 31 prepared by Rossi Group and dated March 2024 (the "Application"); and 32 2. The City of Dover is authorized to appoint a District administrator (the "Administrator") to 33 file the Application on behalf of the City, and to provide such other documents and 34 information as may be necessary or desirable in connection with the Application; and 35 3. If the Application is successful and the City of Dover receives notice of District renewal: 36 a. The City shall adhere to the District Plan and the Local Incentives contained in the 37 Application for the duration of the District designation; and 38 b. The Administrator, or their designee(s), is authorized to execute such documents and 39 enter into such agreements as may be necessary or desirable in connection with the 40 Downtown Development Districts program and the rights and obligations of the City 41 of Dover thereunder; and 42 c. The Administrator, or their designee(s), is authorized to carry out all District 43 administrative and reporting requirements on behalf of the City of Dover for the 44 duration of the District. 45 ADOPTED: * 46 47 ROBIN R. CHRISTIANSEN WILLIAM F. HARE MAYOR COUNCIL PRESIDENT 48 Actions History 49 05/13/2024 – Scheduled for Introduction – City Council P.O. Box 475 ❖ Dover, Delaware ❖19903 Page 74 Community Excellence Through Quality Service

Item #9. PETITION TO AMEND ZONING DISTRICT Public Hearing Before the Dover City Council on May 13, 2024 Recommendation from Planning Commission Meeting of April 15, 2024 With Staff and Development Advisory Committee Review Application: Rezoning Lands of Linda Duncan at 600 Forest Street Applicant/Equitable Owner: Erin Barrett Owner: Linda Duncan Address: 600 Forest Street, Dover DE, and unaddressed Forest Street Location: South side of Forest Street at the east end of Loockerman Street. East of Railroad Avenue and railroad corridor. Tax Parcel: ED-05-076.12-02-44.00-000 ED-05-076.12-02-45.00-000 Overall Parcel Size: 0.51 acres+/- Present Use: Vacant tract of land 2019 Comprehensive Plan Designation-Land Mixed Use Use Category: Present Zoning: IO (Institutional and Office Zone) H (Historic District Zone) SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone) Proposed Zoning: C-2A (Limited Central Commercial Zone) H (Historic District Zone) SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone) Request: Rezoning to build a mixed-use building to include office/retail and apartments. File Number: Z-24-03 Ordinance Number: 2024-09 P. O. Box 475 Dover, DE 19903 Page 75 Community Excellence Through Quality Service

Z-24-03 Lands of Linda Duncan at 600 Forest Street Planning Commission Recommendation Report of April 15, 2024 Item #9. Page 2 of 10 Planning Commission Recommendation: The Application Z-24-03 Lands of Linda Duncan at 600 Forest Street: Rezoning IO/H/SWPOZ to C-2A/H/SWPOZ was represented by Mrs. Erin Barrett as the equitable owner of the subject property. A Public Hearing was conducted on April 15, 2024 where one member of the public spoke, and no written comments were received (as part of the meeting) regarding the Rezoning application. The Planning Commission’s motion to recommend approval of the proposed rezoning from IO to C-2A (Limited Central Commercial Zone) and subject to the H (Historic District Zone) and SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone) resulted in a 9-0 vote in favor. (Draft Meeting Minutes attached.) APPLICATION: Z-24-03 Lands of Linda Duncan at 600 Forest Street, Dover DE: Rezoning IO/H/SWPOZ to C-2A/H/SWPOZ This Rezoning Application was referred to the Planning Commission as per Zoning Ordinance, Article 10 §5. The Planning Commission is required to provide a Review Report to the City Council. The following document and attachments are provided as the Review Report and Planning Commission Recommendation. I. APPLICATION SUMMARY: This Rezoning Application is for two parcels of land consisting of 0.51 acres+/-*. The property is zoned IO (Institutional and Office Zone) and subject to the H (Historic District Zone) and the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone). The proposed zoning for the property is C-2A (Limited Central Commercial Zone) and remaining subject to the H (Historic District Zone) and the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone). The property is located on the south side Forest Street and near the west end of Loockerman Street. The owner of record is Linda Duncan. The equitable owner is Erin Barrett. Property Address: 600 Forest Street. Tax Parcel: ED-05- 076.12-02-44.00-000 and ED-05-076.12-02-45.00-000. Council District 4. Ordinance #2024-09. *It is noted that the survey plan submitted shows a parcel of 0.51 acres +/- but it does not match the city’s GIS mapping of the parcels. Planning Staff listed two parcel numbers currently related to the area of request. This is being researched for clarification. Existing Property: FORMER HARTNETT LUMBER YARD BUILDING This was the site of the former Hartnett Lumber Yard building; it was included in the 1979 National Register of Historic Places inventory. The property is currently within the City of Dover H (Historic District Zone) and also listed in the National Register of Historic Places as part of the Victorian Dover Historic District. A Demolition Permit was issued in 1999 to demolish the buildings on this property (after a fire). The property is currently a vacant tract of land with no buildings. The south side (rear) of the property is at the end of Loockerman Street near the intersection with Jerusalem Way. The land on the west side and southwest side of the subject property is owned by the State of Delaware; this is the location of the former train station building now utilized as offices. The street that the property is addressed on is Forest Street (to the north) which is a State maintained road. Page 76

Z-24-03 Lands of Linda Duncan at 600 Forest Street Planning Commission Recommendation Report of April 15, 2024 Item #9. Page 3 of 10 Previous Applications: At the September 20, 2010 Meeting, the Planning Commission granted conditional approval and Architectural Review Certification for a plan to build a four story 32,624 S.F. office building with a coffee shop and the associated site improvements. On September 19, 2011, the plan received a one year extension; and a second extension was granted September 17, 2012. The plan did not achieve final plan approval and has expired (HI-10-05/S-10-17). Surrounding Land Uses The surrounding parcels are zoned commercial: C-2 (Central Commercial Zone), C-2A (Limited Central Commercial Zone), and IO (Institutional and Office Zone). The property to the west is owned by the State of Delaware and contains the former train station building. The First Capital Center (Duncan Center) is at 500 W. Loockerman Street, which is south of the subject property. This building is a 5.5-6-story office building built in 2004. These properties are all currently zoned IO (Institutional and Office Zone). The other side of Forest Street contains a 3-tenant commercial building with parking off South Kirkwood Street. To the north and northwest is a gas station and multi-tenant building including retail, offices, and a convenience store. II. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE REVIEW In the 2019 Comprehensive Plan, the Land Development Plan (Map 12-1) recommends that this property be used for Mixed Use. The goals and polices for Mixed Use Areas are listed in the 2019 Comprehensive Plan excerpts presented below (pages 12-7 through 12-9): MIXED USE AREAS Dover is a community whose character is determined by its history, changes in its economic base, or by regional and national events. Resulting Mixed-Use areas are characterized by a finely scaled mix of residential, commercial, civic, institutional, and occasionally industrial uses. Typically reflecting the long-term cycles of growth and change in the community, these traditional development patterns emerge where no single use category is predominant. These areas reflect close proximity of uses and structures, neighborhoods developed around walkability versus automobiles, varied architectural styles typically with grid-based street patterns, and an array of social and economic determinates. Mixed Use areas can reflect the historic pattern of development such as in Downtown Dover, an area where a mix of uses is driven by a primary set of uses such as around Bayhealth Hospital, or they can be an area where a new development should foster walkability and close interactions among activities and uses in a traditional neighborhood setting. Goals: Mixed Land Use The overall goals for Mixed Use areas are: 1. Encourage creation of neighborhood centers. 2. Within the close-knit neighborhood fabric there are opportunities for the creation of urban centers. These centers should be established along major roadways and feature mixed use development, pedestrian-friendly public environments, and opportunities for connection to future transit. Page 77

Z-24-03 Lands of Linda Duncan at 600 Forest Street Planning Commission Recommendation Report of April 15, 2024 Item #9. Page 4 of 10 3. In order to encourage non-automobile access to the center, the activities should be clustered within a one-half mile radius (or 10-minute walk) and be located so as to draw upon residents from a number of surrounding neighborhoods. 4. Develop strategies that will encourage the creation of well-defined public street spaces and pedestrian-friendly village areas that encourage walking and bicycle use. This may include on-street and behind building parking, and the creation of build-to lines for new development. 5. Improve access that limits public access to open spaces areas such as pedestrian, bicycle, and transit networks to parks and natural areas. 6. Encourage the Mixed Use of residential and commercial uses in the Downtown area. Recommendations for Mixed Use Areas The Land Development Plan sets forth recommendations for the four largest distinct Mixed- Use areas. Downtown Dover – Historic Core and Center City : Mixed Use Area Downtown Dover is the City’s primary Mixed-Use area. The historic City center clustered around The Green dates back as early as the 1700s. It expands to also include the traditional City pattern of grid streets which developed during the 19th and early 20th centuries. As a result of its earlier development, Downtown Dover, like many other historic cities, includes a variety of intermingled land uses. The Downtown area, which includes the traditional Loockerman Street business district, is broadly bounded by Wesley College on the north, the railroad tracks on the west, Bayhealth-Kent General Hospital on the south, and St. Jones River on the east. It includes a street level mix of residential, commercial, office, cultural, and institutional uses. Downtown Dover is the traditional and symbolic center of the community and is vitally important to the overall image and identity of the City. As the State’s office complex and other businesses and services make Downtown the largest area of employment in the City, Downtown Dover is vital to the economy. It is important to preserve the area as a safe, convenient, and aesthetically pleasing business environment. Downtown provides a unique and affordable commercial environment where locally owned businesses reflect the small- town nature of the community. Downtown also provides a residential environment with a wide variety of housing types near commercial, cultural, education, and employment resources. The age of the buildings and infrastructure in the Downtown area requires special attention and incentives to assist in continual use and revitalization activities. Downtown lacks the vibrancy of years gone by and its revitalization will hinge on mixed land uses and developing a commercial niche. Removal of blighted conditions, rehabilitation and redevelopment of traditional residential areas, and re-establishment of neighborhood identity will be important components of the City’s strategies and initiatives. The goal of the Land Development Plan is to enhance the role of Downtown Dover as a major employment, residential and commercial center as well as the symbolic and cultural heart of the community. Efforts should strive to recognize its unique heritage and historic resources Page 78

Z-24-03 Lands of Linda Duncan at 600 Forest Street Planning Commission Recommendation Report of April 15, 2024 Item #9. Page 5 of 10 and to provide for mixed use development allowing greatest variation of uses, Activities to reestablish the economic and social vitality of Downtown neighborhoods are encouraged. Recommendations: Downtown Dover – Mixed Use • Master plan the Loockerman Street corridor. • Enhance the Downtown area through economic development and historic preservation programs. • Continue to support the preservation and adaptive reuse of buildings and infrastructure through public investments, property maintenance enforcement, housing grants, and financial incentives. • Promote zoning districts and regulations that support the traditional mixed-use nature of the Downtown area. • Support revitalization of Downtown residential neighborhoods. The Rezoning Request to C-2A (Limited Commercial Central Zone) is consistent with the Land Use Classification of Mixed-Use. Table 12-1: Land Use and Zoning Matrix (from the 2019 Comprehensive Plan) specifies that the following zones are compatible with this Land Use classification. See the excerpt from Table 12-1 given below. C-2 (Central Commercial) (Downtown Redevelopment Target Area Only) C-2A (Limited Central Commercial) TND (Traditional Neighborhood Design) C-1 (Neighborhood Commercial) C-1A (Limited Commercial) RGO (General Residence and Office) (Downtown Mixed-Use Redevelopment Target Area Only) R-8 (One Family Residence) R-10 (One Family Residence) RG-1 (General Residence) RG-2 (General Residence) RG-4 (General Resident - Multi-Story Apartments) C-3 (Service Commercial) CPO (Commercial and Professional Office) IO (Institutional and Office) III. ZONING REVIEW Request for C-2A (Limited Commercial Central Zone) Zoning The following code excerpt of the C-2A zoning district is provided from Article 3 §14 of the Zoning Ordinance. Page 79

Z-24-03 Lands of Linda Duncan at 600 Forest Street Planning Commission Recommendation Report of April 15, 2024 Item #9. Page 6 of 10 Section 14. Limited central commercial zone (C-2A). 14.1 Uses permitted. In a limited central commercial zone (C-2A), no building or premises shall be used, and no building or part of a building shall be erected, which is arranged, intended, or designed to be used, in whole or in part, for any purpose, except the following: (a) Retail stores. (b) Business, professional or governmental offices. (c) Personal service establishments. (d) Restaurants. (e) Service establishments. (f) Hotels. (g) Places of public assembly. (h) Drive-throughs. (i) One family residences, including attached and semi-detached dwellings, complying with the bulk standards of the RG-1 (General Residence) zone. (j) Apartments and multi-family dwellings. 14.2 Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted, conditional upon the approval of the planning commission in accordance with the procedures and subject to the general conditions set forth in article 10, section 1: (a) Parking lots and parking structures as a principal use on suitably landscaped lots. (b) Fuel pumps accessory to a permitted use. 14.3 Enclosed buildings. All permitted uses and all storage accessory thereto, other than off-street parking, shall be carried on in buildings fully enclosed on all sides, except for outdoor eating areas associated with restaurants and outdoor sales areas approved by the city planner. 14.4 Performance standards. All uses are subject to performance standards as set forth in article 5, section 8.1. 14.5 Site development plan approval. Site development plan approval in accordance with article 10, section 2 hereof shall be required prior to the issuance of building permits for the erection or enlargement of all structures and prior to the issuance of certificates of occupancy for any change of use. H (Historic District Zone) The project site is located in the H (Historic District Zone) and subject to the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, Article 3 §21 and referenced sections. The H (Historic District Zone) is described in Zoning Ordinance, Article 3 Section 21 with the following purpose statement: Article 3, Section 21. - Historic district (H). 21.1 Purpose. The purpose of this historic district regulation is to preserve and enhance that unique character and value of the old portion of Dover as an area of special charm and interest. It is particularly intended that the regulations prevent, in the historic dis trict, any change of conditions that would be deemed to be a disfigurement or degradation of the present unique visual and architectural qualities of the district. SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone) The purpose of the Source Water Protection Overlay Zone is to provide a safe drinking water supply and to ensure that groundwater is adequately protected and maintained. The SWPOZ includes a list of prohibited uses where such uses/activities could impact ground water resources. Page 80

Z-24-03 Lands of Linda Duncan at 600 Forest Street Planning Commission Recommendation Report of April 15, 2024 Item #9. Page 7 of 10 The site is located within the SWPOZ (Tier 3: Excellent Recharge Area) found in Article 3 Section 29.7 of the Zoning Ordinance. However, this project site is within the Downtown Redevelopment Target Area which is exempted from the SWPOZ requirements and restrictions as per Zoning Ordinance, Article 3 §29.79 with regard to bulk standards, ground cover, and floor area ratios. IV. RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING STAFF: This Request is to rezone lands from IO (Institutional and Office Zone) to C-2A (Limited Central Commercial Zone). While both zones are commercial in nature, the IO Zone generally does not allow for residential dwelling units instead focusing on offices, public buildings, and institutional uses. The C-2A zone allows for both commercial uses and a variety of residential units including one family dwellings, apartments, and multi-family dwellings. This location is in the Downtown Development District (High Priority Target Area). This location is also in the Downtown Redevelopment Target Area, which is outlined in Dover Code of Ordinances, Appendix C, Article II, Section 4. The property’s location in these areas and other qualifications may allow redevelopment activities to qualify for incentives. The Transforming Downtown Dover: Capital City 2030 Plan commissioned by the Downtown Dover Partnership envisions projects to increase residential dwelling units, revitalize commercial areas, and provide gateway improvements. This property location is part of the western gateway approach into Downtown Dover. Staff recommends that the Rezoning be granted to C-2A (Limited Central Commercial Zone), with it remaining subject to H (Historic District Zone) and SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone) as requested for the approximate half acre parcel. The proposed zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan for the Mixed-Use classification, as it fits the goals of the Comprehensive Plan by encouraging the use of both commercial and residential uses in the Downtown area. The C-2A allows for different housing types as well as retail, offices, restaurants, hotels, and personal services establishments, potentially creating neighborhood centers. The C-2A zone would also allow for the place of public assembly if desired. Loockerman Street corridor is a mixed-use corridor which includes a variety of first floor commercial businesses and offices with apartments on the second floors. One example of a mixed-use building is the Bayard Plaza Apartments with retail and commercial spaces on the first floor, and apartments on the floors above. There are a number of surviving historic buildings in the general area including: New Jerusalem Baptist Church, the train station building, and other buildings on Loockerman Street. There is existing infrastructure for water, sanitary sewer, and electric services that can be extended to serve development and the police, fire, and emergency medical services service the area. Any future development project will need to consider traffic circulation on nearby streets and sidewalks, and site access/entrance locations. It is noted that the Zoning Ordinance outlines specific procedures and review process regarding changes to the H (Historic District Zone) and the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone) zoning designations of a property. These specific procedures are outlined in Zoning Ordinance, Article 10 §3.3; Zoning Ordinance, Article 3 §29.77; and Zoning Ordinance, Article 10 §5. This application did not make a request to be removed from the H (Historic District Zone) or the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone). Page 81

Z-24-03 Lands of Linda Duncan at 600 Forest Street Planning Commission Recommendation Report of April 15, 2024 Item #9. Page 8 of 10 This Rezoning Request does not grant approval of a specific use for the property but makes its land use subject to a listing of uses permitted and potential conditional uses as allowed in the C-2A zoning district and as additionally limited by SWPOZ prohibited uses list. Staff notes that any potential development for the subject rezoning area would have to be in line with the zoning classification, overlay zones, and would similarly have to follow all development design guidelines of the Zoning Ordinance, as well as the Design Standards and Guidelines for the City of Dover Historic District Zone. Were the Application for Rezoning to be recommended by the Planning Commission and subsequently approved by the City Council, the applicant would still have to submit Site Development Plans and/or Subdivision Plans, Architectural Review Certification, and Permits for review for any new use of the site to be established. This recommendation is being made without the benefit of hearing the comments of surrounding landowners and residents. A public hearing is required on this matter and the Planning Commission should give those comments consideration. V. PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW FOR RECOMMENDATION This Rezoning Application is a request for a zoning map amendment which changes the zoning district of a property. The Planning Commission as part of their public hearing and review process will provide a recommendation on the rezoning request to City Council. As part of the process outlined in Zoning Ordinance, Article 10 Section 5, the Planning Commission must evaluate the following factors when considering the request: Article 10 § 5.36 Report of the planning commission. Regarding each application for a zoning map amendment, the planning commission shall provide a report to the city council stating a recommended action with regards to the proposed amendment, along with the commission's evaluation of the following factors: (A) Whether the uses permitted by the proposed change would be compatible with the existing uses and zones in the area concerned; (B) Whether adequate public services and infrastructure exist or can be created or expanded to serve the needs of any additional demand as a result of such change; and (C) Whether the proposed change is in accordance with the city's current comprehensive plan. A Recommendation Report from the Planning Commission will be forwarded to the City Council for their consideration of the Rezoning Application. This document and its attachments make up the Recommendation Report. RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION: At the Hybrid (In-Person and Virtual) Planning Commission Meeting of April 15, 2024, the Rezoning Application Z-24-03 was represented by Mrs. Erin Barrett as the equitable owner of the subject property at 600 Forest Street. During the Public Hearing, one member of the public spoke, and no written comments were received. The Planning Commission’s motion was to recommend approval for Rezoning application Z-24-03 Lands of Lands of Linda Duncan from IO (Institutional and Office Zone) to C-2A (Limited Central Commercial Zone) and remaining subject to the H (Historic District Zone) Page 82

Z-24-03 Lands of Linda Duncan at 600 Forest Street Planning Commission Recommendation Report of April 15, 2024 Item #9. Page 9 of 10 and SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone) and resulted in a vote of 9-0 in favor of rezoning. The reasons cited for the recommendation of approval include it being in keeping with things we are trying to do for Downtown Dover; its compatible with surrounding uses in the area; consistency with the City’s 2019 Comprehensive Plan; and with reference to the recommendation of approval from the Planning Staff (in Development Advisory Committee Report). See also the included excerpt of the DRAFT Meeting Minutes of the April 15, 2024 Planning Commission meeting. The comments received from the other member agencies of the Development Advisory Committee (D.A.C.) are also provided. VI. ADVISORY COMMENTS TO THE APPLICANT: 1) The applicant shall be aware that approval of any Rezoning application does not represent Site Development Plan, Subdivision Plan, or Architectural Review Certification. Following any decision made by City Council in regard to this Rezoning, then an application for a Site Plan, Subdivision Plan, Architectural Review Certification and/or appropriate Building Permits must be submitted to the Planning Department prior to the establishment of a use, development activity, or any construction activity on the site. The applicant should contact the Planning Staff to determine the appropriate review process for any proposed projects. 2) The applicant should be aware that Development within the H (Historic District Zone) is subject to Architectural Review Certification process which may involve application to the Historic District Commission. 3) The applicant should also be aware that the previous uses as a lumberyard may necessitate environmental assessments related to Brownfields or environmental remediation activities. 4) The applicant should be aware of the potential for historic archaeological resources which may include previous building locations, wells, privies, etc. on the property. The State Division of Historical & Cultural Affairs can provide technical assistance when dealing with archaeological resources including previous studies at the subject location. 5) The applicant shall be aware that approval of any Rezoning application does not represent a Building Permit, Demolition Permit, Sign Permit, or other construction activity permit approval. A separate application submission is required before issuance of permits by the City of Dover. 6) The applicant shall be aware that any future use and/or buildings may be subject to a separate permitting or licensing processes through the City of Dover Licensing and Permitting Division. All businesses operating in the City of Dover are required to obtain a City of Dover Business License. Certain types of uses also require a Public Occupancy Permit or Rental Dwelling Permits. ATTACHMENTS: • Zoning Map Exhibit Page 83

Z-24-03 Lands of Linda Duncan at 600 Forest Street Planning Commission Recommendation Report of April 15, 2024 Item #9. Page 10 of 10 • Application Z-24-03 Submission: Boundary and Existing Conditions Plan (2010) • Development Advisory Committee Comments from City of Dover Departments of Public Works and Water & Wastewater, Electric Department, City Office of the Fire Marshal, DelDOT, and Dover/Kent County MPO • Excerpt from DRAFT Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 15, 2024 • Proposed Ordinance #2024-09 Page 84

City of Dover Application No.: Z-24-03 Item #9. Department of Planning & Inspections RG- RG- e rs Av C- 1 RG- RG- IO 1 St RG- verno RG- n 2A Fulto 1 1 w St N Go IPM C-3 RG- NQ 1 1 1 N Ne N Kir RG- ueen RG- k wo 1 ge RG- St Rid t 1 IO C-1A est S M 1 od S t ly St NW C- C-1A C-1A C-3 2A RG- r C-1A 1 ton D C-3 C-3 t ion S Wes M ve IO Divis RG-1 ors A W vern C-2A RG-1 S Go IO C-2A RG-1 t C-2A RG-1 eed S C-3 WR C-1A S Ki rkwo C- S t C- est C-3 od S C-2 1 1A Fore IO SW RG-1 RG-1 RG-1 st St RG-1 t w St C-2A S Ne Lincoln St C-2 R-8 C-2 R- t C-3 C-3 Rail cker man S een Cher ry St W Loo Davis Cir 8 RG-1 S Qu R-8 road C-2 C-2 Ave C-2 Vine St St Paul St IO C- RG-1 IO Jerus 2 IO RG-1 RG-1 Way RG-1 alem IO r St Clare RG- IO ghte Slau 1 t RG-1 nce S h St W Nort C-3 Minim RG-1 a St k Ln Ban RG-4 ing S TND Bann ou IO ett H se Cir Garr t St a ter WW Title: Lands of Linda Duncan Address: 600 Forest St. Legend Parcel ID: ED-05-076.12-02-44.00-000 and ED-05-076.12-02-45.00-000 Existing Zoning: IO (Institutional and Office Zone) SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone) Dover Boundary H (Historic District Zone) Proposed Zoning: C-2A (Limited Central Commercial Zone) Subject Property SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone) H (Historic District Zone) Zoning Owner: Date: Linda Duncan 3/19/2024 « Dover Parcels Page 85

Item #9. Page 86

Item #9. CITY OF DOVER DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY STAFF D.A.C. MEETING DATE: MARCH 27, 2024 APPLICATION: Lands of Linda Duncan at 600 Forest Street FILE #: Z-24-03 REVIEWING AGENCY: City of Dover Department of Public Works and Water & Wastewater CONTACT PERSON: Jason A. Lyon, P.E., Director of Water & Wastewater CONTACT PHONE #: 302-736-7025 CONTACT EMAIL #: jlyon@dover.de.us T HE S UBJECT P ROPOSAL HAS BEEN R EVIEWED FOR C ODE C OMPLIANCE , P LAN C ONFORMITY AND C OMPLETENESS IN A CCORDANCE WITH THIS A GENCY ’ S A UTHORITY AND A REA OF E XPERTISE . T HE F OLLOWING I TEMS HAVE BEEN I DENTIFIED AS E LEMENTS W HICH N EED TO BE A DDRESSED BY THE A PPLICANT : CITY AND STATE CODE REQUIREMENTS SANITATION / STREETS / STORMWATER / WATER / WASTEWATER / GENERAL 1. Our office has no objections to the proposed rezoning of tax parcel ED-05-076.12-02-44.00-000. Any redevelopment shall adhere to the City of Dover Water/Wastewater Handbook and the Specifications, Standards & Procedures for Public Works Construction. Impact fees may be applied to this property. Future development shall comply with all aspects of the City of Dover’s Cross Connection Control Program. RECOMMENDATIONS SUGGESTED AS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO MEET CODE OBJECTIVES SANITATION / STREETS / STORMWATER / WATER / WASTEWATER / GENERAL 1. None ADVISORY COMMENTS TO THE APPLICANT SANITATION / STREETS / STORMWATER / WASTEWATER / GENERAL 1. None WATER 1. This site currently has a monitoring well that is being used by DNREC and / or USGS. The use or abandonment of said well will need to be approved by the aforementioned agencies. I F Y OU H AVE A NY Q UESTIONS OR N EED TO D ISCUSS ANY OF THE A BOVE C OMMENTS , P LEASE C ALL THE A BOVE C ONTACT P ERSON AND THE P LANNING D EPARTMENT AS S OON AS P OSSIBLE . Page 87

Item #9. CITY OF DOVER DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY STAFF D.A.C. MEETING DATE: MAR 27, 2024 APPLICATION: Lands of Linda Duncan at 600 Forest Street FILE #: Z-24-03 REVIEWING AGENCY: City of Dover Electric Department CONTACT PERSON: Shawn Burgett, Engineering Services & System Ops Superintendent CONTACT PHONE #: 302-674-7568 CONTACT EMAIL #: sburgett@dover.de.us T HE S UBJECT P ROPOSAL HAS BEEN R EVIEWED FOR C ODE C OMPLIANCE , P LAN C ONFORMITY AND C OMPLETENESS IN A CCORDANCE WITH THIS A GENCY ’ S A UTHORITY AND A REA OF E XPERTISE . T HE F OLLOWING I TEMS HAVE BEEN I DENTIFIED AS E LEMENTS W HICH N EED TO BE A DDRESSED BY THE A PPLICANT : CITY AND STATE CODE REQUIREMENTS ELECTRIC Our office has no objection to the rezoning of: ED-05-076.12-02-44.00-000. RECOMMENDATIONS SUGGESTED AS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO MEET CODE OBJECTIVES ELECTRIC 1. Should this site be redeveloped, which includes modifications to the use, the applicant / developer will be responsible for all costs associated with providing the appropriate meter / service to this site based upon the use including any necessary system upgrades or extensions. The appropriateness and adequacy of electric and meters will be assessed at that time. 2. Any redevelopment shall adhere to the City of Dover’s Electric Service Handbook. https://evogov.s3.amazonaws.com/media/27/media/13108.pdf. ADVISORY COMMENTS TO THE APPLICANT ELECTRIC 1. None. I F Y OU H AVE A NY Q UESTIONS OR N EED TO D ISCUSS ANY OF THE A BOVE C OMMENTS , P LEASE C ALL THE A BOVE C ONTACT P ERSON AND THE P LANNING D EPARTMENT AS S OON AS P OSSIBLE . Page 88

C F #9. Z-24-03 Item I I T R CITY OF DOVER Y E DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE O M F A APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY R D.A.C. MEETING DATE: 03/27/24 D S O H V A E L R APPLICATION: Lands of Linda Duncan at 600 Forrest St FILE #: Z-24-03 REVIEWING AGENCY: City of Dover, Office of the Fire Marshal CONTACT PERSON: Jason Osika, Fire Marshal PHONE #: (302) 736-4457 josika@dover.de.us THE SUBJECT PROPOSAL HAS BEEN REVIEWED FOR CODE COMPLIANCE, PLAN CONFORMITY, AND COMPLETENESS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS AGENCY’S AUTHORITY AND AREA OF EXPERTISE. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AS ELEMENTS WHICH NEED TO BE ADDRESS BY THE APPLICANT: CITY AND STATE CODE REQUIREMENTS: 1. Proposal is a rezoning application. This office has no objections. 2. Every house, building or structure used or intended for use as living quarters or as a place for conducting business, and having any wall facing or abutting any public or private street or alley, shall have displayed on that wall, in legible, easily read characters which are of contrasting color to the background, the proper street number for such house, building, or structure in accordance with the following: One-family and two-family residential structures, height, the number shall measure a minimum of four inches in height, location, the number shall be placed on the house above or to the left or right of the front entrance, color, the number shall be contrasting to the background color, Arabic numerals, all numbers shall be Arabic numerals. Multiple-family dwellings, measurements, the number shall measure a minimum of six inches when identifying individual apartments with exterior doors, and 12 inches when identifying buildings with apartment complexes where there are two or more buildings not assigned street addresses. Individual buildings with street addresses shall have numbers measuring six inches, location, numbers shall be placed either in the center of the building or on the street end of the building so as to be visible from either the public or private street or from the parking lot, color, numbers shall be contrasting to the background color, Arabic numerals, all numbers used shall be Arabic numerals. Page 89

Item #9. Commercial, industrial and office buildings, height, the numbers shall measure a minimum of 12 inches in height, location generally, numbers shall be placed either in the center of the building or on the street end of the building so as to be visible from either the public or private street or from the parking lot, property line or driveway, should the building be located far enough from a public or private road so that the numbers are not clearly visible from the street, then the street address shall also be posted on the property at or near the property line or driveway to said building, color; each building, numbers shall be contrasting to the background color and shall be placed on each building in the complex, Arabic numerals, all numbers used shall be Arabic numerals, Shopping centers. Shopping centers consisting of two or more stores shall have a tenant or suite number affixed to the front of the tenant space and on the outside of the rear door which corresponds with that tenant space. Numbers shall measure six inches in height. (City of Dover Code of Ordinances, 98-344) 3. Project to be completed per approved Site Plan. ADDITIONAL / SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS TO OBTAIN APPROVAL: 1. N/A APPLICABLE CODES LISTED BELOW (NOT LIMITED TO): 2021 NFPA 1 Fire Code (NFPA; National Fire Protection Association) 2021 NFPA 101 Life Safety Code (NFPA; National Fire Protection Association) 2019 NFPA 72 National Fire Alarm and Signaling Code (NFPA; National Fire Protection Association) 2019 NFPA 13 Installation of Sprinkler Systems (NFPA; National Fire Protection Association) 2009 IBC (International Building Code) Latest editions of all other NFPA Codes as defined by the Delaware State Fire Prevention Regulations 2021 Delaware State Fire Prevention Regulations City of Dover Code of Ordinances *If you have any questions or need to discuss any of the above comments, please call the above contact person listed. Page 90

Item #9. CITY OF DOVER D E DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE L APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY D O T =============================================================== APPLICATION: Lands of Duncan in City of Dover (600 Forest Street) FILE#: Z-24-03 REVIEWING AGENCY: DelDOT CONTACT PERSON: Will T Mobley III PHONE#: 302-760-2409 =============================================================== THE SUBJECT PROPOSAL HAS BEEN REVIEWED FOR CODE COMPLIANCE, PLAN CONFORMITY AND COMPLETENESS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS AGENCY'S AUTHORITY AND AREA OF EXPERTISE. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AS ELEMENTS WHICH NEED TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE APPLICANT: CITY & STATE CODE REQUIREMENTS: No person, firm, corporation or the like shall construct, open, reconstruct, maintain, modify or use any crossing or entrance onto a state-maintained highway, street or road, including any drainage modifications leading into or carried by the highway drainage system, without first having complied with standards and regulations adopted by the Department and having obtained a permit issued by the Department. Please contact the Delaware Department of Transportation - Development Coordination section to begin permit process. RECOMMENDATIONS SUGGESTED AS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO MEET CODE OBJECTIVES: ADVISORY COMMENTS TO THE APPLICANT: 1. No objection to Rezoning. 2. Prior to site development, the user will request a pre submittal meeting with the DelDOT. Items to prepare for discussion at time of site development. a. Site access needs to be clarified. b. Trip Generations c. Limiting factors of the site d. Right of Way dedication Page 91

Item #9. CITY OF DOVER Dover/Kent DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE County Metropolitan APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY Planning D.A.C. MEETING DATE: 4/3/2024 Organization APPLICATION: Z-24-03 Lands of Linda Duncan at 600 Forest Street FILE # Z-24-03 REVIEWING AGENCY: Dover/Kent County MPO CONTACT PERSON: Malcolm Jacob PHONE #: (302) 387-6030 Issues of concern to the MPO are effective transit, reducing the amount of vehicle emissions by shortening or eliminating trips, and facilities for alternative modes of transportation, including bicycle and pedestrian access. The MPO considers the bicycle facilities required by the City of Dover to be the standard for all applications, not to be waived. City of Dover Planning Commission Zoning Review Z-24-03 Lands of Linda Duncan at 600 Forest Street 1) The MPO does not have any objections to the proposed rezoning. A sidewalk is already present on most of the property’s perimeter, and as long as these conditions are not negatively impacted by future changes to the property, pedestrians will still be able to navigate the area. 2) The property is located in close proximity to railroad tracks. Depending on future use and expected foot traffic, it may be necessary to steer pedestrians towards designated crossing areas. (These changes would need to take place at 516 Loockerman Street, the property adjacent to 600 Forest Street, though the changes would affect the safety conditions of both properties.) 3) There is a bus stop below the streetlight on Forest Street. Any future changes to the property should not affect access to this location. If you have any questions or need to discuss any of the above comments, please call the above contact person and the Planning Department as soon as possible. Page 92

Item #9. CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION April 15, 2024 Excerpt from Meeting Minutes – Draft The Meeting of the City of Dover Planning Commission was held on Monday, April 15, 2024 at 7:00 PM as an In-Person Meeting and also using the phone/videoconferencing system WebEx. The Meeting Session was conducted with Chair Mrs. Maucher presiding. Members present were Mr. Cooper, Mr. Roach (virtual), Mr. Witham, Mrs. Denney, Mr. Baldwin, Dr. Jones, Mr. Reaves, Mrs. Welsh (virtual), and Mrs. Maucher. Staff members present were Mrs. Dawn Melson-Williams, Ms. Katherine Oehmke, Mr. Jason Lyon (virtual), and Mrs. Kristen Mullaney. NEW APPLICATIONS Z-24-03 Lands of Linda Duncan at 600 Forest Street - Public Hearing and Review for Recommendation to City Council on a rezoning application for a parcel of land consisting of 0.51 acres+/-. The property is zoned IO (Institutional and Office Zone) and subject to the H (Historic District Zone) and the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone). The proposed zoning for the property is C-2A (Limited Central Commercial Zone) and remaining subject to the H (Historic District Zone) and the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone). The property is located on the south side Forest Street and near the west end of Loockerman Street. The owner of record is Linda Duncan. The equitable owner is Erin Barrett. Property Address: 600 Forest Street. Tax Parcels: ED-05-076.12-02-44.00-000 & ED-05-076.12-02-45.00-000. Council District 4. Ordinance #2024-09. Representative: Mrs. Erin Barrett, equitable owner Ms. Oehmke stated that the applicant for this application, Erin Barrett is here as the equitable owner and she is present. They are looking to rezone 600 Forest Street from IO (Institutional and Office Zone) to C-2A (Limited Commercial Zone). They are going to stay in the H (Historic District Zone) and it’s part of the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone). There is a slight difference in the bulk standards between the two zones. Basically, it’s reducing the number of available floors that they can go up with the new development of a structure. It is going from ten to six. The property is in the Historic District; so, once the Rezoning has been approved and they move forward creating a plan, they still need to get Architectural (Review) Certification from the Historic District Commission. Because of our new parking regulations, they will have to provide a parking plan at that time. In looking at the use comparison, the main difference in the IO (Institutional and Office Zone) and the C-2A (Limited Commercial Zone) is that it allows for residential. She has outlined on the screen, the C-2A (Limited Commercial Zone) residential uses. In reference to the Comprehensive Plan, both zones are in the Mixed Use Land Use category. The Mixed Use Comprehensive Plan goals are listed on the screen with the last one highlighted as “encouraging mixed use of residential and commercial uses in the Downtown Area.” You can see that the Source Water Protection Overlay Zone has some prohibitions. None of these uses listed on the screen are what are intended for the development, but it’s just giving you an overview of what things cannot go there. Excerpt of Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 15, 2024 Page 1 of 4 Page 93

Item #9. The next slide shows two maps from Sanborn Maps which are used for the fire (insurance) in the early turn of the century. One is dated 1885 and one is from 1910. You can see that the street has been renamed. The building that was torn down that used to exist is there at the top of the triangle in the middle of those two screens. It was the home of the J. A. Hartnett Milling Company. There are also two pictures that were provided by the Public Archives in Dover. The first one is for 1939 and you can see that this building in the left picture that is a one-story with a door and two windows; we will be seeing that in a little bit. These are pictures of what the site used to look like. In 1979, they did a National Register of Historic Places inventory and this is the picture was provided for the Victorian Dover inventory. The Harnett family operated The Hartnett Inc., a local lumberyard for 110 years; and in 1999, there was a demolition due to a fire. In 2010, there was a Planning Commission approval for a four-story building similarly designed to the existing First Capital Center (otherwise known as Duncan Center) that did not receive a Final Plan Approval. The next slide shows pictures that were provided by the applicant. You can see in the lower left hand picture, the central door with the two windows. You can see that the brick is slightly different. That’s what the original building was and there was some extension of the building at some point. Those buildings are no longer standing. The next slide shows what our current mapping looks like. You can see the red line that means that it is a State maintained road so any Entrance Plan to Forest Street would need to have a DelDOT approval plan. The next slide is a survey dated 2010 that they have asked to be updated. There are some missing boundaries for some parcels; so, that is in the works. The next slide shows an estimation from our Engineering Department. You can see that Loockerman actually extends a little bit further than what our previous GIS system shows. You can see that at the end of Loockerman is the former train station which is now a State owned building that they use for offices. The next slide shows that the site is both in the City of Dover Historic District as well as the Victorian Dover Historic District of the National Register of Historic Places. Neither this particular property nor the train station is listed individually on the National Register. Mrs. Barrett stated that she is the equitable owner looking to develop this property. They would like to put in a multi-use building with some commercial properties on the first floor and then some residential on the two floors above that which would be a total of three floors. Mrs. Denney asked if at this point they have any interest for the commercial use for development. Responding to Mrs. Denney, Mrs. Barrett stated that she wishes she did. She thinks that if you build it, they will come. So she is hoping to get something off the ground and then lure in either a coffee shop or a pizza shop or something that would complement that building and area as a whole. Mr. Reaves asked how she planned to maintain the Historic District with the property that she is constructing. Responding to Mr. Reaves, Mrs. Barrett stated that she has hired the very best, Becker Morgan Group. She is planning to have them come up with a brilliant design. She would like to incorporate some brick that would follow through similar to the area and pull in some historic. She lives in a house that was built in the 1700’s; so, she likes that colonial look and feel. Mr. Witham stated that he understands that she wants mixed use at this site. What type of residential units are you proposing? Responding to Mr. Witham, Mrs. Barrett stated that she would like to do studio, one-bedroom, and two-bedroom apartments. Not high end but for a good working class. It is right by a bus stop which she thinks will be to their advantage. She met with Bayhealth Excerpt of Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 15, 2024 Page 2 of 4 Page 94

Item #9. and they have a need for fifty apartments. She was hoping to do some type of long term lease with them that would allow their residents to stay here. They feel like residents come here and they do their residency and then they move on because there is not a lot that Dover has to offer and they have no housing. It’s a great location right between Bayhealth and Eden Hill Medical Center. We have the Air Force Base. She is not looking to do super high end; only one and two bedroom. She is not going to be targeting families living there. There won’t be a whole bunch of amenities right on-site because the site is small but sparking any type of growth in that area, she thinks would be great for Downtown. Mr. Witham asked if she was relying on Becker Morgan Group to scope out the number and dimensions of those apartments. Responding to Mr. Witham, Mrs. Barrett stated yes, she is putting all of her eggs in that basket. Mrs. Maucher opened the public hearing. Mr. Jonathan Street – 500 Troon Road Dover, DE 19901 Mr. Street stated that he is not here representing Mrs. Barrett at all. He sits on various boards and commissions with the City. He works Downtown and he and his family are also residents of the City. Echoing what she said, it’s just what Downtown needs to spur development. It’s in keeping with the Comprehensive Plan and the Master Plan and what the City is really trying to do over the next few years. Mrs. Maucher closed the public hearing. Mrs. Denney stated that she is retired now for many years but there was a time when she did a lot of recruiting of physicians here to Dover. It was a very difficult thing to do especially in the beginning when Bayhealth was just a minor hospital. Her feelings were that what was happens is that these guys and girls do their residencies and they go through all of the schooling and residencies and the reward in the end is a beautiful place to live. The wives would say sometimes how they couldn’t wait. But they would come here and the wives would say there was no place to shop and there is no place for this or that and that was really a stumbling block. Now we have a residency program here which is magnificent because we are drawing more and more of the best. If you live here for a short period of time, you realize, as she did when she first came here to Dover from up north that you are right in the middle. You have the beaches. You get up on Saturday morning and then you can be at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. We are surrounded by art. We have art here. She was on the committee that helped develop the sports center. You can grab a train and be over in DC quickly. We are surrounded by the arts, but we don’t really show that to people because when you first get here it is just apparent. It has to be really pointed out to you. She thinks that this is a great use and it’s very much needed here because they come and do their residency and they need a place to home but they don’t necessarily need a place to entertain and do all of those things yet. She thinks that these apartments will lend themselves very well. Mrs. Denney moved to recommend approval to City Council for Z-24-03 Lands of Linda Duncan at 600 Forest Street for the Rezoning of the land from IO (Institutional and Office Zone) to C-2A (Limited Commercial Zone), (remaining subject to H (Historic District Zone) and SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone), seconded by Dr. Jones and the motion was carried 9-0 by roll Excerpt of Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 15, 2024 Page 3 of 4 Page 95

Item #9. call vote. Mrs. Denney voting yes; she thinks that this is an excellent use and it’s in keeping with everything that we are trying to do here for Downtown Dover. Mr. Witham voting yes; this is an excellent plan and he wishes the very best for the applicant. It certainly meets the Comprehensive Plan. The use that is being requested is compatible with surrounding uses. Mr. Baldwin voting yes; based on Staff recommendations and the fact that it is a fit in the Comprehensive Plan. Dr. Jones voting yes; for reasons previously stated. Mr. Reaves voting yes; for Staff recommendations and for reasons stated previously. Mrs. Welsh voting yes; for reasons stated previously and she thinks that it is a great use of the land. Mr. Cooper voting yes; based on Staff recommendation and every single word from Mrs. Denney’s statement. Mr. Roach voting yes. Mrs. Maucher voting yes; for reasons previously stated. Excerpt of Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 15, 2024 Page 4 of 4 Page 96

Item #9. FINAL READING City of Dover CITY OF DOVER PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2024-09 1 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND ZONING MAP OF THE CITY 2 OF DOVER BY CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3 600 FOREST STREET 4 WHEREAS, the City of Dover has enacted a zoning ordinance regulating the use of property within the 5 limits of the City of Dover; and 6 WHEREAS, it is deemed in the best interest of zoning and planning to change the permitted use of property 7 described below from IO (Institutional and Office Zone) and subject to the H (Historic District Zone) and the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone) to C-2A (Limited Central Commercial Zone) and subject to the H (Historic District Zone) and the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone). 8 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF 9 DOVER, IN COUNCIL, MET: 10 1. That from and after the passage and approval of this ordinance the Zoning Map and Zoning 11 Ordinance of the City of Dover have been amended by changing the zoning designation from IO (Institutional and Office Zone) and subject to H (Historic District Zone) and the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone) to C-2A (Limited Central Commercial Zone) and subject to the H (Historic District Zone) and the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone) on that property located at 600 Forest Street (South side of Forest Street and near the west end of Loockerman Street) consisting of 0.51 acres +/- owned by Linda Duncan. 12 13 (Tax Parcel: ED-05-076.12-02-44.00-000 and ED-05-076.12-02-45.00-000; Planning Reference: Z-24-03; Fourth Council District) 14 ADOPTED: * 15 Actions History 05/13/2024 – Scheduled for Public Hearing/Final Reading – City Council 04/15/2024 – Public Hearing – Planning Commission 16 03/25/2024 – First Reading - City Council Page 97

Item #10. PETITION TO AMEND ZONING DISTRICT Public Hearing Before the Dover City Council on May 13, 2024 Recommendation from Planning Commission Meeting of April 15, 2024 With Staff and Development Advisory Committee Review Application: Lands of White Marsh Environmental Systems, Inc. at 1100 and 1110 South Little Creek Road Owner: White Marsh Environmental Systems, Inc. c/o Tidewater Utilities Addresses: 1100 and 1110 South Little Creek Road, Dover DE Location: South side of South Little Creek Road and west of State Route 1 Tax Parcel: ED-05-077.12-01-03.00-000 Size: 10.7146 acres +/- Present Uses: Offices 2019 Comprehensive Plan Designation – Land Use Category: Office Present Zoning: CPO (Commercial and Professional Office Zone) Proposed Zoning: IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing Zone) Reason for Request: For rezoning of the property for future expansion for material storage (in addition to current Office use). File Number: Z-24-04 Ordinance Number: 2024-10 Planning Commission Recommendation: The Application Z-24-04 Lands of White Marsh Environmental Systems, Inc. was represented by Mr. Jonathan Street of the engineering firm the Becker Morgan Group on behalf of the property owner. A Public Hearing was conducted on April 15, 2024 where one member of the public spoke, and no written comments were received regarding the Rezoning application. The Planning Commission’s motion to recommend approval of the proposed rezoning from C-PO to IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing Zone) resulted in a 9-0 vote in favor. (Draft Meeting Minutes attached.) Page 98

Item #10. Z-24-04 Lands of White Marsh Environmental Services Inc. at 1100 and 1110 South Little Creek Road Planning Commission Recommendation Report of April 15, 2024 Page 2 APPLICATION: Z-24-04 Lands of White Marsh Environmental Systems, Inc. at 1100 and 1110 S. Little Creek Road, Dover DE: Rezoning C-PO to IPM This Rezoning Application was referred to the Planning Commission as per Zoning Ordinance, Article 10 §5. The Planning Commission is required to provide a Review Report to the City Council. The following document and attachments are provided as the Review Report and Planning Commission Recommendation. I. APPLICATION SUMMARY This Rezoning Application Z-24-04 is for a parcel of land consisting of 10.7146 acres +/-. The property is zoned CPO (Commercial and Professional Office Zone). The proposed zoning for the property is IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing Zone). The property is located on the south side of South Little Creek Road and west of State Route 1. The owner of record is White Marsh Environmental Systems Inc. c/o Tidewater Utilities. Property Addresses: 1100 and 1110 S. Little Creek Road. Tax Parcel: ED-05-077.12-01-03.00-000. Council District 2. Ordinance #2024-10. The First Reading was completed by the City Council on March 25, 2024 referring the Application to the Planning Commission for Public Hearing, Review, and Recommendation. Existing Property: The subject property is located on the south side of South Little Creek Road and includes two existing buildings used as offices and an existing shed (accessory structure). The two main buildings are addressed individually at 1100 and 1110 South Little Creek Road. They were previously developed as offices for Tidewater Utilities on the northern portion of the site and include existing parking lot areas. This development occurred under Site Plan S-02-21 for the 6,776 SF office building (closest to South Little Creek Road) and Site Plan S-07-22 Tidewater Utilities Office Annex Building for a separate 9,882 SF office building. The southern portion of the site is an open area with an on-site walking trail and some areas of woodland. The southern property line adjoins State Route 1; however, this is not considered frontage and no access can be established from this roadway. The CPO zoning district requires that all uses and the storage accessory to permitted uses on the site must be located within fully enclosed buildings. Given the operational needs of this utility provider for the storage of materials and equipment, they are seeking rezoning to potentially allow outdoor storage options on the same property as their office facilities. This application only seeks Rezoning of the property from CPO (Commercial and Professional Office Zone) to IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing Zone). The applicant is seeking rezoning to allow for future expansion for material storage and operational facilities to join the office use on the property. Any new development of the site will be subject to a separate application submission for plans or permits. Surrounding Land Uses: In the immediate area, there are a variety of zoning districts along the South Little Creek Road corridor with commercial/industrial zoning on the south side of the roadway and residential zoning on the north side of the roadway. To the west, the adjacent property is an industrial park of multiple buildings (developed as the Tudor Industrial Park) that is zoned C-3 (Service Commercial Zone) with a small multi-tenant shopping center building zoned C-1A (Limited Commercial Zone) to the Page 99

Item #10. Z-24-04 Lands of White Marsh Environmental Services Inc. at 1100 and 1110 South Little Creek Road Planning Commission Recommendation Report of April 15, 2024 Page 3 northwest corner. To the east is a parcel zoned CPO and then State Route 1. Across South Little Creek Road to the northwest are a manufactured home community zoned MH (Manufactured Housing Zone), a townhouse subdivision along Barrister Place zoned RG-3 (Group Housing Zone); and further west is Stoney Creek as a residential subdivision zoned R-8 (One Family Residence Zone). Directly north of the subject site are lands located within the jurisdiction of Kent County which appear to be residential in use. II. COMPRENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE REVIEW The 2019 Comprehensive Plan currently depicts the subject area as Office as the Land Use Classification on Map 12-1: Land Development Plan Map. The Comprehensive Plan notes that “a healthy and well-rounded local economy will depend upon diversity in business and employment opportunities.” The 2019 Comprehensive Plan discussed the approaches to office and industrial land uses as employment centers in the section titled “Employment Centers: Office Parks and Industrial Land Uses” beginning on pager 12-16; see excerpt below: Goal: Employment Centers Create a more vibrant, growing economy with a broader range of job opportunities through collaborative efforts to market the region, identify potential targets, and respond to opportunities to foster an increase in office and industrial development in appropriate and designated areas. Policies: Employment Centers 1. Protect existing industrial, office park and manufacturing establishments from encroachment by incompatible land uses which could result in nuisance complaints, hazardous situations, and human conflict. 2. Provide sufficient land area for industrial purposes to enable the expansion of existing industries, the establishments of new facilities, and revitalization of underutilized older industrial sites. 3. Provide for a variety of office park and industrial development opportunities through the designation of areas for small, medium and large establishments within planned industrial parks. 4. Promote alternative modes of accessibility including pedestrian and bicycle facilities, bus shelters and transit stops, and provide incentives for car and van pooling of employees. 5. Create flexible and contemporary industrial zoning provisions that reflect emerging trends in uses, facilities, and business opportunities to meet future needs. Recommendations: Employment Centers The City is committed to fostering a strong, vibrant, and balanced local economy built on existing and new business locations. This initiative requires close coordination with state and county economic development entities. It also requires continuous attention to the needs of existing businesses, efforts to promote a skilled workforce, a comprehensive marketing and promotional strategy, and land use and development regulations that are efficient and contemporary. The Comprehensive Plan designates areas throughout the City where job Page 100

Item #10. Z-24-04 Lands of White Marsh Environmental Services Inc. at 1100 and 1110 South Little Creek Road Planning Commission Recommendation Report of April 15, 2024 Page 4 growth and opportunities are encouraged. Plan Chapter 10 – Economic Development lays out a set of goals and actions designed to reinforce this commitment. Office Parks The Land Development Plan designates specific tracts of land of various sizes for Office and Office Park land uses. Office Park development involves an integrated development of office buildings with shared entrances, driveways, and parking. The majority of uses permitted within an Office Park are generally weekday professional office uses involving very little or no activity at night or on weekends. For this reason, the Office Park designation may be viewed as a transitional use category when situated between more intense commercial and industrial land uses and residential land uses. This designation usually involves the C-PO (Commercial/Professional Office Zone) zoning district. These areas are located throughout the City with established office concentrations in the Enterprise Business Park, along Silver Lake Boulevard, on College Park Drive, along Old Rudnick Lane, the Northgate Center, and elsewhere. Scattered office uses are also located along Saulsbury/McKee Road and within designated “Mixed Use” areas in the Eden Hill Farm Traditional Neighborhood Design (TND). Smaller scale areas for office parks are the Woodbrook complex on South Governors Avenue, office complexes along Walker Road, and areas along Route 8. Large Scale Industry The Land Development Plan designates all existing major industrial facilities and associated vacant lands for Industrial use. These properties include the manufacturing facilities of Kraft Heinz Foods, Proctor & Gamble, Edgewell Personal Products, PPG Industries, General Metalcraft, and others. Industrial Parks Several planned industrial parks have been initiated since 1986 which offer industrial development potential. The Land Development Plan designates these sites for continued Industrial use. These sites include Kent County Aero Park/Air Cargo Terminal, Enterprise Business Park, College Business Park, and McKee Business Park. The City purchased and has developed the Garrison Oak Business and Technology Center (formerly the Garrison Oak Technical Park) in 1999-2000. It now houses a solar electric facility, an electric generating facility, a flooring products manufacturer, and a security firm with ten shovel ready lots remaining available. Planning is underway to extend the Joint Use Agreement with Dover Air Force Base to allow expansion of the Kent County Aero Park into a regional facility. The Central Delaware Aviation Complex will facilitate aviation uses including air cargo, aircraft maintenance and repair, and related uses as part of a newly designated “Employment Center.” The Rezoning Request to IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing Zone) is consistent with the Land Use Classification of Office. Table 12-1: Land Use and Zoning Matrix (from the 2019 Comprehensive Plan) specifies that the following zones are compatible with this land use classification. See the excerpt from Table 12-1 given below. It is noted that Table 12-1 for the Office Land Use Category identifies a number of zoning districts. Page 101

Item #10. Z-24-04 Lands of White Marsh Environmental Services Inc. at 1100 and 1110 South Little Creek Road Planning Commission Recommendation Report of April 15, 2024 Page 5 CPO (Commercial and Professional Office) Office and Office IO (Institutional and Office) Parks IPM (industrial Park Manufacturing) RGO (General Residence and Office) III. ZONING REVIEW Request for IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing Zone) Zoning The types of permitted uses and conditional uses in the IPM zone are given Article 3 §20 of the Zoning Ordinance. See the following code excerpt below for the current provisions of the IPM zone. Article 3 Section 20. – Industrial Park Manufacturing Zone (IPM). 20.1 Uses permitted. No building or premises shall be used and no building or part of a building shall be erected, which is arranged, intended or designed to be used, in whole or in part, for any purpose, except the following, and in accordance with performance standards procedure as set forth in article 5, section 8, and subject to site development plan approval as set forth in article 10, section 2: 20.11 Manufacturing, assembling, converting, altering, finishing, cleaning, cooking, baking or any other type of manufacturing or industrial processing of any goods, materials, products, instruments, appliances and devices, provided that the fuel used shall be oil, gas or electricity; together with incidental clinics, cafeterias and recreational facilities for the exclusive use of employees of the concern engaged in such undertaking. 20.12 Research, design, testing and development laboratories. 20.13 Printing, publishing, binding, packaging, storage, warehousing, transshipment and distribution, and trucking terminals. 20.14 Business, professional or administrative offices; banks and financial institutions; hotels, motels and restaurants; public parks, playgrounds, and recreational facilities; and public utility uses, provided that these uses shall only be located upon a thoroughfare, arterial street or access highway with[in] the IPM zone. Retail sales and service establishments within planned industrial parks for local needs and local consumption of the employees and customers of the other permitted uses within the planned industrial park. 20.15 Signs shall meet the regulations found in article 5, section 4, supplementary sign regulations. 20.16 Agricultural or farm uses as defined and permitted in article 3, section 1.11. 20.17 The following uses may be permitted as conditional uses if approved by the planning commission in accordance with the provisions and procedures set forth in article 10, section 1 and any specified requirements set forth below: (a) Associated retail uses in conjunction with and accessory to a permitted use, provided that the associated retail use does not occupy more than 30 percent of the gross floor area of the building or group of buildings on a lot. Parking shall be provided at a rate of one parking space per 300 square feet of retail space for the exclusive use of retail customers in addition to the bulk parking requirements of this zoning district for a particular use. 20.18 Mini-storage facilities, subject to the following regulations: (a) No unit shall be placed within 30 feet of any other structure on the lot or a residential property line. (b) No outside storage [is allowed], except for recreational vehicles, boats or personal automobiles when completely screened from view and parked in specifically approved Page 102

Item #10. Z-24-04 Lands of White Marsh Environmental Services Inc. at 1100 and 1110 South Little Creek Road Planning Commission Recommendation Report of April 15, 2024 Page 6 locations. Parking for these vehicles shall not count toward the required parking set forth in subsection (e) below. (c) No individual unit may be used for retail, garage sale or any other commercial activities. (d) No storage of flammable, explosive, corrosive or other hazardous products may occur in the individual unit. (e) Parking must be provided at a ratio of one space for each 25 rental units, plus a minimum of three spaces for an office outside of the enclosure. One row of parallel parking is permitted between buildings at a ratio of one space per 25 feet. (f) All other bulk requirements of this ordinance are met. 20.2 Uses prohibited. The following uses are specifically prohibited: 20.21 Residences, except those existing at the time of adoption of this amendment. 20.22 Manufacturing uses involving primary production of the following products from raw materials: asphalt, cement, charcoal, and fuel briquettes; chemicals: aniline dyes, ammonia, carbide, caustic soda, cellulose, chlorine, and carbon black and bone black, creosote, hydrogen and oxygen, industrial alcohol, nitrates (manufactured and natural) of an explosive nature, potash, plastic materials, and synthetic resins, pyroxylin, rayon yarn, and hydrochloric, nitric, phosphoric, picric, and sulphuric acids: coal, coke, and tar products, including gas manufacturing; explosives; fertilizers; glue, and size (animal); linoleum and oil cloth; matches; paint, varnishes, and turpentine; rubber (natural or synthetic); [and] soaps, including fat rendering. 20.23 The following processes: nitrating of cotton or other materials; magnesium foundry; reduction, refining, smelting, and alloying of metal or metal ores; refining secondary aluminum; refining petroleum products, such as gasoline, kerosene, naphtha, [and] lubricating oil; distillation of wood or bones; [and] reduction and processing of wood pulp and fiber, including papermill operations. 20.24 Operations involving stockyards, slaughterhouses, and slag piles. 20.25 Storage of explosives, [and] bulk or wholesale storage of gasoline above [the] ground. 20.26 Dumps. 20.27 Quarries, stone crushers, screening plants, and storage of quarry screenings, accessory to such uses. 20.28 Junkyards, automobile dismantling plants or storage of used parts of automobiles or other machines or vehicles or of dismantled or junked automobiles. 20.3 Development options. Land zoned IPM may be developed on a conventional individual lot basis or as a planned industrial park development made up of multiple individual lots and containing an internal road system. Lot area, bulk and parking requirements for conventional development in an IPM zone shall be as set forth in article 4, section 4.16 of this ordinance. Development of land in an IPM zone as a planned industrial park shall be permitted only when certain eligibility requirements, as set forth in article 3, section 20.4 of this ordinance, and when specific design standards, as set forth in article 3, section 20.5 of this ordinance, are met. 20.4 Eligibility for planned industrial park development. No area shall be developed as a planned industrial park unless the following conditions are met: (a) The development consists of a continuous area of at least 25 acres in single ownership. (b) The development will be served by public water supply and public sewerage, which shall be in place at the time construction of the first stage of the industrial park begins. (c) The frontage of the development shall be on an arterial road and be of sufficient width that safe and efficient access to the industrial park can be adequately spaced from accesses to adjacent properties, according to standards set forth by the Delaware Department of Transportation. Page 103

Item #10. Z-24-04 Lands of White Marsh Environmental Services Inc. at 1100 and 1110 South Little Creek Road Planning Commission Recommendation Report of April 15, 2024 Page 7 20.5 Design standards for planned industrial parks. The design standards, including dimensional requirements and sign regulations, for a planned industrial park shall be the same as required for conventional individual lot development for land in an IPM zone, as set forth in article 4, section 4.16 of this ordinance, unless specifically excepted in this article or unless waived by the planning commission, where the commission finds such a waiver to be necessary, desirable and consistent with the purposes of this article and of the comprehensive plan. 20.51 In a planned industrial park, no structure may be located within 100 feet of the property line of the development. 20.52 There shall be a landscaped buffer area of no less than ten feet along all property lines. Where adjacent to residential zones, the buffer shall consist of a landscape screen no less than 6½ feet high. All landscaping shall be properly maintained throughout the life of any use on the lot. 20.53 The average size of all individual lots in a planned industrial park shall be 2½ acres. The minimum individual lot size shall be 60,000 square feet. The minimum width of a lot shall be 150 feet. 20.54 Structures in a planned industrial park shall be restricted to two stories and 35 feet in height. The maximum floor area ratio shall be 0.5. The maximum area of an individual lot permitted to be covered by an enclosed structure is 35 percent. Not more than 65 percent of the total area of an individual lot may be covered by impervious surfaces. 20.55 Access to state highways and arterial roads shall be controlled by standards set forth by the department of transportation. There shall be no exceptions or waivers to this requirement. The internal circulation system shall be separated from the external public street system, and pedestrian traffic shall be separated from vehicular traffic by means of appropriate site design and traffic control devices. 20.56 No less than 35 percent of the site area shall consist of grass and landscaped areas. Parking areas shall be landscaped. 20.57 Permanent facilities shall be provided by the developer to handle increased stormwater runoff which will result from increasing the impervious surface area of the site in accordance with the State of Delaware soils erosion and sedimentation control act (7 Del. C. § 4001 et seq.) adopted and administered by the City of Dover. Such provision shall include contributions toward the cost of off-site facilities constructed by the city to the extent that the improvements are necessitated by the construction of the planned industrial park. 20.6 Site development plan approval. Site development plan approval, in accordance with article 10, section 2 hereof, shall be required for either conventional individual lot development or planned industrial park development of land zoned IPM prior to the issuance of building permits for the erection or enlargement of all structures and prior to the issuance of certificates of occupancy for any change of use. In the case of planned industrial parks, this requirement will apply to each individual lot within the development, in addition to the requirement to obtain site development plan approval for the development as a whole. The application for site development plan approval for a planned industrial park shall include, in addition to the usual requirements: (a) Substantiation of the need for the planned industrial park, based on the developer's market analysis and expression of tenant's or buyer's interest. (b) Nature of the applicant's interest in the development. (c) The approximate use, height and floor area of all buildings and other structures. (d) Preliminary traffic study and proposed methods for alleviating adverse impact on adjacent roads. (e) Approximate size and capacity of all proposed parking areas. (f) Proposed stormwater management plan. (g) Plans of existing natural features showing topography, soils, drainage and vegetation. (h) Site plans showing approximate locations of buildings, roads, parking, landscaping and utility and drainage easements. Page 104

Item #10. Z-24-04 Lands of White Marsh Environmental Services Inc. at 1100 and 1110 South Little Creek Road Planning Commission Recommendation Report of April 15, 2024 Page 8 (i) An outline or a draft text of any proposed protective covenants governing architectural controls, landscaping, lighting, etc., that the developer intends to impose on tenants or property owners within the planned industrial park. 20.7 Performance standards. All uses are subject to performance standards as set forth in article 5, section 8.1. (Ord. of 3-24-1986; Ord. of 1-14-1991; Ord. of 6-10-1991; Ord. of 7-12-1993, §§ 2, 9; Ord. of 7-10-2000; Ord. of 2-12-2001; Ord. of 7-23-2001) IV. RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING STAFF: This Request is to rezone lands from C-PO (Commercial and Professional Office Zone) to IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing Zone). The current CPO zone is a zoning district permitting offices, banks, and medical laboratories type uses with other commercial uses only allowed through a conditional use review process when the use is accessory to a permitted use on the same lot. The C-PO zone also does allow for conditional use review to create residential uses in the form of apartments, multi-family residences, and one-family residences. While office use is permitted in the CPO, the opportunity for storage activities is limited to interior storage fully within a building only. The proposed Rezoning is to the IPM zone which is a zoning district offering uses related to manufacturing and industrial processing, laboratories, storage and warehousing, offices, public utility uses, and other uses (see Zoning Ordinance, Article 3 Section 20). The IPM zone also includes conditional uses (uses subject to specific review for approval) for associated retail activities and mini-storage facilities. There are a series of uses that are prohibited including residences and certain manufacturing uses among other uses. Given the size of the subject parcel, its development would be limited in the IPM zone to a conventional individual lot as it does not meet the eligibility criteria for a planned industrial park development (development of multiple individual lots with internal road system). The subject parcel meets the lot area and width/depth requirements of the IPM zone for a conventional lot. The bulk standards (setbacks, height, lot coverage) of the IPM zone require greater setbacks from property lines for buildings (than the CPO zone) and restrict building height to a distance from the nearest property line. The maximum lot coverage of 75% is the same in IPM as CPO. The sufficiency of the existing site entrance from South Little Creek Road (State maintained road) and any off-site transportation related improvements would be evaluated by DelDOT at the time of new development/expansion. Staff recommends that the rezoning request from C-PO to IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing Zone) be granted as requested related to the proposed zoning district and its development requirements/limitations noted above and the other findings of this Report. The adjoining properties are commercial and industrial related zones and contain existing uses that would be compatible with the continued/expanded use of the subject property as offices and storage activities of an operational facility. The nearby residential areas are across the road and are buffered by the landscaping and multiple trees surrounding the front office building. It is noted that the Comprehensive Plan’s goals for the Office Land Use Classification focus on the opportunities for expansions to meet future needs of establishments of a variety of sizes. This property has land area available to expand onsite keeping a local/regional business within Dover. There is existing infrastructure for water, sanitary sewer, and electric services that serves the property (and could be expanded if necessary); and the police, fire, and emergency medical services service the area. Page 105

Item #10. Z-24-04 Lands of White Marsh Environmental Services Inc. at 1100 and 1110 South Little Creek Road Planning Commission Recommendation Report of April 15, 2024 Page 9 This Rezoning Request does not grant approval of a specific use for the property but makes its land use subject to a listing of uses permitted and potential conditional uses as allowed in the IPM zoning district. Staff again notes that any potential development for the site would have to be in line with the zoning classification and would similarly have to follow all development design guidelines of the Zoning Ordinance. Were the application for Rezoning to be recommended by the Planning Commission and subsequently approved by the City Council, the applicant would still have to submit plans and/or permits for review for most uses of the site to be established. This recommendation is being made without the benefit of hearing the comments of surrounding landowners and residents. A public hearing is required on this matter and the Planning Commission should give those comments consideration in making a recommendation to City Council on this Application. V. PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW FOR RECOMMENDATION This Rezoning Application is a request for a zoning map amendment which changes the zoning district of a property. The Planning Commission as part of their public hearing and review process will provide a recommendation on the Rezoning request to City Council. As part of the process outlined in Zoning Ordinance, Article 10 Section 5, the Planning Commission must evaluate the following factors when considering the request: Article 10 § 5.36 Report of the planning commission. Regarding each application for a zoning map amendment, the planning commission shall provide a report to the city council stating a recommended action with regards to the proposed amendment, along with the commission's evaluation of the following factors: (A) Whether the uses permitted by the proposed change would be compatible with the existing uses and zones in the area concerned; (B) Whether adequate public services and infrastructure exist or can be created or expanded to serve the needs of any additional demand as a result of such change; and (C) Whether the proposed change is in accordance with the city's current comprehensive plan. A Recommendation Report from the Planning Commission will be forwarded to the City Council for their consideration of the Rezoning Application Z-24-04. This document and its attachments make up the Recommendation Report. RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION: At the Hybrid (In-Person and Virtual) Planning Commission Meeting of April 15, 2024, the Rezoning Application Z-24-04 was represented by Jonathan Street of the engineering firm the Becker Morgan Group on behalf of the property owner White Marsh Environmental Systems, Inc. During the Public Hearing, one member of the public spoke, and no written comments were received. The Planning Commission’s motion was to recommend approval for Rezoning application Z-24-04 Lands of White Marsh Environmental Systems, Inc. from C-PO (Commercial and Professional Office) to IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing Zone) and resulted in a vote of 9-0 in favor of rezoning. The reasons cited for the recommendation of approval include compatibility with land uses in the area; to assist and keep businesses (like Tidewater Utilities) Page 106

Item #10. Z-24-04 Lands of White Marsh Environmental Services Inc. at 1100 and 1110 South Little Creek Road Planning Commission Recommendation Report of April 15, 2024 Page 10 operating here; consistency with the City’s 2019 Comprehensive Plan; the factors for consideration (compatibility of uses, availability of public services and infrastructure, consistency with the Comprehensive Plan) are met; and with reference to the recommendation of approval from the Planning Staff (in the Development Advisory Committee Report). See also the included excerpt of the DRAFT Meeting Minutes of the April 15, 2024 Planning Commission meeting. The comments received from the other member agencies of the Development Advisory Committee (D.A.C.) are also provided. VI. ADVISORY COMMENTS TO THE APPLICANT: 1) The applicant shall be aware that approval of any Rezoning Application does not represent Site Development Plan or Subdivision Plan approval. Following any decision made by City Council in regard to this Rezoning, then an application for a Site Plan, Subdivision Plan, and/or appropriate Building Permits must be submitted to the Planning Department prior to the establishment of a use, development activity, or any construction activity on the site. The applicant should contact the Planning Staff to determine the appropriate review process for any proposed projects. 2) The applicant shall be aware that approval of any Rezoning Application does not represent a Building Permit, Sign Permit, or other construction activity permit approval. A separate application submission is required before issuance of permits by the City of Dover. 3) The applicant shall be aware that any future use may be subject to a separate permitting or licensing process through the City of Dover Licensing and Permitting Division. All businesses operating in the City of Dover are required to obtain a City of Dover Business Licenses. Certain types of uses also require a Public Occupancy Permit or Rental Dwelling Permits. ATTACHMENTS: • Zoning Map Exhibit • Application Z-24-04 Submission: Boundary and Topographic Survey Plan Sheet • Development Advisory Committee Comments from City of Dover Departments of Public Works and Water & Wastewater, Electric Department, City Office of the Fire Marshal, DelDOT, and Dover/Kent County MPO • Excerpt from DRAFT Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 15, 2024 • Proposed Ordinance #2024-10 Page 107

City of Dover Application No.: Z-24-04 Item #10. Department of Planning & Inspections Coo RM-1 per C ir R-8 n Ro u dt re e Dr Regent St MH Moriarty S t R-8 Holmes St narch D Ingram St Mo r Signal St RG-3 R-8 Barrister Pl ROS R-8 S Little Creek Rd C-1 C-1A APZ II C-3 R-8 C-3 rl Ct Ba Ot CPO is Dr R-8 C-3 Ct t er 1 dC wl M n Connector lan Fo State H Cr Punc heon Ru Is d g for rta wy Lo n aw R-8 Ro be Ct sle Ha Ave berton Av e tSt K im RG-2 IPM re w R-8 Sh K ear s ury t sb ney ag e Ct AS M Ct Ct Pl um Title: Lands of White Marsh Environmental Systems, Inc. Address: 1100 and 1110 South Little Creek Road Legend Parcel ID: ED-05-077.12-01-03.00-000 Existing Zoning: CPO (Commercial and Professional Office Zone) Proposed Zoning: IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing Zone) Dover Boundary Owner: White Marsh Environmental Systems, Inc. Date: 3/19/2024 Subject Property Zoning « Dover Parcels Page 108

24x36 24x36 Item #10. 24x36 24x36 NAD 24x36 83 / DS 24x36 P N 24x36 24x36 24x36 ARCH I T E C TURE 24x36 ENG I NE E R I NG Delaware 24x36 24x36 309 South Governors Avenue 21 Dover, DE 19904 302.734.7950 21 24x36 The Tower at STAR Campus 24x36 100 Discovery Boulevard, Suite 102 Newark, DE 19713 24x36 302.369.3700 24x36 KO Maryland RE AN 312 West Main Street, Suite 300 LANDS N/F WA DEL Salisbury, MD 21801 R AW 24x36 24x36 410.546.9100 VA E VE ARE CARBAUGH PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, LLC T.P.: 2-05-07712-01-0400-00001 RY North Carolina 30' DEED REF.: D 519/193 T ING ER RO WI ANS UTE 30' ZONING - CPO 3333 Jaeckle Drive, Suite 120 24x36 DT 24x36 H R ME 1 (S Wilmington, NC 28403 IGH ME R1 22 X 910.341.7600 22 X T-O OR ) ADA BENCH MARK 1 F-W IAL www.beckermorgan.com LI X FIRC 21 H 24x36 A 24x36 S 17° 28' 44" E IRON ROD W/ CAP 999.00' RY TTLE -G X Y IG 22 21 ELEV.: 20.15' X H WA N: 420918.0482 20 20 X Y ING 21 E: 633849.9357 C 367 24x36 X 24x36 WID REE 20 .83F.H. 19 19 X ' W.M 19 19 X K . TH W.V . 19 18 18 20 17 X RIG ROA 24x36 18 17 16 24x36 19 X 18 17 16 RADIUS: 21539.86' F.H. 17 X HT- ARC LENGTH: 529.79' D( 18 18 19 19 X CHD. BRG: N 10° 55' 32" E OF FIRE LANE -WA K-67 19 19 19 20 24x36 22 20 21 X CHD. LENGTH: 529.77' 24x36 22 21 22 22 22 X 23 ) B 21 6 20 X Y 23 F.F ,776 S UILD 23 22 X SO 24x36 21 24x36 2.8 X VA ING 5' UT . E L.: .F. 22 15 X 1617 30' H NG 21 21 21 20 17 15 X 2 16 FIRE X EXISTING BUILDING EXI 24x36 24x36 18 70' 40' 20 21 STI X 20 16 22 F.F. EL.: 21.80' EXI 19 X 9,882 S.F. . G.M ST . 19 X SH ING 24x36 S.F 10.7146 ACRES ± 24x36 450 ED 22 LANE 20 X X 22 F.H. 21 15 X 24x36 . W.V 15 24x36 22 X 19 16 W.V. X 21 14 X F.H. 24x36 22 21 X 24x36 18 17 "E 21 G.M. 1' 1 20 19 G.TE 5 20 14 S 78° 189'154.4 ST 15 S8 24x36 24x36 T.P.: 2-05-077 20 6° 2 LANE FIRE 18 13 74 "' W 20 16-02-0301-0 13 RT. 10. L.L.C 0001 21 20 LANDS N/F DEED REF.: 24x36 20 19 19 17 24x36 20 16 15 14 14 21 . 20 19 D 11586/150 21 21 X X X X X FIR 1588.33' X FCM 18 17 N 17° 29' 01" W FCM 17 24x36 22 19 19 24x36 ZONING - M LANDS N/F PROJECT TITLE RT. 10. L.L.C. LANDS N/F T.P.: 2-05-07712-01-0200-00001 RT. 10. L.L.C. LANDS N/F 24x36 RT. 10. L.L.C. T.P.: 2-05-07712-01-0200-00001 DEED REF.: D 11586/150 ZONING - C3 T.P.: 2-05-07712-01-0200-00001 DEED REF.: D 11586/150 LANDS OF 24x36 WHITEMARSH ZONING - C3 DEED REF.: D 11586/150 ZONING - C3 ENVIRONMENTA 24x36 24x36 24x36 SYSTEMS INC. 24x36 24x36 . 24x36 24x36 24x36 1100 S. LITTLE CREEK ROAD SITE DATA CITY OF DOVER KENT OCUNTY, DELAWARE 24x36 24x36 1. OWNER OF RECORD: WHITE MARSH ENVIRONMETNAL SYSTEMS INC. c/o TIDEWATER UTILITIES,INC 1100 S. LITTLE CREEK ROAD SHEET TITLE 24x36 DOVER, DELAWARE 19901 24x36 2. ENGINEER / SURVEYOR: BECKER MORGAN GROUP INC. 309 SOUTH GOVERNORS AVE. BOUNDARY AND 24x36 DOVER, DELAWARE 19904 302-734-7950 TOPOGRAPHIC 24x36 3. PROPERTY LOCATION: 1100 S. LITTLE CREEK ROAD, DOVER, DELAWARE 19901 LATITUDE N 39° 09' 20.60" - NAD83 (2007) SURVEY SURVEY LEGEND 24x36 ITEM EXISTING PROPOSED C-1-NOTES-LEGEND-SURVEY 4. TAX PARCEL NUMBER: LONGITUDE W 75° 29' 43.31" - NAD83 (2007) 2-05-07712-01-0300-00001 . 24x36 UNMARKED POINT 5. DEED REFERENCE : D.R. 347/272 24x36 24x36 CONCRETE MONUMENT FCM SCM 6. SITE AREA SUMMARY: 10.7146 ACRES ± IRON PIPE FIP SIP 7. ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS: C-PO - COMMERCIAL AND PROFESSIONAL OFFICE IRON PIPE W/ CAP FIPC 8. SETBACKS: C-PO - COMMERCIAL AND PROFESSIONAL OFFICE 24x36 24x36 IRON ROD FIR SIR FRONT YARD: 10 FT SIDE YARD: 5 FT 0 30 60 120 IRON ROD W/ CAP FIRC SIRC REAR YARD: 15 FT DRILL HOLE FDH SDH 24x36 9. BULK REQUIREMENTS: C-PO - COMMERCIAL AND PROFESSIONAL OFFICE 24x36 STONE FSTONE MINIMUM LOT AREA: 5,000 S.F. Do Not Explode - Select Scale PK NAIL FPK SPK MINIMUM LOT WIDTH: COVERAGE: 50 FT 75% MAX IMPERVIOUS SCALE: 1" = 60' 24x36 MINIMUM FRONTAGE: 50 FT 24x36 BUILDING HEIGHT: 45 FT (3-STORIES) ISSUE BLOCK LEGEND FLOOR AREA RATIO: 2.0 ITEM EXISTING ITEM EXISTING 10. PRESENT USE: OFFICES 24x36 24x36 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER SANITARY GRAVITY SEWER LINE, EX. 10"S SIZE & FLOW DIRECTION 11. ROAD CLASSIFICATION: S. LITTLE CREEK ROAD - MAJOR COLLECTOR CONCRETE SIDEWALK, SLAB / PAVING SANITARY SEWER FORCE MAIN, SIZE 12. DelDOT TID: PARCEL IS NOT IN A DELDOT TID AREA EX. 10" F.M. IMPERVIOUS SURFACED ROAD, DRIVE & FLOW DIRECTION 24x36 OR PARKING LOT 13. INVESTMENT LEVEL: PARCEL IS WITHIN LEVEL 1 INVESTMENT AREA 24x36 SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE (S.M.H.) INDIVIDUAL TREE OR BUSH 14. SURVEY DATUM: NGS MONUMENTS EVERGREEN DECIDUOUS SANITARY SEWER CLEANOUT VERTICAL: NAVD 88 - L37 WIRE FENCE X X X NAD 83 (2007) DSP - DNREC EX. 10" W HORIZONTAL: 24x36 CHAINLINK FENCE WATER MAIN & SIZE 24x36 STOCKADE FENCE 15. SURVEY UNIT: LINEAR: US SURVEY FOOT FIRE HYDRANT F.H. ANGULAR: DEGREES MINUTES SECONDS (DMS) COORDINATE: GROUND . WATER VALVE (W.V.) OR METER (W.M.) . . . STRUCTURE (CONCRETE, WOOD, 24x36 METAL, ETC.) W.M. W.V. 24x36 16. MONUMENTATION: 6 FOUND MARK DATE DESCRIPTION STORM DRAIN MANHOLE (S.D.M.H.) DRAINAGE DITCH OR SWALE GENERAL NOTES 17. SURVEY CLASSIFICATION: SUBURBAN SURVEY LAYER STATE: SURVEY EMBANKMENT SIDESLOPES (DOWN) STORM DRAIN LINE (CMP OR RCP) 1. THE BOUNDARY & TOPOGRAPHIC DATA SHOWN HEREON WAS COMPILED FROM A FIELD RUN SURVEY PROJECT NO.: 2023208.00 24x36 24x36 CONTOUR 49 CATCH BASIN PERFORMED BY BECKER MORGAN GROUP, INC., DOVER, DE. IN FEBRUARY 2024. DATE: 3-1-24 43.55 2. THE BOUNDARY LINES PORTRAYED HEREON HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED BASED SOLELY ON PHYSICAL ELEVATION SPOT SHOT UTILITY POLE W/ OVERHEAD SERVICE (TELEPHONE OR ELECTRIC OR BOTH) EVIDENCE DISCOVERED IN THE FIELD IN CONJUNCTION WITH DETERMINATIONS DERIVED FROM SOURCE OF SCALE: 1" = 60' BENCH MARK TITLE AND ADJACENT DEED RECORD INFORMATION. DRAWN BY: M.J.H. PROJ. MGR.: M.J.H. 24x36 24x36 UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC U.E. 3. PROPERTY SHOWN HEREON IS SUBJECT TO ANY RIGHT-OF-WAY, EASEMENTS, RESTRICTIONS, ETC. AS PROPERTY OR RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE U.T. MAY BE SHOWN OR NOTED IN ANY RECORD, PUBLIC OR OTHERWISE, OR ANY REQUIREMENT OR SHEET CENTERLINE REGULATION OF ANY PUBLIC AGENCY. 1 24x36 UNDERGROUND GAS MAIN EX. 2" G 24x36 LIGHT POLE 4. PARCEL IS LOCATED WITHIN ZONE "X", AREA OF MINIMAL FLOOD HAZARD, BASED ON FIRM MAP 10006C0186J PAVEMENT TO BE REMOVED N/A & MAP 10006C0188J, EFFECTIVE DATE JULY 7, 2014. COPYRIGHT 2024 Page 109 F:\AutoCAD\Projects\2023\2023208\DWG\2023208-SVY-C3D21.dwg, Mar 01, 2024 - 11:21am .PDF 24x36 24x36 2024-03-01

Item #10. CITY OF DOVER DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY STAFF D.A.C. MEETING DATE: MARCH 27, 2024 APPLICATION: Lands of White Marsh Environmental Systems, Inc. @ 1100 & 1110 S. Little Creek Road FILE #: Z-24-04 REVIEWING AGENCY: City of Dover Department of Public Works and Water & Wastewater CONTACT PERSON: Jason A. Lyon, P.E., Director of Water & Wastewater CONTACT PHONE #: 302-736-7025 CONTACT EMAIL #: jlyon@dover.de.us T HE S UBJECT P ROPOSAL HAS BEEN R EVIEWED FOR C ODE C OMPLIANCE , P LAN C ONFORMITY AND C OMPLETENESS IN A CCORDANCE WITH THIS A GENCY ’ S A UTHORITY AND A REA OF E XPERTISE . T HE F OLLOWING I TEMS HAVE BEEN I DENTIFIED AS E LEMENTS W HICH N EED TO BE A DDRESSED BY THE A PPLICANT : CITY AND STATE CODE REQUIREMENTS SANITATION / STREETS / STORMWATER / WATER / WASTEWATER / GENERAL 1. Our office has no objections to the proposed rezoning of tax parcel ED-05-077.12-01-03.00-000. Any redevelopment shall adhere to the City of Dover Water/Wastewater Handbook and the Specifications, Standards & Procedures for Public Works Construction. Impact fees may be applied to this property. Future development shall comply with all aspects of the City of Dover’s Cross Connection Control Program. RECOMMENDATIONS SUGGESTED AS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO MEET CODE OBJECTIVES SANITATION / STREETS / STORMWATER / WATER / WASTEWATER / GENERAL 1. None ADVISORY COMMENTS TO THE APPLICANT SANITATION / STREETS / STORMWATER / WATER / WASTEWATER / GENERAL 1. None I F Y OU H AVE A NY Q UESTIONS OR N EED TO D ISCUSS ANY OF THE A BOVE C OMMENTS , P LEASE C ALL THE A BOVE C ONTACT P ERSON AND THE P LANNING D EPARTMENT AS S OON AS P OSSIBLE . Page 110

Item #10. CITY OF DOVER DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY STAFF D.A.C. MEETING DATE: MAR 27, 2024 APPLICATION: Lands of White Marsh Environmental Systems, Inc at 1100 and 1110 S. Little Creek Road FILE #: Z-24-04 REVIEWING AGENCY: City of Dover Electric Department CONTACT PERSON: Shawn Burgett, Engineering Services & System Ops Superintendent CONTACT PHONE #: 302-674-7568 CONTACT EMAIL #: sburgett@dover.de.us T HE S UBJECT P ROPOSAL HAS BEEN R EVIEWED FOR C ODE C OMPLIANCE , P LAN C ONFORMITY AND C OMPLETENESS IN A CCORDANCE WITH THIS A GENCY ’ S A UTHORITY AND A REA OF E XPERTISE . T HE F OLLOWING I TEMS HAVE BEEN I DENTIFIED AS E LEMENTS W HICH N EED TO BE A DDRESSED BY THE A PPLICANT : CITY AND STATE CODE REQUIREMENTS ELECTRIC Our office has no objection to the rezoning of: ED-05-077.12-01-03.00-000. RECOMMENDATIONS SUGGESTED AS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO MEET CODE OBJECTIVES ELECTRIC 1. Should this site be redeveloped, which includes modifications to the use, the applicant / developer will be responsible for all costs associated with providing the appropriate meter / service to this site based upon the use including any necessary system upgrades or extensions. The appropriateness and adequacy of electric and meters will be assessed at that time. 2. Any redevelopment shall adhere to the City of Dover’s Electric Service Handbook. https://evogov.s3.amazonaws.com/media/27/media/13108.pdf. ADVISORY COMMENTS TO THE APPLICANT ELECTRIC 1. None. I F Y OU H AVE A NY Q UESTIONS OR N EED TO D ISCUSS ANY OF THE A BOVE C OMMENTS , P LEASE C ALL THE A BOVE C ONTACT P ERSON AND THE P LANNING D EPARTMENT AS S OON AS P OSSIBLE . Page 111

C F I I #10. Z-24-04 Item T R Y E CITY OF DOVER O M DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE F A R APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY D S D.A.C. MEETING DATE: 03/27/24 O H V A E L R APPLICATION: Lands of White Marsh Environmental Systems Inc at 1100 and 1110 S Little Creek Rd FILE #: Z-24-04 REVIEWING AGENCY: City of Dover, Office of the Fire Marshal CONTACT PERSON: Jason Osika, Fire Marshal PHONE #: (302) 736-4457 josika@dover.de.us THE SUBJECT PROPOSAL HAS BEEN REVIEWED FOR CODE COMPLIANCE, PLAN CONFORMITY, AND COMPLETENESS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS AGENCY’S AUTHORITY AND AREA OF EXPERTISE. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AS ELEMENTS WHICH NEED TO BE ADDRESS BY THE APPLICANT: CITY AND STATE CODE REQUIREMENTS: 1. Proposal is a rezoning application. This office has no objections. 2. Gated Areas: Fire Department access shall be provided to the property through the use of a system or device approved by the Fire Marshal. The system or device required shall be located in an area accessible to the fire department and approved by the Fire Marshal. All gates shall be either automatic or manual. An automated system shall consist of one manual and one automated means to open the gate. The owner or their representative shall meet with the Fire Marshal prior to submission to agree on the system. A letter of agreement shall be created and signed by both parties. The letter shall include a detailed description of both the manual and automated means. A manual gate shall consist of one manual means to open the gate. The owner or their representative shall meet with the Fire Marshal prior to submission to agree on the means to open. A letter of agreement shall be created and signed by both parties. The letter shall include a detailed description of the manual means to open. To be considered accessible for fire department apparatus the actual clear openings shall be not less than 14 feet, the paved surface through the gate shall be not less than 12 feet, and the gate shall be setback from the perpendicular street by at least 50 feet. Please contact this office to discuss options available to comply with this requirement. (2021 Delaware State Fire Prevention Regulations 705, Chapter 5, 2.6) Page 112

Item #10. 3. The installation of natural gas and LP gas meters, regulators, valves, and LP gas bottles shall be protected from impact damage by impact protection. Natural gas and LP gas meters, regulators, and valves located inside structures shall have impact protection, except when located in separate protected utility rooms. Dimensions of bollards. Bollards shall be a minimum of six-inch diameter filled with concrete. The bollard shall be set into the ground at a depth of at least 36 inches (three ft.) embedded in concrete at a minimum of 18 inches surrounding the bollard. The bollards must be a least 48 inches (four ft.) in height above the finish grade elevation. Any deviation of the stated requirements must be approved by the fire marshal and/or chief building inspector. The above dimensions shall serve as the requirement for installation; however, the fire marshal and/or chief building inspector shall have the authority to require more stringent dimensions to fit the needs of devices warranting impact protection. Color of bollards. Bollards should be of the following colors; yellow, amber or orange. All colors shall be of fluorescent or have a reflective coating. Any deviation of the stated requirements must be approved by the fire marshal and/chief building inspector. (City of Dover Code of Ordinances, 46-4) 4. Every house, building or structure used or intended for use as living quarters or as a place for conducting business, and having any wall facing or abutting any public or private street or alley, shall have displayed on that wall, in legible, easily read characters which are of contrasting color to the background, the proper street number for such house, building, or structure in accordance with the following: One-family and two-family residential structures, height, the number shall measure a minimum of four inches in height, location, the number shall be placed on the house above or to the left or right of the front entrance, color, the number shall be contrasting to the background color, Arabic numerals, all numbers shall be Arabic numerals. Multiple-family dwellings, measurements, the number shall measure a minimum of six inches when identifying individual apartments with exterior doors, and 12 inches when identifying buildings with apartment complexes where there are two or more buildings not assigned street addresses. Individual buildings with street addresses shall have numbers measuring six inches, location, numbers shall be placed either in the center of the building or on the street end of the building so as to be visible from either the public or private street or from the parking lot, color, numbers shall be contrasting to the background color, Arabic numerals, all numbers used shall be Arabic numerals. Commercial, industrial and office buildings, height, the numbers shall measure a minimum of 12 inches in height, location generally, numbers shall be placed either in the center of the building or on the street end of the building so as to be visible from either the public or private street or from the parking lot, property line or driveway, should the building be located far enough from a public or private road so that the numbers are not clearly visible from the street, then the street address shall also be posted on the property at or near the property line or driveway to said building, color; each building, numbers shall be contrasting to the background color and shall be placed on each building in the complex, Page 113

Item #10. Arabic numerals, all numbers used shall be Arabic numerals, Shopping centers. Shopping centers consisting of two or more stores shall have a tenant or suite number affixed to the front of the tenant space and on the outside of the rear door which corresponds with that tenant space. Numbers shall measure six inches in height. (City of Dover Code of Ordinances, 98-344) 5. A lock box (Knox) containing any and all means necessary for fire department access shall be provided at the following occupancies: any occupancy that contains a fire alarm signaling system that is monitored off-site, or any occupancy that contains an automatic sprinkler system. (2021 Delaware State Fire Prevention Regulations 705, Chapter 5, 2.4) Secured key systems. When required; exemption. A secured key system shall be required for any new or existing building where a fire alarm or sprinkler system is being installed. It shall be the responsibility of the owner or occupant to keep a set of keys in the secured key box that are current to the locks of the protected occupancy. Buildings with 24-hour staffing or guard service shall be exempt from this subsection. Location. The secured key system shall be located as close to the main entrance as possible. Should the building design not allow the secured key system to be located by the main entrance, the fire marshal and fire chief shall come to an agreement as to an alternate location for the key box. A secured key system, once installed, shall not be obstructed from view or obstructed by any means that would delay the fire department access to the box. Required keys. Keys to be secured in the key box shall include keys to all points of ingress or egress, whether on the interior or exterior of the building, and keys to locked mechanical rooms, electrical rooms, elevator rooms, fire alarm and sprinkler controls and any area protected by automatic fire detection. Keys to individual residential apartment units are not required. Ordering responsibility. It shall be the responsibility of the general contractor to order the key box for new buildings. It shall be the responsibility of the owner or tenant to order the key box for existing buildings. Installation before testing. No acceptance test for sprinklers or fire alarms shall be conducted before the installation of a key box. (City Code of Ordinances 46-127) Knox Box to be mounted 6 feet above ground level 6. Project to be completed per approved Site Plan. Page 114

Item #10. ADDITIONAL / SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS TO OBTAIN APPROVAL: 1. N/A APPLICABLE CODES LISTED BELOW (NOT LIMITED TO): 2021 NFPA 1 Fire Code (NFPA; National Fire Protection Association) 2021 NFPA 101 Life Safety Code (NFPA; National Fire Protection Association) 2019 NFPA 72 National Fire Alarm and Signaling Code (NFPA; National Fire Protection Association) 2019 NFPA 13 Installation of Sprinkler Systems (NFPA; National Fire Protection Association) 2009 IBC (International Building Code) Latest editions of all other NFPA Codes as defined by the Delaware State Fire Prevention Regulations 2021 Delaware State Fire Prevention Regulations City of Dover Code of Ordinances *If you have any questions or need to discuss any of the above comments, please call the above contact person listed. Page 115

Item #10. CITY OF DOVER D E DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE L APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY D O T =============================================================== APPLICATION: Lands of White Marsh Environmental Services in City of Dover: 1100 and 1110 S. Little Creek Road FILE#: Z-24-04 REVIEWING AGENCY: DelDOT CONTACT PERSON: Will T Mobley III PHONE#: 302-760-2409 =============================================================== THE SUBJECT PROPOSAL HAS BEEN REVIEWED FOR CODE COMPLIANCE, PLAN CONFORMITY AND COMPLETENESS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS AGENCY'S AUTHORITY AND AREA OF EXPERTISE. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AS ELEMENTS WHICH NEED TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE APPLICANT: CITY & STATE CODE REQUIREMENTS: No person, firm, corporation or the like shall construct, open, reconstruct, maintain, modify or use any crossing or entrance onto a state-maintained highway, street or road, including any drainage modifications leading into or carried by the highway drainage system, without first having complied with standards and regulations adopted by the Department and having obtained a permit issued by the Department. Please contact the Delaware Department of Transportation - Development Coordination section to begin permit process. RECOMMENDATIONS SUGGESTED AS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO MEET CODE OBJECTIVES: ADVISORY COMMENTS TO THE APPLICANT: 1. No objection to Rezoning. 2. Prior to site development, the user will request a pre submittal meeting with the DelDOT. Items to discuss when site is developed: a. Proposed increase in trips may spur frontage/entrance alterations. Page 116

Item #10. CITY OF DOVER Dover/Kent DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE County Metropolitan APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY Planning D.A.C. MEETING DATE: 4/3/2024 Organization APPLICATION: Z-24-04 Lands of White Marsh Environmental Systems, Inc. at 1100 and 1110 S. Little Creek Road FILE # Z-24-04 REVIEWING AGENCY: Dover/Kent County MPO CONTACT PERSON: Malcolm Jacob PHONE #: (302) 387-6030 Issues of concern to the MPO are effective transit, reducing the amount of vehicle emissions by shortening or eliminating trips, and facilities for alternative modes of transportation, including bicycle and pedestrian access. The MPO considers the bicycle facilities required by the City of Dover to be the standard for all applications, not to be waived. City of Dover Planning Commission Zoning Review Z-24-04 Lands of White Marsh Environmental Systems, Inc. at 1100 and 1110 S. Little Creek Road 1) The MPO does not have any objections to the proposed rezoning. A sidewalk is already present throughout the developed portion of the property. If further development takes place in the future, the sidewalk should be extended southward so that the pedestrian accessibility of the area will be contiguous. If you have any questions or need to discuss any of the above comments, please call the above contact person and the Planning Department as soon as possible. Page 117

Item #10. CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION April 15, 2024 Excerpt from Meeting Minutes – Draft The Meeting of the City of Dover Planning Commission was held on Monday, April 15, 2024 at 7:00 PM as an In-Person Meeting and also using the phone/videoconferencing system WebEx. The Meeting Session was conducted with Chair Mrs. Maucher presiding. Members present were Mr. Cooper, Mr. Roach (virtual), Mr. Witham, Mrs. Denney, Mr. Baldwin, Dr. Jones, Mr. Reaves, Mrs. Welsh (virtual), and Mrs. Maucher. Staff members present were Mrs. Dawn Melson-Williams, Ms. Katherine Oehmke, Mr. Jason Lyon (virtual), and Mrs. Kristen Mullaney. NEW APPLICATIONS Z-24-04 Lands of White Marsh Environmental Systems at 1100 & 1110 S. Little Creek Road - Public Hearing and Review for Recommendation to City Council on a rezoning application for a parcel of land consisting of 10.7146 acres +/-. The property is zoned CPO (Commercial and Professional Office Zone). The proposed zoning for the property is IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing Zone). The property is located on the south side of South Little Creek Road and west of State Route 1. The owner of record is White Marsh Environmental Systems Inc. c/o Tidewater Utilities. Property Addresses: 1100 and 1110 S. Little Creek Road. Tax Parcel: ED-05- 077.12-01-03.00-000. Council District 2. Ordinance #2024-10. Representative: Mr. Jonathan Street, Becker Morgan Group Mrs. Maucher stated that for disclosure, she is employed by the Delaware Division of the Public Advocate and in that role they represent the rate payers of public utilities regulated by the Public Service Commission. Her office does have interactions with White Marsh or Tidewater, but she does not believe that would preclude her from voting on a Rezoning application. Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that this is the Lands of White Marsh Environmental Systems. The property is located at 1100 & 1110 S. Little Creek Road. The image on the screen is the view of their front entrance and then the property is sizeable; it’s 10.7146 acres. It extends to the south. While the property has a property line that is shared with State Route 1, no access is granted to that roadway. Access to the property as it exists today is S. Little Creek Road. The property currently has a couple of existing buildings hence the building addresses that are addressed individually, but they are only dealing with one tract of land. Currently, the zoning is CPO (Commercial and Professional Office Zone). The two main buildings there are office uses. They are seeking to rezone to IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing Zone). For this property, the Comprehensive Plan has a Land Use Category of Office and Office Parks. You can see that both the CPO (Commercial and Professional Office Zone) which is its current zoning and the proposed zoning request for IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing Zone) comply with that Land Use Category. The Development Advisory Committee Report includes some more detailed information about the Comprehensive Plan and how that is looked at. Specifically, their request is to go to the IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing Zone) and the uses are a little more leaning towards the manufacturing world if you will. It does still involve the office type use. Perhaps the Excerpt of Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 15, 2024 Page 1 of 4 Page 118

Item #10. biggest difference is when it comes to the ability for storage. The current owner/tenant is looking to expand their operations and with that, they would like to be able to store their materials and equipment on-site. The CPO (Commercial and Professional Office Zone) would require that all storage occur within enclosed buildings. The IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing Zone) does give the flexibility where they could have something more along the lines of a work yard area or space for outdoor storage. That is some of the reasoning behind their request to rezone. The Planning Staff has looked at this and does note while both zones allow for the office type use that the IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing Zone) is probably more appropriate given the targeted future for this property by the applicant. They do note that it would be limited to development in the conventional individual lot provisions of the IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing Zone). It does not meet the IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing Zone) requirement for a planned industrial park which would be a development of multiple individual lots with some type of internal road system. It doesn’t meet the bulk standards for that. Otherwise, actually the bulk standards related to things like setbacks and height, in the IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing Zone) are actually greater so they are more restrictive. In that case, for a lot coverage percentage they are the same but that would be all for any kind of future development and that is not what we are here tonight about. We are looking at the Rezoning and whether the use is allowed in the IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing Zone) and if it would be appropriate in this given area. Staff has found that it does meet the Comprehensive Plan goals when you look at the Office Land Use Classification focus. There is existing infrastructure in the area related to water, sewer and electric. Our other services related to police, fire and EMS currently serve this location because certainly it’s within the City. The Planning Commission is charged this evening in looking at three main factors when you consider a Rezoning. Those are related to whether the use is permitted by the proposed change would be compatible with the existing uses in the area. The property is adjacent to another property that is also zoned CPO (Commercial and Professional Office Zone) on the east. To the west is what was developed under the Tudor Industrial Park. It’s a series of multi-tenant buildings with a variety of uses from storage to otherwise more industrial nature. She has already noted about the public services and infrastructure and whether they exist or can be created or expanded. That would be the case if they were looking for any type of expansion on this property with a future development. DelDOT would be evaluating their entrance and whether there needed to be any offsite transportation improvements but that would come along with any kind of development proposal. The third factor that the Planning Commission is charged to look at is whether it’s in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. The Development Advisory Committee Report was presented to the Planning Commission. Tonight, they are making a recommendation on a Rezoning as recommendations go forward to City Council for their own public hearing and final action. Mr. Street stated that he has stood up here many times before when he gets asked to do a Site Plan. With this one at least they know that they want to do. It’s two things and that is outdoor storage of some of their key infrastructure components and with the possibility of indoor storage as well. IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing Zone) is the only zone that allows for that; otherwise they would just stick with their current zoning and just go through and permit the building and permit the yard area. They are looking to do something similar to what Eastern Shore (Natural Gas) and Chesapeake Utilities’ plan looked like a few years ago when they moved their headquarters to just south of the old Blue Hen Mall. They have their building which is their headquarters and office space, they have a place for their trucks as a covered canopy, and then they’ve got a warehouse and a gravel yard that stores their pipe and some of their valves. That is zoned IPM (Industrial Excerpt of Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 15, 2024 Page 2 of 4 Page 119

Item #10. Park Manufacturing Zone) and that allows for that. CPO (Commercial and Professional Office Zone) doesn’t allow for this and that is really what Tidewater wants to do. To echo Staff’s comments, it’s in keeping with the Comprehensive Plan. The neighboring Tudor Industrial Park is zoned C-3 (Service Commercial Zone) but frankly it operates as an industrial park. The neighbor on the east side is CPO (Commercial and Professional Office Zone) as well. They are not really wanting to change the use of what they are doing; they just want to look for some outdoor storage. Tidewater is a critical infrastructure provider and frankly what they are looking to do is beef up their storage of components. If we get hit with some kind of shortage of supply chains and everything else we’ve been hearing for the last five years that they want to be able to do supply key infrastructure as needed. As he said, it’s in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, public services are available, and it is permitted use with the zone. Mrs. Maucher asked where they currently store material and is there anticipation of increased truck traffic. Responding to Mrs. Maucher, Mr. Street stated that there is no change from what they currently do. They have a small storage place over on the north side of the Chick-fil-A in Camden. There is actually a tank over there. But it’s really not secured and they are looking to keep this more secure. No real increased traffic, just trying to beef up their supply of what they need. Mrs. Maucher opened the public hearing. Mr. Zack Prebula – Kent Economic Partnership at 555 Bay Rd Dover, DE 19901 Mr. Prebula stated that they are in support of this project for many reasons. One, this will allow the company to continue to grow here in Kent County by allowing them to add additional warehousing and storage to beef up their inventory and better serve their customers allowing them to grow here in Kent County. Another reason is that industrial zoning is very limited in the Kent County area. So by adding this to our inventory, we can add to our industrial inventory in the County and be able to attract businesses and support the local businesses in those zonings. They ask the Planning Commission to please support this project. Mrs. Maucher closed the public hearing. Mrs. Denney moved to recommend approval to City Council for Z-24-04 Lands of White Marsh Environmental Systems at 1100 & 1110 S. Little Creek Road as she thinks this is an excellent use for what exists there. She thinks that it is very important for us to assist and keep businesses such as Tidewater here operating. If at some point they can’t expand and store their goods, then we always have the potential to lose those businesses. If we are going to have that zoning, she feels like it is the perfect place. She feels like it’s extremely compatible with the other things that are going on out there. Sometimes when it comes to things that are industrial you are feeling lesser evils, but it meets all of the requirements. She doesn’t feel that way. She thinks this is an good and appropriate and a compatible use for this property, seconded by Mr. Witham and the motion was carried 9-0 by roll call vote. Mrs. Denney voting yes; in keeping with her comments when she made the motion. She does think that it’s an excellent use. She thinks that it’s very much compatible with what else is going on there and the area seems to fall together appropriately for this project. Mr. Witham voting yes; he supports the Rezoning based upon the comments of Mrs. Denney and because of Staff recommendations as well. It seems to him that all factors which they are to consider under Article 10 Section 5.36 have been met. Mr. Baldwin voting yes; for reasons stated. Excerpt of Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 15, 2024 Page 3 of 4 Page 120

Item #10. Dr. Jones voting yes; based upon Staff recommendations and comments that have already been stated. Mr. Reaves voting yes; for reasons stated and Staff recommendations. Mrs. Welsh voting yes; for reasons stated by Mrs. Denney. Mr. Cooper voting yes; for reasons previously stated. Mr. Roach voting yes; for reasons previously stated. Mrs. Maucher voting yes; for reasons previously stated. Excerpt of Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 15, 2024 Page 4 of 4 Page 121

Item #10. FINAL READING City of Dover CITY OF DOVER PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2024-10 1 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND ZONING MAP OF THE CITY 2 OF DOVER BY CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3 1100 AND 1110 S. LITTLE CREEK ROAD 4 WHEREAS, the City of Dover has enacted a zoning ordinance regulating the use of property within the 5 limits of the City of Dover; and 6 WHEREAS, it is deemed in the best interest of zoning and planning to change the permitted use of property 7 described below from CPO (Commercial and Professional Office Zone) to IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing Zone). 8 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF 9 DOVER, IN COUNCIL, MET: 10 1. That from and after the passage and approval of this ordinance the Zoning Map and Zoning 11 Ordinance of the City of Dover have been amended by changing the zoning designation from CPO (Commercial and Professional Office Zone) to IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing Zone) on that property located at 1100 and 1110 S. Little Creek Road (South side of South Little Creek Road and west of State Route 1) consisting of 10.7146 acres +/- owned by White Marsh Environmental Systems. 12 13 (Tax Parcel: ED-05-077.12-01-03.00-000; Planning Reference: Z-24-04; Second Council District) 14 ADOPTED: * 15 Actions History 16 05/13/2024 – Scheduled for Public Hearing/Final Reading – City Council 17 04/15/2024 – Public Hearing – Planning Commission 18 03/25/2024 – Scheduled for First Reading – City Council Page 122

Item #11. REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING The Regular City Council Meeting was held on April 22, 2024, at 6:42 p.m. with Council President Hare presiding. Council members present were Mr. Anderson, Mr. Boggerty, Dr. Pillsbury, Ms. Arndt, Mr. Sudler, and Mr. Lewis. Mr. Neil and Mr. Rocha were absent. Staff members present were Police Chief Johnson, Ms. Marney, Ms. Duca, Ms. Melson- Williams, Mr. Rodriguez, Chief Carey, and Ms. Rivera. Mayor Christiansen was also present. OPEN FORUM The Open Forum was held at 6:18 p.m., prior to 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. Mr. Dennis Minus, 118 West Division Street, stated that the last time he was before council, he talked about everyone being creative as a community and thinking outside the box. Mr. Minus mentioned that three (3) words come to mind, creativity, intervention, and prevention; as a family, they would do a great service. He wants to intervene with the community that is suffering the most, and have Council be active as a team. Mr. Mike Soja, 447 Barrister Place, expressed his concerns about the shootings in Dover. Mr. Soja asked why legal gun owners are constantly being punished and held to a higher standard than criminals with guns. At what point are they able to defend themselves against senseless violence without facing consequences and litigation? City Council sets the standard for what they can and cannot do as civilians without legal terms behind it. Mr. Soja explained that things must be put in place so that they can do better. There is no community policing anymore, and the homelessness downtown is outrageous. He further explained that this is not a place where the average person wants to go because they do not feel safe. Mr. Soja stated that they need Council to get out there to see firsthand what is happening. Mr. Marty Mattocks, 86 Representative Lane, stated that he wanted to address five (5) items: traffic and safety concerns, quality of life, foot traffic, children’s safety, and parking. Mr. Mattocks explained that many people enjoy walking in their neighborhood with their dogs, taking pictures of the wildlife, sunsets, and sunrises. He further explained that they enjoy a great quality of life and that the proposed development would impact the residents negatively with the extra traffic, parking congestion, and safety concerns. Mr. Mattocks stated that the proposed development could have a potential negative impact on the police, fire and rescue, and emergency medical services. He wants everyone to be part of a better solution for 1079 Silver Lake Boulevard. Ms. Kathleen Maslar, 937 Silver Lake Boulevard, explained that the new construction that was proposed is to have 90 residences on the five-acre lot, which would be an increase in density of over 100%. There is no access or corridors beyond the road. The road goes over a bridge into the neighborhood, which ends in a cul-de-sac. Ms. Maslar knows that there is pressure being brought in from the outside. She also stated that during the meeting when they went over the building proposal, they had implied that the building commission stated that they did not have to show their plans. She believed it would discourage them from showing the plan to the residents. Ms. Maslar stated that the map used did not accurately represent the neighborhood. She feels that there might be something afoot that is not part of the revitalization of Downtown Dover. Page 123

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 2 INVOCATION The invocation was given by Elder Ellis B. Louden. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilman Anderson. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Mr. Sudler moved for adoption of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Boggerty, and unanimously carried. (Neil, Rocha absent) 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. Lewis moved for adoption of the consent agenda, seconded by Mr. Sudler, and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. (Neil, Rocha absent) PROCLAMATION-DRINKING WATER WEEK The City Clerk read the following Proclamation into the record: WHEREAS, water is our most valuable natural resource. Drinking water serves a vital role in daily life, serving an essential purpose to health, hydration, and hygiene needs for the quality of life our citizens enjoy. Tap water delivers public health protection, fire protection, support for our economy and the quality of life we enjoy; and WHEREAS, the hard work performed by the Department of Water & Wastewater is evident in various roles, from designing capital projects to operators ensuring the safety and quality of drinking water. These efforts are crucial for communities to receive high-quality water from its source to consumers’ tap; and WHEREAS, the coronavirus pandemic has shone a light on the importance of drinking water for health, hydration, and hygiene needs. We are all stewards of the water infrastructure that is essential for the well-being of current and future generations. NOW, THEREFORE, I, ROBIN R. CHRISTIANSEN, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF DOVER, DELAWARE, do hereby proclaim May 5-11, 2024, as Drinking Water Week in the City of Dover and encourage all residents to help protect our source waters from pollution, practice water conservation and get involved with their water by familiarizing themselves with it. PROCLAMATION – MILITARY SPOUSE APPRECIATION DAY The City Clerk read the following Proclamation into the record: WHEREAS, former President Ronald Reagan established Military Spouse Appreciation Day in 1984. U.S. Secretary of Defense Casper Weinberger standardized the date by declaring the Friday preceding Mother’s Day as Military Spouse Day to acknowledge the significant Page 124

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 3 contributions, support, and sacrifices made by spouses of the Armed Forces; and WHEREAS, serving alongside our Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Coast Guardsmen, our Nation’s military families selflessly give of themselves and sacrifice their time with loved ones to ensure our safety and freedom. Enduring separation, relocation, heartache, and anticipation, military spouses demonstrate a strength reflective of the spirit of our Nation; and WHEREAS, the spouses of our men and women in uniform shoulder the responsibility of maintaining their families, caring for children, and providing comfort and support while their loved ones are away. Military spouses demonstrate immense courage and unwavering faith. Through their spirit of resilience, we witness the best of America. Let us celebrate these selfless individuals by supporting them and reaffirming our everlasting commitment to stand beside them and their families. NOW, THEREFORE, I, ROBIN R. CHRISTIANSEN, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF DOVER, DELAWARE, do hereby proclaim May 10, 2024, as Military Spouse Appreciation Day in the City of Dover and encourage all citizens to be aware of the challenges faced by military spouses and show support by offering their friendship, empathy, and understanding, realizing that they are making daily sacrifices for their country. PUBLIC HEARING/FINAL READING - PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2023-12 – LANDS OF DRAPER FARM PROPERTIES, LLC AT 1617 FORREST AVENUE Ms. Arndt moved that the Final Reading of Proposed Ordinance #2023-12 be acknowledged by title only, seconded by Mr. Anderson, and unanimously carried. (The First Reading of the proposed ordinance was accomplished during the Council Meeting of December 11, 2023.) (Neil, Rocha absent) Ms. Dawn Melson-Williams, Principal Planner, reviewed Proposed Ordinance No. 2024-12 - Lands of Draper Farm Properties, LLC, located at 1617 Forrest Avenue. The property is zoned R-10 (One-Family Residence Zone) and subject to the COZ-1 (Corridor Overlay Zone). The property is located on the north side of Forrest Avenue adjacent to Cranberry Run Drive. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Mr. Boggerty stated that there were a few concerns, mainly with the increase in traffic with Dover High and the unknown of what would go there. He mentioned that they heard what is allowed in that space, but at one time, there was supposed to be a gas station where trucks could idle, and their concerns were noise and pollution. Mr. Boggerty stated that the new apartments that are to be built would bring in a level of increased traffic. Mr. Boggerty stated that they do not make zoning decisions based on what is thought to be developed on the property. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Ms. Melson-Williams stated that the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing, where several people spoke at that meeting, and the meeting minutes are included in the recommendation report. Ms. Melson-Williams noted that the vote was six (6) to two (2) in favor of denial. The concerns mentioned include the compatibility of the commercial development in a residential neighborhood, potential traffic, safety issues, nearby schools, and the appropriateness of the proposed zoning changes. This would be in addition to the residents' testimonies that have been received. Ms. Melson-Williams stated that the two (2) Planning Page 125

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 4 Commission members who voted against the motion for denial cited their reasonings that the proposed zoning was compliant with the desires of the Comprehensive Plan. This would be compliance for a mix of uses and the safety concerns and traffic would be addressed during the site plan development process. Responding to Mr. Hare, Ms. Melson-Williams stated that the property is currently zoned as R- 10, which is a one (1) family residence zone. The main use for this zoning is for a single-family detached home with a minimum 10,000-square-foot lot size. She explained that zoning can be considered for a series of conditional uses, such as a place of worship, schools, and other institutional type of uses, but that they would involve a specialized review process with the Planning Commission. Council President Hare declared the public hearing opened at 7:10 p.m. and asked if anyone would like to speak in favor of the proposed amendments to state their name and address for the record. Mr. John Paradee, Attorney for Baird, Mandalas, Brockstedt & Federico, LLC, 6 South State Street, and Jonathan Street, Engineer for Becker Morgan Group, reviewed a PowerPoint presentation entitled Draper Farm Properties, LLC Rezoning Application #Z-23-02 (Exhibit #1). Mr. Paradee provided a binder containing exhibits to the City Clerk’s Office to be included in the record. (Exhibit #2). Responding to Mr. Sudler, Mr. Paradee stated that constituents do not want any commercial use immediately adjacent to the Cranberry Run subdivision, and their main reasons were traffic and congestion. He mentioned that there were questions about how to gain access to the property from Route 8, and whether or not the traffic would run through the neighborhood. Several of the constituents expressed concerns about already having difficulty getting out on Route 8 during rush hour in the mornings and evenings. Mr. Paradee stated that there was a significant amount of traffic on Route 8 and that they all felt this would exacerbate the problem. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Mr. Paradee stated that he did visit the location on several occasions and took over 100 photographs of the corridor. Mr. Paradee explained that he used that opportunity to put himself in the shoes of the residents and drove through Cranberry Run on different occasions at different times of the day. He mentioned that there is a substantial amount of traffic that flows into the city from the west in the morning and then reverses direction in the evening, with significant congestion during rush hour. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Ms. Melson-Williams stated that at the Planning Commission meeting, there was a presentation given by their design professional representative which is included in the meeting packet. She explained that it focused on the activities of the corridor, the location, and similar references that comply with the Comprehensive Plan. Responding to Mr. Paradee, Ms. Arndt took issue with his statement that if it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, then the rezoning should be approved. This is not the case because other criteria needs to be met, such as whether there will be public services available and compatibility with surrounding land uses. Ms. Arndt also took issue with the reference to the pending lawsuit and the indication that if they approved this, then the lawsuit would go away. Page 126

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 5 This did not sit well with her. Ms. Arndt stated that they are there for the process and to listen to the residents and hear what they have to say. Responding to Ms. Arndt, Mr. Paradee mentioned that if they look at the Code, the provisions stated that there are three (3) criteria, the infrastructure, compatibility, and the Comprehensive Plan consistency. These are the standards under review by the Planning Commission. Mr. Paradee stated that if they look at the section that he cited, it deals with the consideration by the City Council. He believed that the application was compatible with the surrounding uses. Mr. Paradee explained that Article 10, section 5.6 of the city code, deals with the consistency of the Comprehensive Plan. It does not talk about compatibility or infrastructure. Mr. Scott Halls, 104 Tucket Circle in Cranberry Run stated that his concerns are that his children have a bus stop at or within 100 feet of the entrance to the subdivision. He mentioned that traffic is already bad, but adding additional traffic would be more of a significant risk. His second concern is the entrance into their subdivision along Route 8. Every single subdivision coming from Redner’s has a right turn lane into their subdivision, but they do not. Mr. Hall asked if the property is already zoned for mixed property, what is stopping them from developing the limited commercial use as is. He questioned what the motives are behind the rezoning proposal, suggesting that there may be undisclosed intentions for a larger development or some other purpose beyond what is currently being presented. Mr. Hall is concerned about the lack of additional outlets to and from the subdivision and the potential need to destroy property to make the additional outlets. The additional traffic and congestion does not sit well with him, especially since two (2) of his kids have bus stops in the general vicinity. Mr. John Davis, 4 Stoney Drive in Heatherfield, stated that the zoning request was not compatible with the immediate area and the parcel is in the middle of three (3) neighborhoods, all of which are single-family homes. Throughout the last three (3) years that he has been involved with this, the residents of these three (3) neighborhoods are constantly confronted with the assertion that the Comprehensive Plan would allow zoning changes to be done and that it has the force of law. Mr. Davis explained that when he read through the 2019 Comprehensive Plan, it was evident that what is missing in the amendments is input from the stakeholders. Mr. Davis stated that unlike zoning requests which require individual notice to property owners, the Comprehensive Plan Amendment approval has no knowledge passed onto individual property owners. He mentioned that they were confronted with a situation where they did not know that the Comprehensive Plan was being amended, but when it was protested in a zoning meeting, they were told that the plan had the force of law and that they had to follow it. Residents have been subjected to a process where they were not informed regarding an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, but received notice when a zoning request has been made. Mr. Robert Hice, 124 Chelsea Way in Cranberry Run stated that for them nothing happens, and that they just want the farmland, that is their preference. If they had the money, they would buy it, but they cannot do that. If it must be developed, zone it for single-family homes. He does not want commercial property of any kind, and this is because of the traffic, safety, and noise issues. Mr. Hice mentioned that no one knows what business would be there and his concern would be empty stores. There are plenty of empty retail spaces between Mifflin Road and down to Gateway North. Mr. Hice asked how many more times they will have to come back because of zoning and if they can have a final say on it. Page 127

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 6 Responding to Mr. Sudler, Ms. Melson-Williams stated that rezoning application #Z-21-05 came through to request to rezone the property to C-2A and that the (current) request before Council is a different application. The city’s zoning ordinance does have some provisions related to reconsideration and that is when an application is denied by City Council. The code specifically says that a substantially similar one shall not be reconsidered sooner than one (1) year from the date of the prior denial. There is an exception to that if the Planning Commission requests that Council reconsider an application because of significant changes in that area and that is part of the zoning ordinance in Article 10, Section 5.61. Mr. Richard Heisler, 1598 Forrest Avenue, stated that the owners of this property have not been good custodians of taking care of it. He mentioned that it only seems that when a zoning notice goes up, that is when they will take care of the property. He is very skeptical of the care that the property will get if the zoning change is made. Ms. Jackie George, 301 Chelsea Way in Cranberry Run, stated at a previous council meeting that it was mentioned that the commercial residential zoning worked east of Mifflin Road, why would it not work west of Mifflin Road? The big difference between East Mifflin Road and West Mifflin Road is the four-lane highway. She continued to state that there is easy access on and off commercial properties east of Mifflin Road, but that they are not going to have that west of Mifflin Road. Ms. George explained that when Mr. Paradee mentioned this at a previous meeting, that it would be a right turn in and out of the property. They were going to turn right on Route 8 and then make a right and come down Cranberry Run to be able to turn around to go back out to make a left onto Route 8. This will create a traffic nightmare for the residents of Cranberry Run and for the people who travel on Route 8. Ms. Lynne Sadusky, 16 Stoney Drive, stated that she is concerned for the students at Dover High School. She mentioned that any commercial property coming in would be a temptation for the students to cross the road since they are already crossing the road to go to Wawa. She felt that it was an accident waiting to happen and that it would not be compatible with the neighborhood. Ms. Sadusky stated that they are a residential neighborhood, they have gas stations, convenience stores, pharmacies, banks, hardware stores, grocery stores, and restaurants, and they do not need anything else. This is all within a mile of their residences. Ms. Sadusky believed that this was not compatible with the neighborhood. Via Webex, Ms. Rosemarie Eberly, 109 Tuckett Circle in Cranberry Run, stated that the students who live opposite Dover High School have a habit of crossing the middle of the road. Any commercial property will become an attractive nuisance encouraging students to cross the road. She noted that with little regard for traffic, they would be taking an already unsafe situation and making it worse. The students who have bus stops would be affected by any commercial property, and the section of Route 8 that has two lanes would be impatient drivers. Ms. Eberly explained that commercial development would bring litter, crime, light pollution, and lower property values. She mentioned that just because something can be changed, does not mean it should change. Ms. Eberly stated that keeping the current zoning is compatible with the Comprehensive Plan. Arielle Rivera, Assistant City Clerk, stated that the City Clerk’s office received an email dated Page 128

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 7 April 22nd, 2024, in opposition to the proposed rezoning from Ms. Kimberly Haggard (Exhibit #3). Council President Hare declared the public hearing closed at 8:14 p.m. Mr. Anderson stated that there were good presentations on both sides with a lot of good information. He believed Councilwoman Arndt made a good point when he looked up Article 10, Section 5.35 in the code, which says the planning office shall report to the Planning Commission, and it specifically says “and” City Council; then it lists the factors. Therefore, based on that “and” that they can consider the same factors as the Planning Commission. He believed that there is a problem with compatibility with the surrounding land. Mr. Anderson believed that the Planning Commission was not being capricious and that they considered the factors of the public facilities and compatibility of land use. Mr. Anderson supports the Planning Commission's recommendation. Mr. Sudler expressed dissatisfaction with the current process regarding the order and how information is being communicated to the stakeholders. He would like to see the stakeholders have more participation and input. He commended Mr. Paradee for talking with Councilman Anderson and his recommendations to meet with the stakeholders. Mr. Sudler stated that he would not be voting in support of the approval. Mr. Boggerty stated that both arguments were very compelling. He mentioned that he trusts the Planning Commission to do their job and that they are there for a reason. Mr. Boggerty supports the Planning Commission’s recommendation. Ms. Arndt stated that she agreed with the information presented in the report and that it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. She emphasized the importance of ensuring that the public process is compatible with the adjacent land uses. Ms. Arndt mentioned that change is hard, and no one wants to see anything change around their neighborhood. She explained that they need to recognize that a vacant property will not stay vacant for long, and it is at the owner’s discretion what to do with that property. Ms. Arndt struggles with what is permissible and that there are uses that could be more compatible with the neighborhood. Ms. Arndt agreed with the Planning Commission. Ms. Arndt moved to approve proposed ordinance #2023-12, seconded by Mr. Anderson. The motion failed by a roll call vote of seven (7) no votes (Anderson, Boggerty, Pillsbury, Arndt, Sudler, Lewis, and Hare). (Neil, Rocha absent) FINAL HEARING – PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2024-03 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 2024 – CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENT TO MAP 12-1: LAND DEVELOPMENT PLAN MAP Ms. Arndt moved that the Final Reading of Proposed Ordinance #2024-01 be acknowledged by title only, seconded by Dr. Pillsbury, and unanimously carried. (The First Reading of the proposed ordinance was accomplished during the Council Meeting of January 22, 2024.) (Neil, Rocha absent) Ms. Dawn Melson-Williams, Principal Planner reviewed Proposed Ordinance No. 2024-03 Page 129

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 8 Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2023 – Consideration of Amendment to Map 12-1: Land Development Plan Map. The request is to revise the Land Use Clarification from Office to Mixed Use on Map 12-1: Land Development Plan Map. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Ms. Melson-Williams stated that a portion of the property is adjacent to Silver Lake and that would come into play should it ever be developed. She mentioned that the zoning ordinance has very specific provisions related to the consideration of things like site development plans, subdivisions, and conditional uses that have to be reviewed by the Silver Lake Commission. The zoning ordinance has buffering requirements for Silver Lake as a water body of water. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Ms. Melson-Williams stated that they are dealing with the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and rezoning is not one of the items that goes before that commission. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Hare stated that if this passes, then there will be a rezoning hearing, but if this does not pass, then there will not be. Responding to Mr. Hare, Mr. Anderson believed that they got it right with the Comprehensive Plan when it comes to infrastructure and the character of the neighborhood. Changing the Comprehensive Plan is something that he has a question about, but he will hear what the people have to say. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Ms. Melson-Williams explained that in the zoning ordinance, Article 5, Section 11.251, regarding Silver Lake, all site plans, conditional use site plans or subdivision applications for parcels where any boundary of the parcel is abutting Silver Lake are required to go before the Silver Lake Commission. Before appearing before the Planning Commission, the Silver Lake Commission shall provide advisory comments for the Planning Commission on such applications. In this case, the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, and the future rezoning application are not types of applications that are required to be reviewed by the Silver Lake Commission. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Chief Johnson stated that he did go out and survey the area so that he would be better familiar with it. He further stated that he did not see any access challenges for either routine or emergency police services in that area as currently constructed. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Chief Carey stated that as far as the fire department’s concerned, he does not see any access problems as of right now, as long as it meets building codes, as the structures are being built. The biggest concern they have would be the water flow in that area and if it would be a dead-end main because it is on a cul-de-sac at the end. Ms. Arndt stated that the Planning Commission has recommended approval and planning staff recommended approval and it did go through the state review process, and no state agencies objected to the change. Mr. Boggerty stated that he had followed up with a realtor to discuss what their thoughts were and why there were mixed emotions. Mr. Boggerty explained that they said it is destined to be a Page 130

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 9 beautiful area, which is much needed in that area as far as housing and growth, along with other things that they plan to put out there. Council President Hare stated that the approval to change the Comprehensive Plan is needed to have the public hearing for the rezoning request for 1079 Silver Lake Boulevard. If the approval to change the Comprehensive Plan is denied, then there will be no public hearing for the rezoning request. Ms. Arndt moved to approve the Proposed Ordinance #2024-03. The motion was seconded by Mr. Boggerty. (Neil, Rocha absent) Mr. Anderson stated that there are good intentions, but when it comes to the concerns of the residents about the bridge and limited access, the concerns about the water compatibility, and fire access with the dead-end cul-de-sac, the Comprehensive Plan that was voted upon was correct. This should be based upon a compelling reason, not based upon preference. He had not heard a compelling reason to change the Comprehensive Plan in such a way that would maybe increase resonance, as well as add commercial and other aspects. Mr. Sudler stated that there are a lot of infrastructure issues that are not being addressed and he does not think that this area is ready for a change in zoning. Mr. Sudler understands that the developers have a right to develop, but the stakeholders also have a valid point. Mr. Sudler stands with Councilman Anderson that he has not heard a valid reason to change what is set in place already. Ms. Arndt moved to approve proposed ordinance #2024-03, seconded by Mr. Boggerty. The motion failed by a roll call vote of one (1) yes (Arndt) and six (6) no (Anderson, Boggerty, Pillsbury, Sudler, Lewis, and Hare). (Neil, Rocha absent) Ms. Melson-Williams stated that the request to change failed to align with the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. As a result, the land remains designated for office use according to the plan. The proposed rezoning would not be compatible with the existing land use category of office. PUBLIC HEARING/FINAL HEARING – PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2024-04 – LANDS OF DOVER FEDERAL CREDIT UNION AT 1079 SILVER LAKE BOULEVARD: CPO TO C-2A Ms. Melson-Williams stated that the request to change failed to align with the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. As a result, the land remains designated for office use according to the plan. The proposed rezoning would not be compatible with the existing land use category of office. ADOPTION OF MINUTES - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 08, 2024 The Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of April 08, 2024, were unanimously approved by motion of Mr. Lewis, seconded by Mr. Sudler, and bore the written approval of Mayor Christiansen. (Neil, Rocha absent) COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE REPORT – APRIL 09, 2024 Page 131

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 10 The Council Committee of the Whole met on April 09, 2024, at 6:00 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 6:03 p.m.). Mayor Christiansen was absent. Civilian members present for their Committee meetings were Mr. Lewis (Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement), Mr. Shevock (via WebEx), and Ms. Smith (Legislative, Finance, and Administration. Mr. Tholstrup (Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement) was absent. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Mr. Neil moved for adoption of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Boggerty and unanimously carried. PARKS, RECREATION, AND COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT COMMITTEE The Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee met with Chairwoman Arndt presiding. Adoption of Agenda Mr. Neil moved for adoption of the agenda, seconded by Dr. Pillsbury and unanimously carried. Mayor and Council Reports – March 2024 Council President Hare Council President Hare had no report to give. First District Dr. Pillsbury reported that she attended the St. Patrick’s Day Parade along with the First District Town Hall. Mr. Rocha reported that he facilitated the Unsheltered Working group along with Ms. Arndt. He also worked closely with Dr. Pillsbury and Mr. Boggerty to arrange a meeting for the First District regarding the property at 10 Merion Road in Fox Hall. Mr. Rocha reported that he attended the farewell of Director Eaton, the Governors Outstanding Volunteer Service Awards, and the opening of the Hope Center on Division Street which was opened by the Wilmington Hope Commission. Second District Mr. Lewis had no report to give. Third District Page 132

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 11 Mr. Neil reported that he attended the St. Patrick’s Day Parade along with Dr. Pillsbury, the Delaware League of Local Governments meeting regarding Marijuana, the Governors Outstanding Volunteer Service Awards, the farewell luncheon for Robin Eaton, and the ribbon cutting for Crumbl Cookie. Mr. Neil reported that he requested staff help on several questions dealing with trash at the Valero, signs in a community, and cats in a community based on constituent complaints. Mr. Neil commended Mr. Hugg, Ms. Duca, and Ms. Melson- Williams for their quick response to the complaints. Mr. Neil reported that he sent out a series of alerts regarding the sewer main break, as there were several questions that had been received. Finally, Mr. Neil reported that he sent written comments to the legislative bills that were brought to council's attention by Chief Johnson. Ms. Arndt reported that in addition to Councilman Neil's remarks, she also participated in the Governor's Outstanding Volunteer Service Awards. Ms. Arndt commended Mr. Todd Stonesifer, Chair of the Downtown Dover Partnership, on his award and expressed appreciation for all his efforts on behalf of the city. Ms. Arndt also reported that she attended the most recent Silver Lake Commission meeting where she presented a draft procedure for dedicating city parks. Ms. Arndt stated that the procedure was well received, and she will be working with staff to bring the procedure back to the committee for discussion. Fourth District Mr. Sudler reported that he attended the Delaware League of Local Governments meeting regarding marijuana and CBD regulations. Mr. Sudler stated that it was interesting to hear about the lack of strict regulations on CBD versus marijuana. Mr. Sudler stated that he and Mr. Anderson held a meeting for the Silver Lake residents regarding their concerns about the proposed new zoning and development that could take place in their development. Mr. Sudler also reported that he followed up with constituents' concerns regarding trash dumping in the Lincoln Park area near Simon Circle. Mr. Sudler stated that they met on-site to further hear their concerns. Finally, Mr. Sudler stated that Mr. Anderson, Mr. Lewis, the mayor, the city manager, Commissioner Angel, Representative Phillips, and himself will be meeting regarding House Bill No. 55 and the language concerns within the bill on April 16, 2024. In preparation for their Fourth District Town Hall to be held at Levy Court to bridge a partnership between Mr. Anderson, Commissioner Angel, and himself to address some of the homeless issues around April 26th through the 29th. Mr. Anderson reported that in addition to Councilman Sudler's comments, they have been addressing constituent concerns regarding a local business needing to call the police four times in the last week with complaints of open drug use, and clients and staff being harassed by beggars. A second complaint was received about an individual sleeping in an alley and using the bathroom between trash receptacles on a different street. Also, a complaint was received regarding the use of dirt bikes on the streets again. Mr. Anderson reported that he attended the National League of Cities Congressional Conference, where they discussed Page 133

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 12 several items that he will be able to bring back to staff, as well as some grant opportunities that are not being utilized yet. Finally, Mr. Anderson reported that they are in the process of planning their Fourth District Town Hall. At-Large Mr. Boggerty reported that he attended the meeting with a neighborhood in the first district regarding a home on Merion Court, and they will be holding a follow- up meeting. He is currently planning his Unity Day for June 29, 2024, and the focus will be anti-bullying. Mr. Boggerty reported that he participated in the St. Patrick's Day Parade and has recently launched his podcast which will be called Dover and Beyond with Councilman Boggerty. He explained that the podcast can be found on his personal Facebook page as well as his council Facebook page. Mr. Boggerty thanked Mr. Anderson for being his first guest, and they discussed finances and how the city budget works. He also explained that he was a panelist for the aging population at the Modern Maturity Center and discussed transportation, employment, and how best to support organizations like Meals on Wheels and the Modern Maturity Center, he attended the opening of the Hope Center, and the ribbon cutting of Crumbl Cookie. Finally, Mr. Boggerty reported that the residents of Capital Park had raised concerns about their basketball court. Through collaborative efforts with Senator Paradee and other members, they successfully had the court repaved, ensuring that the children can now engage in safe and enjoyable playtime. Finally, Mr. Boggerty reported that along with Councilman Sudler, he attended the celebration for all the Dover High School teams. Mayor Christiansen Mayor Christiansen was absent, and no report was made. Ms. Arndt moved for adjournment of the Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee meeting, hearing no objection the meeting adjourned at 6:16 p.m. LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE The Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee met with Chairman Anderson presiding. Adoption of Agenda Mr. Anderson requested to move item five (5) on the agenda to item three (3). Mr. Sudler moved for adoption of the agenda as amended, seconded by Mr. Boggerty, and unanimously carried. Discussion – The National League of Cities (NLC) Service Line Program for the City of Dover (Dennis Lyon, HomeServe Regional Director Page 134

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 13 Mr. Dennis Lyon, HomeServe Regional Director, reviewed the presentation titled NLC Service Line Warranty Program by HomeServe (Attachment #1). The committee recommended referring to staff for evaluation. Responding to Mr. Neil, Mr. Lyon stated that for each individual incident, such as those occurring on external lines, coverage of up to $8,500 would be provided. Similarly, for incidents within the internal plumbing, homeowners would receive coverage of up to $3,000 for associated costs. Mr. Lyon explained that excluding any royalty or revenue share, the water coverage and service are priced at $5.49 per month, while sewer coverage is priced at $7.49 per month, and in-home plumbing coverage is available for $9.49 per month. The aim is to maintain price points so that individuals who may not be financially equipped to handle such issues can still affordably protect themselves without significant financial strain. Mr. Lyon stated that he could not provide an average cost of services because they vary but he does know that fewer than one percent of their claims exceed the $8,500 threshold. Mr. Lyon explained that the reason for the low percentage is attributed to the vetting of contractors and the utilization of actuarial methods and underwriting to estimate the volume of business they can direct their way. By ensuring contractors are shielded from issues such as homeowners lacking funds or requesting payment plans, they offer them rates typically 15 to 20% lower than those available to the general public. This strategy significantly contributes to keeping the costs down. Mr. Lyon explained that in an instance where the cost exceeds $8,500, the homeowner would be informed before the work began as they would be responsible for the overage. However, the homeowner would pay the overage at the same rate that the contractor bills them. Responding to Ms. Arndt, Mr. Lyon stated that the rate is standardized and that there are no inspections of the home or any questions about the age of the lines or what materials may have been used. Coverage begins after a 30-day waiting period. Mr. Lyon also explained that claims do not count against eligibility, and the rates remain unchanged despite the filing of a claim. Mr. Rocha moved to recommend referral back to staff for evaluation. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lewis and unanimously carried. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Mr. Lyon explained that their partnership agreement incorporates indemnification clauses to safeguard the partners from any potential civil litigation. Mr. Lyon noted that they have not experienced any situations where a partner has been involved in a dispute, and precautionary language in the agreement is in place to protect the partners. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Mr. Lyon explained that he included a monetary option in the agreements, referred to as a licensing fee. This fee would be set at Page 135

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 14 $5,000 annually for the initial three years of the agreement, totaling $15,000, with the flexibility for the city to utilize these funds as they deem necessary. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Mr. Lyon stated that HomeServe selects the most skilled contractors, and they are deeply committed to community engagement and diversity. Mr. Lyon explained that they embrace and celebrate all aspects of the community. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Mr. Lyon stated that they have collaborated with a partner who supplied a list of minority-owned businesses to contact. Mr. Lyon clarified that the partner's familiarity with the community allows for targeted outreach, offering insights on which businesses to prioritize and which ones to avoid. This strategic approach helps ensure the consistent delivery of high-quality service, which is their constant goal. By consent agenda, Mr. Lewis moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Sudler and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. (Neil, Rocha absent) Evaluation of Bids – North Bradford Street Rehabilitation Project (Jason Lyon, Water/Wastewater Director) Mr. Jason Lyon, Water/Wastewater Director, reviewed the background and analysis for the North Bradford Street rehabilitation project. Staff recommended awarding the contract to Sam’s Construction, LLC, for the City of Dover North Bradford Street Rehabilitation Project, Bid #24-0025PW, for the amount of $1,103,390.70. Responding to Mr. Boggerty, Mr. Lyon stated that Sam’s Construction has done numerous projects on several street programs, and their work has always been adequate. Mr. Lyon explained that they reached out to Sam’s Construction to make sure they understood the bid because there is some uniqueness to it. Mr. Lyon stated that the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) has led to a substantial influx of funding nationwide, prompting contractors to submit higher bids in the hope of securing projects and earning a good profit margin. It is possible that George & Lynch may not be well-versed in the new product being utilized for this particular project. Responding to Mr. Boggerty, Mr. Lyon explained that the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL), initiated by the Federal Government, is directing funds toward various infrastructure projects such as streets, roads, bridges, and water/wastewater facilities across the country. He noted that the abundance of projects available may contribute to the city receiving fewer bids. Many of these projects are either unique, highly specialized, or relatively straightforward, and contractors are often overwhelmed with their existing workload. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Lyon clarified that the two projects in question were funded by the city and have been continued due to their complexity. He Page 136

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 15 further elaborated that the funds for these projects had to be allocated on an annual basis, indicating that grant money was not involved in the process. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Lyon stated that the money was accounted for in past budgets, which occurred in Fiscal Years 2021 and 2022. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Lyon stated that the majority of grants available are typically geared towards emergent contaminants, water or wastewater projects, and environmental considerations. He pointed out that the current project does not meet the criteria for these grants unless it pertains to improving compliance with the American Disabilities Act (ADA). Mr. Lyon further explained that, as previously discussed, grants can be obtained through the Transportation Alternative Program offered by the Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT), although they did not seek funding for the current project. However, they did submit applications for grants to address accessibility issues on State Street by enhancing the sidewalks. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Lyon stated that the different materials being utilized for the project are what make it unique. Instead of the traditional method of cutting out concrete sidewalks and removing nearby trees, which has been a sensitive topic, they are using a more environmentally friendly solution. Mr. Lyon explained that they are utilizing a pervious concrete material for the sidewalks allowing them to preserve the surrounding trees while addressing the issues caused by root growth. Mr. Lyon related the material to that of kinetic sand. Mr. Lyon explained that the public works team does not have the equipment necessary to make a mill and overlay for a project, and the project includes not only the sidewalks being improved but also the curb. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Lyon stated that informally, at various functions, discussions often revolve around comparable projects and the diverse contractors engaged by various municipalities. Responding to Ms. Arndt, Mr. Lyon stated that the project is estimated to span approximately 180 calendar days. Upon approval and finalization of the contractual paperwork, the project is slated to commence in June, with an anticipated completion date of December. Mr. Hare moved to recommend accepting the staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Mr. Rocha and unanimously carried. By consent agenda, Mr. Lewis moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Sudler and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. (Neil, Rocha absent) Proposed Ordinance #2024-07 – Amending Chapter 80 – Personnel, Article IV – Pension Plans and Retirement Benefits, Division 3 – General Employee Pension Plan (Councilman Anderson and Councilwoman Dr. Pillsbury) Page 137

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 16 Mr. Anderson reviewed the background regarding the proposed changes to proposed ordinance #2024-07. Staff recommended approval of proposed Ordinance #2024-07. Dr. Pillsbury moved to recommend renumbering section 80-511 to 80-510 and taking the current section 80-510 and renumbering it to 80-511 with the changes as discussed. Mr. Anderson seconded the motion. Responding to Dr. Pillsbury, Mr. Anderson expressed agreement with the point made regarding the exclusions under the new section 80-510. He acknowledged the importance of carefully examining whether this section is even necessary in its current form. Mr. Anderson emphasized that while the section is part of existing law, it is important to thoroughly review and potentially revise it if needed. He suggested that obtaining a legal opinion on the matter before it is brought to the floor would be a wise decision. Ultimately, Mr. Anderson reiterated his agreement with Dr. Pillsbury on the matter. Responding to Dr. Pillsbury, Mr. Anderson confirmed that they would implement this change first before addressing her next question. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Mr. Anderson stated that he is aware of the discussion with the Pension Board where major topics were extensively deliberated upon, with the majority of the board members expressing agreement. However, the recent staff-related change was not brought up during those discussions as it was a suggestion received only the night before this meeting. This proposed alteration is more centered around legal matters brought forth by the Human Resources and Finance Departments. Mr. Anderson emphasized that this aspect does not play a significant role in the current issue at hand. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Sudler expressed his understanding of the situation and emphasized the importance of ensuring that all voices and members have the opportunity to be heard. He proposed moving to open the meeting to allow for a discussion on the topic at hand, specifically regarding the questionnaire. Mr. Sudler suggested suspending the rules to facilitate dialogue and potentially hear from the president or a representative of the pension organization to provide their perspective and address any concerns they may have. He stressed the significance of including the members who would be impacted by the decision in the discussion before moving forward with a vote. Responding to Mr. Boggerty, Mr. Anderson affirmed that it was correct to focus solely on the amendment at hand and then open up the discussion regarding the ordinance. Responding to Mr. Hare, Mr. Anderson clarified that the discussion was centered around the Human Resource staff amendment only. Page 138

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 17 Responding to Dr. Pillsbury, Mr. Anderson stated that the proposed change in the law would extend coverage for college students up to the age of 26, aligning with current healthcare regulations. He explained that this adjustment was recommended by the pension committee as an expansion of existing benefits to better accommodate students. Responding to Dr. Pillsbury, Mr. Anderson confirmed that unmarried individuals would be eligible for survivor's benefits, with a spouse being the automatic next beneficiary. If the individual is no longer married due to being completely unmarried, single, divorced, or widowed, then the children would be next in line to receive survivor's benefits for a period of time. Mr. Anderson suggested that if there is any ambiguity regarding the issue at hand, it would be fair to include a definition section in the ordinance to address and clarify any potential confusion before it becomes a problem. Responding to Dr. Pillsbury, Mr. Hare emphasized the importance of clarifying the provisions related to chronic alcoholism, narcotic addiction, and eligibility for disability benefits in cases where individuals are not under the influence of alcohol or drugs at the time of a work-related injury. He highlighted the distinction between individuals claiming disability solely based on alcoholism or drug addiction versus those who sustain a legitimate injury while sober at work. Mr. Hare also raised the question of eligibility for disability benefits for individuals who take time off to engage in activities in another country, emphasizing the need for a legal opinion on such cases to ensure clear guidelines and avoid any potential misunderstandings in the ordinance. It is essential to address these concerns to provide fair and consistent access to disability benefits for all eligible individuals under the specified circumstances. Responding to Mr. Boggerty, Mr. Anderson stated that the disability provisions in question pertain to individuals who are vested in the pension plan, regardless of whether their disability is work-related or not. He highlighted that individuals who meet the criterion of being vested in the pension plan and become disabled are eligible for immediate access to the benefits they have accrued through their contributions, without having to wait until a specific age threshold, such as 60 years old. This exception is designed to provide financial support to individuals facing disability challenges, recognizing their vested status in the pension plan. The focus is on enabling individuals to access the funds they have contributed over time to support them during periods of disability. Responding to Mr. Boggerty, Mr. Anderson explained that the disability exception within the pension plan does not prevent individuals from accessing other forms of financial support like social security benefits, workers' compensation, or short-term disability insurance. These additional resources may still be available to individuals who qualify for them based on their specific circumstances. Mr. Anderson mentioned that there are distinct levels within the pension plan. For instance, after reaching five years, there are benefits that begin to accumulate and grow over time. Contributions made by employees are retained Page 139

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 18 by them, but the portion contributed by the city is not kept if the employee is not vested in the plan. It is important to note that vesting in the pension plan may be subject to specific criteria and timelines, which determine when an individual is entitled to receive their full benefits. Mr. Anderson also invited staff to provide additional insights or clarification on this topic to ensure accurate information is communicated. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Hare provided further insight into potential scenarios involving a lineman who sustains an injury while on the job. Mr. Hare mentioned that if the lineman were to be injured while working on a bucket truck, there is a likelihood that they may seek legal representation and pursue disability benefits. In such cases, it is possible that an agreement or settlement could be reached with regard to the benefits the individual is entitled to based on their contributions and eligibility. Mr. Hare also noted that if the injury occurred off- duty, such as in a car accident, the situation would be handled differently. He concluded by expressing gratitude for the discussion. Responding to Ms. Smith, Mr. Anderson stated that the city participates in the state plan for healthcare and benefits, recognizing that there may be connections to assist individuals with their state plan. However, he admitted that he is not entirely certain of the details and suggested that the question could be directed to staff for further investigation and clarification. This approach would ensure a more comprehensive understanding of how the city's benefits are intertwined with the state plan and how they can be utilized to support individuals in need. Responding to Mr. Rocha, Dr. Pillsbury explained that the reason for raising the issue was due to the restrictions imposed by HIPAA regulations. As a healthcare provider, Dr. Pillsbury highlighted that there are limitations on disclosing information about a person's specific medical conditions, such as alcoholism or substance abuse history. Dr. Pillsbury expressed concerns about the broad and general exclusions in the context of these regulations, stating that they could potentially pose significant challenges. In today's environment, Dr. Pillsbury emphasized that such issues could present considerable obstacles and need to be carefully addressed. Responding to Dr. Pillsbury, Mr. Sudler expressed his agreement and elaborated on the importance of addressing chronic alcoholism and mental health issues within the healthcare profession. He emphasized that chronic alcoholism should be viewed as a treatable disease that warrants a comprehensive treatment plan to help individuals become productive members of the organization. Mr. Sudler highlighted the various workplace factors such as burnout and role strain that can contribute to substance use, whether legal or illegal. He emphasized the need for a proactive approach to assessing and addressing mental health issues among organizational citizens. Mr. Sudler proposed utilizing psychometric instruments and anonymous surveys to identify the need for mental health services and resources for employees. He argued against penalizing individuals with mental health illnesses and stressed the importance of providing benefits to facilitate Page 140

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 19 access to treatment. Mr. Sudler underscored the significance of early intervention and resource allocation to prevent detrimental outcomes for employees, such as losing pensions due to substance abuse issues later in their careers. He concluded by advocating for a proactive and supportive approach to mental health and substance abuse issues in the workplace. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Mr. Hare discussed the limitations of mandating alcohol abuse classes or mental health sessions for employees who are effectively fulfilling their job responsibilities without any complaints. He argued that as long as an individual is performing their duties satisfactorily and there are no issues, they should not be compelled to attend such programs. Mr. Hare highlighted the scenario of someone potentially being an alcoholic but functioning well at work, questioning the necessity of enforcing classes or interventions in such cases. He emphasized the distinction between personal behavior outside of work hours and job performance, suggesting that as long as an employee's behavior is not affecting their work performance, interventions should not be imposed. Mr. Hare acknowledged that extreme situations, such as health complications from alcohol abuse, may require intervention and assessment by appropriate personnel. However, he emphasized the importance of considering an individual's job performance and behavior within the workplace context when determining the necessity of mandated programs. Overall, Mr. Hare emphasized the importance of balancing individual rights and job performance when considering interventions related to alcohol abuse or mental health in the workplace. Responding to Dr. Pillsbury, Mr. Anderson reaffirmed his understanding of the process regarding disability benefits within the city. He mentioned his involvement with the Pension Board and shared that disability benefits could be granted without employees losing their paid time off. However, he clarified that the disability benefits would only begin once the individual had exhausted all their accumulated time off with the city. Mr. Anderson explained that this process is in accordance with existing laws and is also linked to IRS regulations and other relevant statutes. By highlighting the structured process tied to disability benefits within the city, Mr. Anderson aimed to provide clarity on how employees can access these benefits without losing their accrued paid time off. Dr. Pillsbury stated that regarding the need for correction in 80-513, noting the adjustments made to 80-510 and 80-511 in section B, it was suggested that the fourth line should reference 80-511 instead of 80-510 to align with the previous amendments. Responding to Dr. Pillsbury, Mr. Anderson stated that upon making this correction, it was confirmed that the change would be adopted without objection. Responding to Dr. Pillsbury, Mr. Anderson acknowledged the need for improvement in the language of the existing law, and he suggested having the solicitor review it for potential clarity enhancements. This recommendation was made with the understanding that no actual changes were being proposed at that Page 141

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 20 moment, but rather a review for possible language improvement in line with the current regulations. It was noted that such a review could potentially lead to a more precise and understandable law without necessitating any substantive alterations. Christina Kober stated that she serves on the Pension Board, and she noted that they once again come before council to address concerns about current ordinance changes that are here before them this evening. The board and its membership spent numerous hours addressing necessary changes to the current ordinance. Regrettably, the two (2) council members on the Pension Board seemed to have taken forth their own recommendations for the proposed ordinance changes. Without further discussion with the Pension Board about the vigilance of their membership, the members would have been unaware of the revision of the ordinance or its inclusion on the agenda for tonight's meeting. She inquired about the status of open communication and transparency in the city government. Some of their members are present, standing united to support their efforts for fairness and transparency in the way the city government should work. They are frustrated, and they are angry. They collectively believe their words and efforts are meaningless. In December, council members spoke of their commitment to making retirees their first priority. Yet after last month's meeting, there is still no action taken. They believe an agreement was reached on a cost-of-living increase. Ms. Kober expressed frustration at the lack of communication within the city government, noting that it has been non-existent. Furthermore, she highlighted the absence of a system of checks and balances. Both retirees and board members were physically present for this meeting while also participating remotely. They remain committed to striving for parity, fairness, and transparency. The General Employee Pension Board members drafted proposed ordinance changes 2024-07, which was considered by the board on February 8th, 2024. The board members recommended amendments to the ordinance during that meeting, and it was unanimously approved for recommendations to the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee as revised. The two (2) sponsors of the ordinance serve on the Pension Board. On February 8th, amendments were submitted to the City Clerk's office for the next Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee packet. Since February 8th, the Legislative, Financing, and Administration has met on February 13th, 27th, March 12th, March 25th (special meeting) and then on March 26th. Ms. Kober stated that the reason cited for the delay in considering the ordinance was the staff's need for additional time to prepare for tonight's meeting. Ordinance 2024-07, as recommended by the Pension Board, underwent revisions by the ordinance sponsors. However, these revisions were incorporated into the packet without markup indicating the sponsors' amendments, and the original texts adopted by the Pension Board were not provided alongside. The transparent process for considering the sponsor's amendments would be the ordinance as recommended for adoption by the Pension Board to be presented at this meeting, where the sponsors and the others would have been given the opportunity to Page 142

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 21 propose amendments. A transparent process for considering the sponsors' amendments would involve presenting the ordinance as recommended for adoption by the Pension Board at this meeting. During this presentation, sponsors and other members would be given the opportunity to propose amendments. Instead, neither the original ordinance nor the revised version proposed by the Pension Board has been posted on the city's website ordinance listing. It is the only ordinance missing from that listing. The action history of the ordinance does not include any reference to the Pension Board's deliberations or recommendations for adopting the revised version of the ordinance. The ordinance lacks a synopsis summarizing the amendments, whether revised or otherwise. Ms. Kober noted that until Thursday, when the ordinance was included in the meeting packet and posted on the website, only the sponsors were aware of the significant changes made to the proposed ordinance. To her, it is a lack of transparency and a matter of egregiousness. On a side note, the General Employee Pension Board met on March 4th to discuss a cost-of-living increase. The city's actuary attended the meeting to provide insights and discuss the recommendations. The request for a cost-of-living increase was initiated on February 9th, 2023, and subsequently discussed on the following dates: April 27th, June 27th, August 3rd, November 2nd, and February 8th, 2024. On March 4th, the Board approved the recommendations for a cost-of-living increase to be forwarded to the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee for further action. It has not yet been placed on the Legislative, Finance, and Administration agenda for consideration. There is no valid reason for the delay in receiving a cost-of-living increase. Someone needs to provide a clear explanation for the ongoing delay and what specific obstacles or reasons are preventing the city from moving forward with the cost-of-living increase. She knows that is off-topic to what they are saying with the ordinance, but this crap is getting old. Responding to Ms. Kober, Mr. Anderson explained that the delay in implementing the cost-of-living increase was because a draft recommendation for an ordinance had been put forward, but an ordinance can only come into existence once it is introduced by council members. He clarified that recommendations alone do not have the force of law until they are formalized through the proper legislative process. Mr. Anderson emphasized that the proposed changes to the board's membership were not related to whether employees would receive the cost-of-living increase or not. He believed that focusing on altering the board's composition would have been a distraction from the core issue at hand. Instead, the discussions with staff were aimed at addressing various concerns related to workload, Human Resources issues, and other internal matters. Through diligence and collaboration with the affected departments, adjustments were made to the initial proposal to ensure that the heart of the recommendation was preserved while incorporating necessary technical corrections. These modifications were then introduced for consideration, ultimately aiming to create a product that addressed staff concerns while upholding the essence of the cost-of-living increase proposal. Page 143

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 22 Responding to Mr. Anderson, Ms. Kober emphasized the issue as one of transparency. She expressed frustration, stating, "We have been waiting, waiting, waiting, waiting, waiting. Oh, we do not have money. Meanwhile, you are handing out money left and right to other people. We have been waiting. We are supposed to be the priority, in your words. So, when are we going to be heard and action taken?" Responding to Ms. Kober, Mr. Sudler stated that it begins at this evening’s meeting with the ordinance. Additionally, they have part two, which they have already been collaborating on with staff for the budget. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Ms. Kober emphasized that transparency entails having members present during discussions and question sessions so they can fully understand the proceedings. She clarified that while they may not necessarily disagree with some of the points raised, it is essential to be included in the process to effectively communicate with their members. It looks sneaky when they change things and then they do not show what was recommended, what the board voted on, and what they were supposed to take forward. Responding to Ms. Kober, Mr. Anderson stated that if anyone wants to see them, they are in an earlier packet. Responding to Ms. Kober, Mr. Sudler expressed disappointment at the notion that the sentiment towards the city's valued employees could be one of deception. He found it disheartening that such a perception existed. Mr. Sudler emphasized his belief in Team Dover's integrity and expressed regret if their actions had contributed to this perception. He reaffirmed his belief that the majority, if not all, city council and committee members are dedicated to enhancing the well-being of the employees and recognizing their contributions over the years. Mr. Sudler acknowledged the disheartening nature of the sentiment and expressed his commitment to taking action to address the concerns. He apologized for any distress caused by the situation and assured them that steps would be taken to rectify it. Dr. Pillsbury expressed her position as a newcomer to the Pension Board, acknowledging her lack of familiarity with past proceedings. She recalled the presentation of the proposed change and the subsequent process of routing it through various departments. Dr. Pillsbury emphasized that these efforts were aimed at advancing the initiative. She noted that her understanding was that many of the suggested alterations stemmed from the retirees and members of the Pension Board. Dr. Pillsbury highlighted a particular concern regarding Section 80-508, which addresses an annual increase, indicating that this aspect was a significant focus for the members involved. She stated that efforts were being made to address these concerns. Expressing confusion over certain comments, Dr. Pillsbury asserted that there was no backward approach to the process. She recalled previous meetings where discussions were held openly, with both parties actively engaged in reviewing the details. Dr. Pillsbury explained that her Page 144

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 23 questions arose from a thorough examination of the document and stressed the importance of legal review before finalizing any decisions. She reiterated the collaborative effort to seek feedback from departments such as Human Resources and expressed a desire to work together toward a resolution. Responding to Dr. Pillsbury, Mr. Anderson expressed agreement with her observations. He explained that all ordinances originate from an idea, and nearly 90% of the initial concept is reflected in the current version. Mr. Anderson clarified that ordinances undergo refinement as they progress through different departments. He cited an example where concerns from the Finance Department led to a change regarding the frequency of reporting. While initially intended as a quarterly report, it was modified to align with monthly statements, which would become law if the ordinance passed. Addressing concerns about election security and residency requirements, Mr. Anderson mentioned that adjustments were made to ensure clarity. He highlighted various amendments that were made in response to objections from the Human Resources and Finance Departments, as well as minor adjustments for clarity and consistency. The goal, he emphasized, was to create an ordinance that could withstand legal scrutiny and serve the city effectively. Mr. Anderson concluded by expressing confidence that the ordinance, once reviewed, would not disrupt city operations. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Sudler stated that he appreciated his efforts in explaining that to the retirees. However, with no disrespect intended towards Mr. Anderson, he strongly feels that it is essential to hear directly from them. Council has had ample opportunity to express their viewpoints, but tonight, they are present, and he believes that it is crucial to listen to their perspectives, whether they are favorable or unfavorable. While they may believe they are attentive to their concerns, he thinks it is important to afford them uninterrupted time to speak. Mr. Sudler stated that if Mr. Anderson agreed, he would like to proceed in this manner. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Mr. Anderson indicates a desire to address concerns in an organized and structured manner and in a normal order. By suggesting that they manage the discussion in a systematic way, he is demonstrating a commitment to ensuring that all viewpoints are considered and given a fair opportunity to be heard. Bob Gedney, Chairman of the Pension Board, stated that he had met with Dr. Pillsbury and Mr. Anderson. Mr. Gedney noted that he and Mr. Anderson are the seniors on this Board. Mr. Gedney inquired about the process regarding obtaining legal opinions or clarity. He emphasized the importance of tracing the source of the advice from the attorney to ensure a thorough understanding of what can or cannot be modified, including any necessary adjustments to the language. Responding to Mr. Gedney, Mr. Anderson wanted it noted for the record that when they receive the attorney's review, the Pension Board also receives it, Page 145

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 24 simultaneously. It goes without saying that once received, this information is privileged, so it is essential to keep it confidential. Ms. Kober expressed her desire to address some issues first. Returning to Mr. Sudler for further discussion, Ms. Kober thanked him. She acknowledged a correction, stating that members have been waiting for resolution since 2018, not since February of 2023. Ms. Kober expressed confusion and highlighted the lack of transparency and communication regarding changes, mentioning that the link sent out on Thursday contained Ms. Pillsbury's changes, not theirs. Ms. Kober explained the need for open dialogue, communication, and transparency. She mentioned a willingness to engage in discussions and expressed a desire for collaboration rather than dictation of decisions. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Ms. Kober expressed her intention to address additional concerns raised. She emphasized her increased vocal presence due to being the sole retiree on the Pension Board. Ms. Kober highlighted her extensive service of 31-and-a-half-years, underscoring her perspective as a retiree with firsthand experience. She shared her personal struggles, including the lack of a cost-of-living raise and the impending insurance increase of 27% in July and having retired four (4) years ago. Responding to Mr. Boggerty, Ms. Traci McDowell referenced Mr. Anderson's statement that an ordinance is not official until it has been formally introduced. She pointed out that according to their code, the Pension Board is responsible for making recommendations. Ms. McDowell reiterated the process for ordinances to be proposed, drafted, and recommended by a committee before being approved by the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee. She criticized changes made to the ordinance without proper procedures, expressing frustration about the situation. Nobody between that meeting and this meeting has a right to change the ordinance. Ms. McDowell highlighted specific changes on page five (5) of the document, where a recommended 3% annual increase was adjusted to 2% without proper consultation. She stressed the importance of following the correct process and involving the Pension Board in discussions prior to making amendments. Ms. McDowell suggested that unauthorized meetings may have taken place based on the changes made without proper consultation. Responding to Ms. McDowell, Mr. Anderson stated that it was a legal meeting. They were there, and the meeting had proper notice. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Ms. McDowell noted that the last meeting did not resemble the current situation. She proceeded to explain a specific issue starting on page five (5) concerning the approval process for pension applications by the Pension Board. Due to difficulties in assembling a quorum, the Human Resources Department was permitted to handle sending applications monthly. However, this arrangement has not been implemented as agreed upon. The Pension Board desired to revert to the original application process, as indicated by an asterisk in the document showing a deletion related to this issue. Ms. McDowell expressed Page 146

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 25 concern that these modifications were not conducted transparently or collaboratively with the board but rather arbitrarily by two (2) members who also held positions as council members and chair of the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee. Notably, changes from "they" and "theirs" to "one" and "ones" were highlighted by Ms. McDowell as potentially distancing the governing body from employees and retirees. Despite perceiving this change as impersonal, Ms. McDowell emphasized more critical concerns at hand. Ms. McDowell asserted that if the process had been followed properly, the Clerk's Office would have handled it, and the changes would have been clearly highlighted. The original ordinance, as well as revisions made by the Pension Board, would have been available on the city's website, but none of them are present. She characterized the situation as a bait-and-switch tactic that began from the outset. Referring to page 17 of 25, Ms. McDowell recalled discussions from August, where the Pension Board members expressed a desire to review the ordinance. This recommendation, she noted, stemmed from a former city clerk. She pointed out that the proposed change in Section 80-521.3 alters the composition of the committee, as Mr. Anderson previously mentioned. The rationale behind this change, she explained, was to address the underrepresentation of retirees on the board, considering there are approximately 334 participants in the plan. However, despite this reasoning, the provision was removed from the adopted ordinance. Ms. McDowell expressed uncertainty about the timing of this removal and its implications. Ms. McDowell proceeded to discuss various changes within the ordinance. On page 13, she highlighted alterations regarding the identification that could be used to identify individuals and their addresses. These changes, she noted, align with practices in the state of Delaware, particularly with council elections. She explained the importance of accurate address information, especially in cases where there are multiple individuals with similar names. Moving to page 14, she noted changes in Section 85.201(D), which she described as brief. On page 15, she addressed Section 85.23, questioning the redundancy of a provision regarding the vice chair assuming duties in the absence of the chair. She also noted changes to Section 85.26, where the Pension Board's authority to call meetings with Human Resources members was removed. Additionally, Ms. McDowell discussed concerns raised about the payment of funds, noting that Pension Board members had requested access to expenditure reports to fulfill their fiduciary responsibilities. However, this request was not included in the revised ordinance. She questioned why the responsibility for approving funds and retirement applications was not left with the Pension Board, given their fiduciary role. Finally, she highlighted concerns about the timing and availability of quarterly reports, suggesting they were not provided in a timely manner. Ms. Kober mentioned that they did receive one report in September, which contained only one line item stating "expenditures" with no further explanation. She emphasized the importance of receiving detailed information, especially Page 147

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 26 regarding retirements, as there had been instances where retirees' figures were incorrect, leading to overpayments or underpayments, and issues with insurance deductions. Ms. Kober stressed that if they were to be held accountable, they should have access to this critical information. Ms. McDowell pointed out that the issue Ms. Kober raised ties into the discussion about the changes on page 17, specifically in Section 85-276. This section originally required an updated list of retirees and beneficiaries to be provided to the general employee pension plan board members whenever a new application was approved by the board. However, this provision was removed from the revised ordinance. Ms. McDowell highlighted another change on page 18, specifically in Section 85-28. The Pension Board members had recommended that the general employee pension plan board seek outside subject matter legal assistance when necessary. However, this recommendation was struck from the revised ordinance. Responding to Ms. McDowell, Mr. Anderson emphasized that no committee has the authority to unilaterally seek legal assistance outside of established city policies. He noted that the proposed reconstitution of the board, which would distinguish it from other boards like the police board, is a non-starter. Instead, he stressed the importance of focusing on ensuring retirees receive the necessary compensation rather than altering the political makeup of the board. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Ms. McDowell stated that yes, it is a non-starter for him. Responding to Ms. McDowell, Mr. Anderson stated absolutely. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Ms. McDowell stated that it is not a non-starter for the people that would like to know the discussion. In a public meeting transparently, because that is what the City of Dover does. Responding to Ms. McDowell, Mr. Anderson stated that he would agree with the city manager that the draft was a draft proposal, not a draft ordinance. He emphasized that the only ordinance that holds weight is the one officially introduced. Mr. Anderson echoed Mr. Hugg's sentiments and supported the stance of the Clerk's Office and other authorities, emphasizing that according to Dover's charter, an ordinance must be introduced by council members, as Ms. McDowell is well aware. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Ms. McDowell stated that he is correct, it has to have a first reading. Responding to Ms. McDowell, Mr. Anderson reiterated that the ordinance currently under consideration is the one that exists, emphasizing that the draft proposals presented in the packet are merely preliminary and subject to change. Page 148

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 27 He clarified that the final version of the ordinance is the one brought forward on the specified date. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Ms. McDowell raised a question regarding the accessibility of the ordinance in question compared to other ordinances pending and adopted since 2009, which are readily available in a list on the city's website. She questioned why this particular ordinance required individuals to search through packets instead of being easily accessible online like others. Ms. McDowell suggested that everyone could verify this information by visiting the "Ordinance and Resolution Listing" on the website. She expressed her intention to share remarks from an email before concluding her statement. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Ms. McDowell stated that in the action history on the ordinance that was in their packet, did not ever mention that the Pension Board considered this item. There was no synopsis that explained what all of the recommendations were. Ms. McDowell read an email that had been sent to Council President Hare earlier that day from Janice Green (Attachment #2). Responding to Ms. McDowell, Mr. Boggerty expressed his disappointment and suggested remanding the issue back to the board for a thorough review. He emphasized the need for complete transparency in the matter to ensure clarity and understanding on both sides. Mr. Boggerty requested that this process be expedited with a sense of urgency, even if it requires a special meeting to address any ambiguities and ensure a timely resolution. Responding to Mr. Boggerty, Mr. Hare stated that he does not disagree with Mr. Boggerty. He suggested considering a process where both versions are compared and presented, perhaps by tabling the issue for further review. This would allow everyone to see the differences and make a more informed decision. Mr. Hare stated that they probably need to determine as soon as possible what type of financial increase they're going to implement. While administrative matters like checking IDs are important, addressing the COLA and other financial aspects should be prioritized. It is crucial to get this resolved promptly so it can be included in the budget and distributed to the people. If they address it now, it would be beneficial. This needs urgent attention, especially considering the significant turnout today. The financial aspect is currently at risk, so it is imperative to address it promptly. Responding to Mr. Boggerty, Ms. Kober stated that two (2) is acceptable because they have been asking for parity, and that is parity. They initially proposed three (3) because they were uncertain about what else they might receive. However, during the Pension Board meeting, it was unanimously agreed upon and passed that 15% was sufficient if she recalls the exact wording correctly. So yes, they would accept a 2% parity to align with everyone else. Mr. Boggerty moved to divide the question and recommend the approval of the 2% COLA raise annually as recommended by staff. The motion was seconded by Mr. Anderson and unanimously carried. Page 149

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 28 By consent agenda, Mr. Lewis moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Sudler and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. (Neil, Rocha absent) Responding to Mr. Anderson, Ms. Marney stated that it would cost roughly $1.9 million, but that she did not have the paperwork in front of her. Responding to Mr. Boggerty, Mr. Sudler expressed his belief that a 2.5% offer should be made in good faith with his motion, considering the wait until 2025 and the extended waiting period for some individuals since 2018. He emphasized that it would demonstrate goodwill in business transactions and negotiations. Mr. Sudler empathized with the employees, noting the lengthy duration since 2018. He highlighted that these individuals are not only city employees but also considered as part of the city's family. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Mr. Anderson emphasized the importance of parity in addressing the issue at hand. He raised a concern about potential changes to other pension plans as well. Mr. Anderson then suggested focusing on considerations for the upcoming calendar year 2024. He explained that an increase could be implemented in the 25 budget, ensuring that individuals are not left out. He clarified that there should be no need to alter future plans, as two (2) distinct issues are being addressed. Mr. Anderson mentioned that efforts are being made to secure funding and presented a proposal that will tackle the current situation. He noted that tangible changes could be expected in the next four (4) to five (5) months, likely around August or September, rather than waiting until the end of the calendar year. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Mr. Boggerty expressed his agreement and acknowledged the validity of Councilman Sudler's perspective but pointed out the challenges that altering the current situation could pose for other unions. Mr. Boggerty emphasized the need for practicality and transparency in negotiations, citing the importance of avoiding overcommitment and potential harm to all parties involved. He also mentioned plans to revisit the issue with the unions to address any grievances and ensure equity. Despite understanding the appeal of Councilman Sudler's proposal, Mr. Boggerty emphasized the necessity of maintaining the current agreement, which includes a 2% increase for Fiscal Year 2025. He concluded by affirming the importance of adhering to the decisions made thus far and seeking a balanced resolution that benefits the entire community. Responding to Ms. Marney, Mr. Boggerty mentioned that the agreed-upon date for any changes would be January 1, 2025. He stressed the importance of honoring the commitments and agreements already in place, emphasizing the significance of sticking to the terms that have been agreed upon. Mr. Boggerty noted that in negotiations, it is common to agree to certain terms, finalize them by signing, ratifying, and then proceeding accordingly. He suggested that the focus should be on confirming and ratifying the 2% increase, as it is a realistic option compared to the proposed 2.5%. Page 150

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 29 Responding to Mr. Boggerty, Dr. Pillsbury stated that she believed introducing the 2.5% increase had complicated the issue. She expressed concerns that focusing on the higher percentage might overshadow the outstanding debts that were owed. Dr. Pillsbury emphasized the importance of honoring previous commitments and suggested that sticking with the 2% increase would be a more appropriate course of action. Effective January 1, 2025, they will continue to address the outstanding amount that has been a primary focus of both the requestor's desires and the committee's efforts. Dr. Pillsbury moved to recommend the approval of the 2% COLA raise annually effective January 1, 2025 with the understanding that staff brings council a proposal regarding the catchup plan as recommended by staff. The motion was seconded by Mr. Neil and carried with Ms. Smith voting no. By consent agenda, Mr. Lewis moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Sudler and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. (Neil, Rocha absent) Mr. Boggerty moved to remand the non-financial issues of the modifications of the ordinance between the Pension Board and the council, to be reviewed by the City Solicitor and resubmitted to council for review and approval. The motion was seconded by Mr. Neil and unanimously carried. By consent agenda, Mr. Lewis moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Sudler and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. (Neil, Rocha absent) Responding to Ms. McDowell, Mr. Boggerty stated that expressed his preference for consolidating both documents to create a single cohesive ordinance that everyone can agree upon. He emphasized the importance of clarity in the transition from section 511 to 510 and requested that the final document be comprehensive and conclusive. Mr. Boggerty delegated the task of organizing the logistics of merging the documents to the board, with the ultimate goal of achieving consensus in the revised version. Responding to Ms. McDowell, Mr. Boggerty highlighted the importance of ensuring that the document is legally sound before being presented for review. He proposed that once the document has been properly vetted and reviewed for legal compliance, it should be returned to the Pension Board simultaneously for their review before being presented to the council. Responding to Mr. Boggerty, Mr. Neil shared his understanding that the document presented is actually an ordinance, implying that any modifications would need to be made through amendments by the Council. He indicated that the sponsors likely initiated any changes made to the ordinance and that he believed this to be the standard procedure for making alterations. Page 151

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 30 Responding to Mr. Neil, Mr. Anderson stated the understanding presented was incorrect. He pointed out that the charter explicitly outlines the protocol for introducing and amending ordinances. Mr. Anderson emphasized the need to refer to the specific section of the charter that addresses amendments to ordinances to clarify any misconceptions. He highlighted that according to the charter, only members of the council have the authority to introduce ordinances, not committees. Responding to Mr. Neil, Mr. Anderson expressed his belief that the issue raised would likely become irrelevant. He noted that individuals would have the opportunity to express their opinions before the matter is brought back to the council. Therefore, any concerns raised would essentially be resolved through the opportunity for public input. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Ms. McDowell stated that she believes it is semantics because what they are saying is that the Pension Board or the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee, or any committee can introduce an ordinance, and that is not what they have done. They have made a recommendation to this board about an ordinance amendment. It is semantics. It is not being introduced or whatever the word Mr. Anderson is saying, but it is being referred to. That is why they have committees. She knows council knows who Janice Green is and they know that she knows what she is talking about. That is what the committees are for. Responding to Ms. McDowell, Mr. Anderson mentioned that there had been a change in the charter regarding the introduction of deduction ordinances. While it may not be available at the moment, he stated that the current debate is essentially focusing on semantics and that ultimately, the board will still review the matter. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Hare stated that if the issue is merely about semantics and requires introduction by a councilman, he would be willing to introduce it if they put something together. Responding to Mr. Hare, Ms. McDowell pointed out that according to the charter, any ordinance originating from a committee implies that it can do so without the need for a specific sponsor. This means that no individual council member is required to sponsor the ordinance. Responding to Ms. McDowell, Mr. Hare stated that whatever assistance is required, he will be available. If they do not need his involvement, he will not be there. Dr. Pillsbury suggested that it would be beneficial to have the attorney present at the meeting to ensure that any document or proposal brought back is in an approved form, thus avoiding any potential legal issues. She stated that there were numerous legal concerns regarding the original proposal that still remain unresolved. Dr. Pillsbury emphasized the importance of having the attorney Page 152

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 31 present during committee meetings to address any legal questions that may arise and ensure that the final document is suitable for approval by the group. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Hare expressed uncertainty about the topic for discussion but suggested focusing on catching up on past issues. He recalled that a proposal was presented in 2018 but no action was taken at that time. Mr. Hare proposed that if a 2% increase is considered, it should be retroactively applied from 2018 to 2025, ensuring that individuals receive the appropriate pay adjustment for those years. This approach would calculate the 2% increment for each year from 2018 onwards, thereby compensating for the missed increases. Downtown Development District Renewal Application (David S. Hugg, III, City Manager and Ann Marie Townshend, Senior Project Manager at the Rossi Group) Mr. David S. Hugg, III, City Manager, and Ann Marie Townshend, Senior Project Manager at the Rossi Group, reviewed the background and analysis of the Downtown Development District renewal application (Attachment #3). Staff recommended approving the application as presented. Mr. Rocha commended Ms. Townshend and her team on their presentation and recommendations as presented. Ms. Arndt stated that the city has been running the program for 10 years, it is a lucrative program, and it would be nuts for the city to not continue with the investment. Ms. Arndt explained that it uses state money to leverage private investment and she is in full support. Mr. Neil commended Ms. Townshend and the Rossi Group for their in-depth presentation and the phenomenal job they have done. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Townshend stated the application goes to the state planning office and the bulk of the expansion will occur in the fourth district. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Townshend stated that in the first 10 years, $1.6 million in funding was received for smaller projects. When considering the proposals for the old post office, or the old Acme site, some of the suggested projects could be nearing a larger magnitude of funds. For instance, in Wilmington, where numerous substantial projects have been undertaken, an approximate total of $34 million has been allocated over the 10 years. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Townshend stated that the current post office, a small corner owned by Chesapeake Utilities, the police station, and the Justice of the Peace Court are not eligible for the incentives. On the other side of the transit center, the R.E. Michel Warehouse has been in operation for many years and likely would not become open for redevelopment. To better utilize the 50 Page 153

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 32 additional acres the proposed properties will have to be removed, which requires a public hearing. Ms. Arndt moved to recommend acceptance of the staff recommendation and approval of the application. The motion was seconded by Mr. Neil and unanimously carried. By consent agenda, Mr. Lewis moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Sudler and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. (Neil, Rocha absent) Responding to Ms. Smith, Ms. Townshend stated that DelState is not eligible for the incentives because they are a state institution. The Delaware Marijuana Control Act – Overview and Options for Dover (David S. Hugg, III, City Manager, and Ann Marie Townshend, Senior Project Manager at the Rossi Group) Mr. David S. Hugg, III, City Manager, and Ann Marie Townshend, Senior Project Manager at the Rossi Group, reviewed the background and analysis of the Delaware Marijuana Control Act for Dover. Staff recommended guidance as to which approach Dover wishes to pursue; prohibit or restrict but allow. If the desire was to allow under restriction, then subordinate decisions needed to be made regarding where and under what conditions. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Mr. Hugg stated that the sales do not benefit the city. The businesses would pay building permits, business licenses, and any other fees required for a retail business. The other component would be the manufacturing and testing process, but the city is not allowed to charge them higher license fees as a revenue source. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Hugg stated that it would benefit the city by being added to the tax roll however, it would be much like Crumbl Cookie. The business will have water, sewer, electric uses, and employees but a majority of the tax dollars will go to the state, the city will only receive the utilities and license fees. Ms. Browyn Sherman, Transportation, and Community Planner at the Rossi Group reviewed the presentation entitled "The Delaware Marijuana Control Act – Overview and Options for Dover”. Responding to Ms. Arndt, Mr. Hugg suggested that limitations on placing a similar facility within 500 feet of another facility could be imposed as a conditional use or established as a provision with specific restrictions. Page 154

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 33 Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Hugg stated that there may be a few spaces available in Garrison Oak, Cassidy Commons, out on Horse Pond Road and Lafferty Lane. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Hugg clarified that medical marijuana dispensaries are considered permitted retail uses. As a result, any potential ordinance would not impose restrictions on medical marijuana or establishments like Best Buds Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Townshend suggested that an ordinance could serve as an opportunity to include a definition of medical marijuana from the state statute and explicitly state that these establishments are permitted in all retail locations. Mr. Anderson opened the floor for a one-minute round table. Mr. Sudler stated that he would like to see a conservative approach taken. In Florida, they had retail stores on the main highway, but he noted that they were medical marijuana facilities. Mr. Rocha stated that he agrees with a conservative approach. Mr. Rocha explained that he would prefer to not have recreational marijuana being smoked in public spaces like the downtown area. In consideration of the dispensaries, he would prefer that they not be downtown but rather out on the main highway. Mr. Rocha emphasized that he would like there to be some type of odor control for the manufacturing and a restriction on smoking at a restaurant or public space. Mr. Rocha expressed concerns about the potential for businesses to have a significant amount of cash on hand. As federal regulations do not currently permit the legalization of marijuana, these businesses are unable to deposit their earnings in banks, leading to an accumulation of cash on their premises. Mr. Anderson stated that the State of Delaware is working on a proposal to deal with state charter banks. Ms. Smith stated that she recommends the conservative approach, as it should not be allowed downtown, around schools, churches, places where the community meets, and anywhere it could be dangerous for young people. Mr. Shevock stated that he is conservative and would prefer not to see it in Dover at all. Mr. Neil stated that he would rather not have legalized marijuana, but it is here to stay. Mr. Neil recommended that the ordinance have input from the police department in terms of security. He emphasized that he does not want the businesses to be in the downtown district, around schools or kids. Mr. Neil explained that it is just another business and they do not want to keep business out of the city. Finally, Mr. Neil recommended that the ordinance should include regulations pertaining to odor control in all manufacturing establishments. Page 155

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 34 Mr. Boggerty expressed concerns about the insufficient land available for accommodating the businesses and recommended looking at the next bigger zoning section. Mr. Boggerty proposed incorporating guidelines for odor mitigation and mandating a double-door entry to enhance security. Finally, Mr. Boggerty concurred with the idea that consumption in public areas should be prohibited. Dr. Pillsbury expressed support for everything that has been said so far and had nothing further to add. Ms. Arndt also agreed that everything had been said and she is interested to see what they will bring back for a vote. Mr. Hare recommended that the businesses should not be situated within the Downtown Dover Business District, in close proximity to schools, or hospitals. He also agreed that there should be clear restrictions on the permissible locations for such establishments. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Townshend mentioned that the Delaware League of Local Governments had previously advocated for a percentage allocation for local governments, but their efforts were unsuccessful. She expressed doubt that the state would reconsider this allocation at present. Ms. Vonderlear Smack, 1001 White Oak Road, Dover, explained that she was never a fan of marijuana until she received a stage three cancer diagnosis. She shared that she struggled with sleep deprivation and severe pain, and it was only when her doctors suggested using a marijuana pen that she found relief and was able to finally get some rest. Mr. Neil moved to recommend that staff come back with recommendations based on what was heard and to include other zoning options. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hare and unanimously carried. By consent agenda, Mr. Lewis moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Sudler and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. (Neil, Rocha absent) Mr. Anderson moved for adjournment of the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee meeting, hearing no objection the meeting adjourned at 9:54 p.m. Mr. Hare moved for adjournment of the Council Committee of the Whole meeting, hearing no objection the meeting adjourned at 9:54 p.m. By consent agenda, Mr. Lewis moved for acceptance of the Council Committee of the Whole Report, seconded by Mr. Sudler and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. (Neil, Rocha absent) Page 156

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 35 QUARTERLY REVENUE REPORTS AS OF MARCH 31, 2024 Members were provided the Quarterly Revenue Report as of March 31, 2024. By consent agenda, Mr. Lewis moved for acceptance of the Quarterly Revenue Report, seconded by Mr. Sudler and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. (Neil, Rocha absent) QUARTERLY REVIEW – CAPITAL INVESTMENT PLAN (CIP) (JANUARY, FEBRUARY, AND MARCH) Members were provided the Quarterly Review for the Capital Investment Plan (CIP) as of March 31, 2024. By consent agenda, Mr. Lewis moved for acceptance of the Quarterly Review of the Capital Investment Plan (CIP), seconded by Mr. Sudler and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. (Neil, Rocha absent) SEMI-ANNUAL INSPECTION BY CITY MANAGER – ROBBINS HOSE COMPANY In accordance with Chapter 46 – Fire Prevention and Protection, Article II – Fire Department, Division 1 – Generally, Section 46-43 – Semiannual Inspections, of the City Code, the City Manager, Mr. Hugg, met with the Fire Chief David Carey to discuss fire company issues. Mr. Hugg submitted a memorandum outlining the items discussed and noted the Robbin’s Hose Company continued to provide an outstanding level of service to the City of Dover and the Unincorporated areas of the fire district. By consent agenda, Mr. Lewis moved for acceptance of the Semi-Annual Inspection by City Manager – Robbins Hose Company, seconded by Mr. Sudler and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. (Neil, Rocha absent) SPECIAL ELECTION TO FILL VACANCY – ROBBINS HOSE COMPANY – SECOND FIRE LINE CAPTAIN (TERM TO EXPIRE DECEMBER 10, 2024) Fire Chief Carey received a letter of resignation from Second Fire Line Captain Troy Christiansen. In accordance with the City Code and the By-Laws of the Robbins Hose Company, nominations were open during the April 01, 2024, Regular Monthly Meeting and, as a result of the nominations being opened, there was three (3) nominations to fill the vacant position. Per Article I, Section 4 of the By-Laws of the Robbins Hose Company No. 1, a special election was held on April 15, 2024. Therefore, the vacancy as a result of the resignation has been filled by Drew Kuntzi as he is our newly elected Second Fire Line Captain and meets the requirements to hold the position. By consent agenda, Mr. Lewis moved for approval of the Special Election of the Robbins Hose Company for the Second Fire Line Captain, seconded by Mr. Sudler and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. (Neil, Rocha absent) FIRST READING COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE #1 – PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2024-07 – CHAPTER 80 – PERSONNEL, ARTICLE IV – PENSION PLANS AND RETIREMENT BENEFITS (EXCEPT POLICE), DIVISION 3 – GENERAL EMPLOYEE PENSION PLAN Page 157

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 36 Mr. Anderson reviewed Proposed Ordinance #2024-07 – Chapter 80 – Personnel, Article IV – Pension Plans and Retirement Benefits (Except Police), Division 3 – General Employee Pension Plan. 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 #2024-07 – AMENDING THE CHAPTER 80 – PERSONNEL, ARTICLE IV – PENSION PLANS AND RETIREMENT BENEFITS (EXCEPT POLICE), DIVISION 3 – GENERAL EMPLOYEE PENSION PLAN. FIRST READING PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2024-11 – LANDS OF CHIANG & SONS PROPERTIES, LLC AT 1241 COLLEGE PARK DRIVE Mr. Anderson made a motion for the referral as recommended by Staff, seconded by Ms. Arndt, and carried unanimously. (Neil, Rocha absent) Ms. Dawn Melson-Williams, Principal Planner reviewed Proposed Ordinance No. 2024-11 - Lands of Chiang & Sons Properties, LLC at 1241 College Park Drive. The property is zoned C- PO (Commercial and Professional Office Zone). The proposed zoning for the property is IO (Institutional and Office Zone). The property is located on the east side of College Park Drive (a private street) and north of State College Road. 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 #2024-11 – AMENDING THE LANDS OF CHIANG & SONS PROPERTIES, LLC AT 1241 COLLEGE PARK DRIVE FROM CPO (COMMERCIAL AND PROFESSIONAL OFFICE ZONE) TO PROPOSED ZONING C-2A (LIMITED CENTRAL COMMERCIAL ZONE). FINAL READING PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2024-08 – AMENDING APPENDIX C – DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT, ARTICLE II – DEFINITIONS, SECTION 4. – TARGET AREA (DAVID S. HUGG, III, CITY MANAGER) Ms. Arndt moved that the Final Reading of the proposed ordinance be acknowledged by title only, seconded by Dr. Pillsbury, and unanimously carried. (Neil, Rocha absent) (The First Reading of the proposed ordinance was accomplished during the Council Meeting of April 8, 2024.) By motion of Mr. Anderson, seconded by Mr. Boggerty, Council, by a roll call vote of six (6) yes (Anderson, Boggerty, Pillsbury, Arndt, Sudler, and Hare), and one (1) no (Lewis), (Neil, Rocha absent) adopted Ordinance #2024-02 as follows: BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: That Appendix C – Article II, Section 4 of the Dover Code relating to Downtown Redevelopment be amended to read as follows: Page 158

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 37 Section 4. – Target Area Target area shall mean that part of the city more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point at the intersection of the centerlines of Cecil and North State Streets, then continuing on the centerline of North State Street in a southerly direction to the intersection of the centerline of State Street and an extension of the centerline of Delaware Avenue, then continuing on the centerline and an extension of the centerline of Delaware Avenue in an easterly direction to the point of intersection of an extension of the centerline of Delaware Avenue and the St. Jones River, then following the centerline of the St. Jones River in a southerly direction to the point of intersection of the centerline of the St. Jones River and the southerly property line of lands now or formerly of the Catholic Diocese of Wilmington, being the site of Holy Cross Roman Catholic Church, then proceeding in a westerly direction along said property line to the easterly right-of- way line of South State Street (U.S. Route 13-A), then crossing the right-of-way line of South State Street in a westerly direction and joining the centerline of Hope Street and proceeding in a westerly direction to the centerlines of Hope Street and South Governors Avenue, then proceeding in a southerly direction along the centerline of South Governors Avenue to the point of intersection of the centerlines of South Governors Avenue and Dover Street, thenproceeding in a westerly direction along the centerline of Dover Street to the point of intersection of the centerlines of Dover Street and Westview Terrace, then continuing in a northerly direction on the centerline of Westview Terrace to the point of intersection of the centerline of Westview Terrace and New Burton Road, then proceeding in a northeasterly direction on the centerline of New Burton Road to the point of intersection of New Burton Road and West Street, then continuing in a northerly direction along the westerly right-of-way line of West Street to the point of intersection of the westerly side of the right-of-way of West Street and the northerly property line of lands now or formerly of Dover Rent-All, Inc., then continuing in a westerly direction along said property line to the point of intersection of said property line and the lands of Conrail Railroad, then proceeding in a northerly direction along the easterly right-of-way line of Conrail Railroad in a northerly direction to the point of intersection of the centerline of West North Street and then westerly along the centerline of West North Street to Clarence Street and north along the center line of Clarence Street to Slaughter Street, 40 and west along the center line of Slaughter Street to Cherry Street and north along the center line of Cherry Street to the intersection with the center line of Lincoln Street to a point of intersection with an extension of the westerly property line of lands now or of late of Michael Nash, being the site of the former Diamond Ice Company, then proceeding in a northerly direction along the westerly property line of the Nash property and in a line extending to the intersection of the southerly property line of lands now or of late Paul T. and Aiko Moore, and then northwesterly and then northerly along the southern and western property line of the Moore property and extending north to an intersection with the centerline of Lincoln Street, and then easterly along the centerline of Lincoln Street to a point of intersection of an extension of the westerly property line of lands now or formerly of Frank Moore et al., and then northerly along the western property of Frank Moore et al. and extending to a point of intersection with the centerline of Forest Street, then easterly along the centerline of Forest Street to a point of intersection with an extension of the westerly property of the lands now or formerly of Page 159

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 38 the Salvation Army, and then northerly and easterly along the western and north property line of the Salvation Army property to the point of intersection with lands now or of late Conrail Railroad, then northerly along the westerly property line of Conrail Railroad and extending to a point of intersection with the centerline of West Division Street, and then easterly along the centerline of East Division Street to the intersection of the easterly right-of-way line of Conrail Railroad, and then northerly along the easterly right-of-way line of Conrail Railroad to the intersection of the right-of-way of Conrail Railroad and the northerly property line of lands now or of late of Southern States Cooperative, Inc., then proceeding in an easterly direction a distance of 52.76 feet to the northeasterly corner of the lands now or of late of Southern States Cooperative, Inc., then proceeding in a southerly direction along the easterly property line of lands now or of late of Southern States Cooperative, Inc., to the point of intersection of said property and the centerline of Mary Street, then proceeding in an easterly direction along the centerline of Mary Street to the point of beginning, being the point of intersection of the centerline of Mary Street and North Governors Avenue, south along the centerline of North Governors Avenue to the intersection of North Governors Avenue and Cecil Street, and west along the center line of Cecil Street through the Wesley College Campus to the point of intersection of Cecil Street and North State Street. High Priority Target Area shall mean that part of the city more particularly described as bounded by the street center lines as follows: (a) Original High Priority Target Area Designation From the intersection of the centerlines of North Governors Avenue and Mary Street south to the intersection of the centerlines of North Governors Avenue and Fulton Street, east to the intersections of the center lines of Fulton Street and North State Street, south to the intersection of the center lines of South State Street and Loockerman Street, east 202 feet and then south 172 feet and then west 36 feet and south 73 feet, and west along the right-of-way of North Street for 136 feet, and then south 45 feet along the center line of State Street and then east 73 feet along the south right-of-way of North Street and then south 71 feet, and then west 11 feet and south six feet and west 20 feet and south 135 feet and west 8 feet and then south 22 feet, then west following the centerline of The Green to the south intersection of the center lines of South State Street and The Green, south to West Water Street and south 218 feet and west 205 feet and 87 southwest 41 feet and west 246 feet and north 102 feet and west 103 feet and northwest 3 feet and west 40 feet and southwest 9 feet and west 44 feet and north to the intersection of South Governors Avenue and the centerline of West Water Street and west to the intersection of the center lines of West Water Street and South Queen Street, south along the center line of South Queen Street 541.11 feet and then west to the center line of South West Street, and north to the intersection of the center lines of West North Street and South West Street, and west to the intersection of the center lines of West North Street and Clarence Street and north to the intersection of the center lines of Clarence Street and Slaughter Street, and west along the center line of Slaughter Street to Cherry Street and north along the center line of Cherry Street to the intersection with the center line of Lincoln Street, and east along the center line of Lincoln Street to the intersection of the center lines of Forest Street and South West Street, and north along the center line of South West Street to the Page 160

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 39 intersection of the center lines of West Street and West Division Street, and west to the east property line of the Norfolk Southern railroad track, and north along this property line to the intersection with the center line of Mary Street, and west to the intersection of the center lines of Mary Street and North Governors Avenue. (b) Expanded boundary approved by the Cabinet Committee on State Planning Issues, effective February 1, 2024: (1) Beginning at the intersection of S. State Street and Loockerman Street and then turning east 202 feet along the southern edge of Lookerman Plaza and then turning north 110 feet to the northern edge of Legislative Avenue and then following the northern edge of E. Loockerman Street 621 feet to the westerly edge of the bridge crossing the St. Jones River at Mirror Lake and then following the westerly edge of Mirror Lake to the boundary of lands of the State of Delaware and then turning west and following the southern boundary of said state lands until the intersection with Kings Highway and then west along the southern edge of E. Reed Street to the original target area boundary and co-located with that boundary south to the point of beginning. (2) Being that the boundary extension encompassing 14 acres is approved by the Cabinet Committee on State Planning Issues. (3) Subject to the condition that no rebates will be granted for expansion of the gross square footage of the building on parcel 2-05-07705-04-5200-00001 unless an eligible project(s) mitigates future flood risks and improves the resiliency of the site. Renovations to the existing building may be considered appropriate, at the discretion of the Office of State Planning Coordination (OSPC) and the Delaware State Housing Authority (DSHA). (4) The boundary extension set forth above shall be incorporated into the City of Dover’s GIS system as an amendment to the High Priority Target Area (a.k.a. the Downtown Development District). ADOPTED: April 22, 2024 CITY MANAGER'S ANNOUNCEMENTS Ms. Sharon Duca, Assistant City Manager stated that the water system flushing concludes this week and spring cleanup continues. MAYOR’S ANNOUNCEMENTS Mayor Christiansen wished everyone a Happy Passover. He reminded everyone that NASCAR weekend, April 26, 27, and 28 is coming up. The Dover Days Festival is coming up on May 3rd and there will be a band concert and fireworks, and then May 4th will be the parade at 9:00 a.m. Mayor Christiansen stated that there has been some senseless violence that has occurred in the city, and it needs to stop. They will not tolerate an unsafe city. Mayor Christiansen wanted to express confidence in Chief Johnson, the men and women of the Dover Police Department, and other organizations that are working with them to take these people off the street. He mentioned Page 161

Item #11. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2024 PAGE 40 that there have been concerns that the issues have not been addressed through press conferences. When these people are in custody, and the Attorney General decides to help them take these people off the street permanently, then they will have a press conference to assure the community that Dover is a safe place to live, work, and play. COUNCIL MEMBERS' ANNOUNCEMENTS Mr. Lewis stated that with the recent gun violence in the city, he wanted to express his sincere sympathy to the families of the victims who were involved. His prayers are with them, and he calls for peace in the city. Mr. Anderson concurred with Councilman Lewis and Mayor Christiansen with the recent tragedy that has happened. His thoughts and prayers are with the families affected by these incidents. Mr. Anderson mentioned that the efforts and support to make the city safe are unrelenting and continuous. Mr. Anderson stated Happy Passover and that all in the Jewish community are supported. Mr. Sudler concurred with Councilman Anderson, Councilman Lewis, and Mayor Christiansen, Emphasized the importance of unity and collaboration in addressing community issues, particularly crime. He wants to advocate for a united front with the community. Mr. Sudler stresses the need for individuals to report crimes to the mayor’s office, and to do what is right. They all must work together. The meeting adjourned at 8:53p.m. ANDRIA BENNETT CITY CLERK All ordinances, resolutions, motions, and orders adopted by the City Council during their Regular Meeting of April 22, 2024, are hereby approved. ROBIN R. CHRISTIANSEN MAYOR /AB Exhibits Exhibit #1: John Paradee - Draper Farm Properties, LLC Rezoning Application #Z-23-02 PowerPoint Exhibit #2: John Paradee - Draper Farm Properties, LLC Rezoning Application #Z-23-02 Binder Exhibit #3: Kim Haggard – Letter in Opposition of Proposed Rezoning Application Z-23-02 Page 162

Item #12. COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE The Council Committee of the Whole met on April 23, 2024, at 6:01 p.m. with Council President Hare presiding. Members of Council present were Mr. Anderson, Ms. Arndt, Mr. Boggerty, Mr. Lewis, Mr. Neil, Dr. Pillsbury, and Mr. Rocha. Mr. Sudler was absent. Mayor Christiansen was also present. Civilian members present for their Committee meetings were Mr. Iriowen (via WebEx) (Utility), and Ms. Smith (Legislative, Finance, and Administration). Mr. Pugh (Utility) and Mr. Shevock (Legislative, Finance, and Administration) were absent. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Mr. Neil moved for adoption of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Boggerty and unanimously carried. UTILITY COMMITTEE The Utility Committee met with Chairman Rocha presiding. Adoption of Agenda Mr. Lewis moved for adoption of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Neil and unanimously carried. Discussion and Update on Customer Service Utility Policies (Allison Haines, Interim Customer Service Director) Ms. Allison Haines, Interim Customer Service Director, gave a brief overview of the current Customer Service Utility Policies. Committee action was not required. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Ms. Haines stated that the due dates for the electric billing are included in the bill. They are due 21 days from the bill date, and a late penalty would not be accrued until after the 30th day. Ms. Haines explained that an extension may be requested, however, they are not automatically granted. The extension policy states that the bill must be paid within seven days of the next billing statement. For example, if the bill is generated on the first and the due date is the 21st, the extension would need to be paid by the first of the next month when the next billing statement is issued so that the customer does not fall behind. Ms. Haines stated that disconnections are done in order of route and the only reason they would deviate from the order would be for extensions. Extensions are an agreement with the customer giving a guaranteed date that the bill will be paid. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Ms. Haines stated that past-due notices are included in the bill after the due date, indicating that any overdue balance is subject to disconnection. An exception is made for customers who have provided an email address, as they receive a guaranteed second notice the day after the delinquent date, reminding them to settle their bill promptly. When initiating disconnections, the team typically consists of six customer service representatives on the floor and one supervisor. However, due to ongoing training in other departments, they may be short-staffed at times. Occasionally, phone calls are made while reviewing the disconnect list. Page 861

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING APRIL 23, 2024 PAGE 2 Item #12. Ms. Haines explained that they also consider customers' payment histories—whether they have experienced disconnections before or if they have been consistently on time with their payments. For first-time occurrences on the disconnect list, they start by placing a door hanger as a courtesy reminder. However, if a pattern of delinquency emerges within a short timeframe, typically within two months, disconnection may follow. On the other hand, if a customer has maintained a good payment record for an extended period, they make every effort to provide a door hanger as a final reminder. Ms. Haines explained that it is important to note that due to operational constraints, such as limited staffing and the growing demand from the expanding City of Dover, they do not send out separate second notices by mail. Instead, all relevant information is included on the bill. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Ms. Haines stated that a recurring challenge they face is that many customers ask for an extension when they are on the brink of disconnection. Unfortunately, this delay in communication often limits the ability to assist them effectively and resolve the problem before it escalates to a disconnection. Ms. Haines explained that they strive to assist the customers through various channels, including assistance brochures which are available on the website, and handouts that are available in the office. These resources are designed to help customers navigate potential financial difficulties and explore available support options. Ms. Haines emphasized that it is crucial for customers to take the initiative and reach out for assistance when needed. They are encouraged to call the office and provide the necessary documents to determine eligibility for available resources. Ms. Haines noted that many individuals successfully access the available resources daily by taking proactive steps to seek help. Some of the programs available are Catholic Charities, First State Community Action, NeighborGood Partners (NCALL), and Holy Cross. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Ms. Haines stated that to set up automatic payments, they offer an autopay option accessible through an autopay form. Customers can fill out the form, provide a voided check, and customer service will automatically deduct the payment on the bill's due date. Ms. Haines stated in cases where customers are enrolled in social programs and can demonstrate a permanent due date, they can accommodate their unique circumstances through a billing exception. This exception allows them to adjust their bill due date to align with the timing of their program funds. This ensures that their payment is withdrawn consistently each month, synchronizing with the receipt of their funds. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Haines stated that there is no grace period, the bill is due on the 21st day and the late assessment is applied on the 30th day. Ms. Haines emphasized that the bill states that any past-due balance is subject to disconnect. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Haines stated that the city has a policy in effect for financial hardship due to a medical condition. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Haines stated that with medical exemptions, documentation must be completed by a doctor and submitted approximately every 120 days for specialized equipment. If customers still have outstanding bills and end up on the disconnect list, the city is required to issue a door hanger, incurring a $50 fee, as a reminder to settle their account. Failure to do so will Page 862

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING APRIL 23, 2024 PAGE 3 Item #12. result in the installation of a load restrictor, limiting electricity usage to only that which is essential to operate medical devices. Unfortunately, if payment remains outstanding after 30 days, they are obligated to discontinue their electric services. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Haines stated that the door hanger is typically only issued once. The list is run at the end of the day to be disconnected the next business day. While assisting customers the customer service staff must utilize several screens to research if the customer has been disconnected in the past year so it is likely that a repeat offender would end up on the disconnect list. Ms. Haines explained that the door hanger is issued again after a two-year grace period. Ms. Haines also explained that businesses are issued door hangers because they are trying to operate a business, but they are required to pay within three days. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Haines stated that the City of Dover does not have any low-income home energy assistance programs. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Haines stated that citizens who do not have computer access can visit 5 East Reed Street from 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. Ms. Haines explained that they carry all the brochures at customer service. Mr. Boggerty thanked Ms. Haines for her hard work and emphasized that she has always extended grace to allow individuals to get help. Mr. Boggerty explained that several programs can assist citizens in saving money which are funded through federal funding and grants, however, the citizens must ask for help. Ms. Patricia Marney, Interim Controller/Treasurer stated that the city currently has a Memorandum of Understanding established with Health Initiative, Inc., as previously mentioned. While the city does not allocate specific funding for these programs, they have chosen not to venture into social services, recognizing that there are ample resources already available. However, should exploring such avenues be of interest, it is certainly something they could consider. Ms. Marney explained that some time ago, she proposed the implementation of a Help Dover initiative to a former city manager. The concept involved a nominal additional charge, for example, 50 cents to a dollar, added to bills, which would contribute to funding such programs. Regrettably, this proposal was declined. While there are alternative approaches, they have acknowledged and utilized existing resources, emphasizing the importance of constituent involvement and follow-up. Ms. Ann Smith, 132 Oakmont Drive, Dover, expressed concerns regarding seniors having to go into customer service to sign documents to defer their payment. Ms. Smith stated that not all seniors are able to do so, and she recommended gathering information from the senior citizens on their electric services. Ms. Haines stated that since COVID-19 if a customer has an email on file customer service will email out extension requests. Ms. Haines also explained that customer service tries to keep collection rates down, so those costs are not passed on to the ratepayers. Responding to Mr. Rocha, Ms. Marney stated that they have tried to do surveys in the past, for items like budget billing and preauthorized things, however, they never received any participation. Page 863

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING APRIL 23, 2024 PAGE 4 Item #12. Ms. Marney stated that they placed inserts in with the bills to set up a services workshop, they had people sign up, but no one showed up on the day of. Responding to Mr. Rocha, Ms. Marney stated that they are limited to what they can send via email. Ms. Marney explained that typically they encounter around 800 to 1,500 accounts per month, which end up on the disconnect list. This number has significantly decreased since 2017, when it used to be much higher. Before that, although the policy existed, it was not rigorously enforced. There was a grace period and a balanced threshold in place. With 26,000 customers, even a modest $100 left unpaid by each would amount to $2.6 million, burdening other ratepayers. Upon Ms. Marney’s arrival in the city in 2013, they faced several million dollars in uncollectible funds annually due to customers leaving without settling their accounts. However, by diligently enforcing existing policies, they have managed to reduce this figure to roughly 1% of that amount per year, equating to approximately $100,000 in write-offs annually. This is a significant improvement from the million dollars they had to write off initially. While these policies may not be popular, they have proven to be effective. Ms. Marney emphasized that she has personal empathy for senior citizens, due to her father, which compels her to go the extra mile to assist them. She stated there have been instances where they have extended beyond their official duties, even making house calls to accommodate their needs. For instance, she recalled a situation where someone needed their deposit refund urgently to attend their father's funeral in Florida. She explained they expedited the process, and she delivered the refund on her way home from work. Ms. Marney explained that their problem is that people are not interacting with them. Mr. Rocha moved for adjournment of the Utility Committee meeting, hearing no objection the meeting adjourned at 6:38 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 Mr. Boggerty and unanimously carried. Proposed Ordinance #2024-07 – Amending Chapter 80 – Personnel, Article IV – Pension Plans and Retirement Benefits (except Police), Division 3 – General Employee Pension Plan (Councilman Anderson and Councilwoman Dr. Pillsbury) Mr. Anderson gave a brief update on the ordinance. Staff recommended approval of Proposed Ordinance #2024-07 as amended at the Special General Employee Pension Plan Board Meeting on April 19, 2024. Mr. Anderson stated that the General Employee Pension Plan Board is waiting for a legal review after the April 19, 2024, meeting, which is why they do not have any amendments back from legal counsel. Mr. Anderson explained that it was a very productive meeting and one of the Page 864

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING APRIL 23, 2024 PAGE 5 Item #12. recommended changes is to add one member to the General Employee Pension Board. He explained that this was fair because it does not give away the city's fiduciary responsibility. The ordinance has been split into two different ordinances, the first part has moved forward for a first reading, and it covers the two percent Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA), and the second part contains policy changes that will move forward after a legal review. Mr. Anderson also explained that a second phase will consist of the idea of providing catch-up, which would be a part of the budget process. Mr. Hare moved to recommend deferring action until the legal review is complete. The motion was seconded by Mr. Neil and unanimously carried. Discussion – Information Technology Improvements and Council Support (Larry Josefowski, Information Technology Director) Mr. Larry Josefowski, Information Technology Director reviewed the presentation titled “Information Technology Update” (Attachment #1). Committee action was not required. Mr. Josefowski explained that some of the issues that the city faces are outdated switches slowing down device performance, Wi-Fi connections that are not compatible with the demands of everyday use, staffing shortages, and audiovisual concerns not within their official job duties. Mr. Josefowski stated that they have collaborated with Kent County to troubleshoot and improve the audiovisual systems. Mr. Josefowski stated despite their best efforts, limited resources pose ongoing challenges, particularly concerning after-hours support and project completion. Without sufficient staffing and budget allocations, sustaining optimal system performance remains a considerable endeavor. While progress has been made in enhancing security and addressing technical challenges, ongoing support, and investment are essential to maintaining and improving the city’s infrastructure effectively. Mr. Rocha stated that he appreciates Mr. Josefowski’s effort and work, however, some of the functions that are not in his team's job description may need to be considered down the road. Mr. Rocha stated that they need to figure out a way to update the system because the cameras work but the audio needs updated. Mr. Rocha continued to state that he understands that it is not part of their job description to provide technical support in the chamber and he appreciates their assistance. Mr. Anderson stated that council is a critical operation and if they do not do their job, then everything else grinds to a halt. Therefore, although IT would not be expected to operate certain parts of the operations, they are expected to support them. Mr. Anderson recommended having an emergency call number for after-hours support when there is a system failure. Mr. Anderson expressed appreciation for Mr. Josefowski bringing forth what technology upgrades are needed, what needs to be budgeted for those upgrades, and whether there are better software programs that can be utilized. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Josefowski stated that issues with supply chains have become increasingly better. Delivery times have gone from a year out for delivery to less than a month. Page 865

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING APRIL 23, 2024 PAGE 6 Item #12. Responding to Mayor Christiansen, Mr. Josefowski stated that the terms of employment do say that duties and responsibilities will be as assigned, however, he believes his team would be in the right to ask for overtime or comp time for that time. Mr. Josefowski stated that another issue is skillset, his team and himself are all IT generalists. Mr. Josefowski stated that they are willing to help, however, they are not specialists. They could go through the training, but they have other training that he feels is a higher priority for his team in terms of the city’s network. Mr. Rocha moved to recess into Executive Session pursuant to 29 Del. C. §10004(b)(6) - Discussion of the content of documents, excluded from the definition of “public record” in § 10002(o)(2) of this title where such discussion may disclose the contents of such documents. The motion was seconded by Ms. Anderson and unanimously carried. The Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee recessed into Executive Session at 7:05 p.m. The Executive Session adjourned at 7:29 p.m. There was no action taken. Enterprise Fund for BLS Emergency Transportation Costs (David S. Hugg, III, City Manager) Mr. David S. Hugg, III, City Manager, reviewed the background for the enterprise fund for BLS emergency transportation costs. Staff recommended approval of Proposed Ordinance #2024-12. Mr. Hare moved to recommend accepting the staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Mr. Neil and unanimously carried. Mr. Anderson moved for adjournment of the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee meeting, hearing no objection the meeting adjourned at 7:32 p.m. Mr. Hare moved for adjournment of the Council Committee of the Whole meeting, hearing no objection the meeting adjourned at 7:32 p.m. William F. Hare Council President Attachments Attachment #1 - “Information Technology Update” Page 866

ATTACHMENT Item #12. #1 Council Committee of the Whole Meeting of 4/23/2024 Information Technology Update Legislative/Finance Committee Larry Josefowski, Director Page 867

Item #12. Connectivity/Performance Issues • Aging equipment being replaced • Replaced/consolidated over 90% of our switches over past 2 years • Increased bandwidth of some connections 10x • Replaced 2 Hyper-V hosts to increase server performance • Additional equipment replacements on horizon • WiFi devices nearing end of supported life • Cat 5 cabling infrastructure (100Mbps vs. 1000Mbps) • Lack of network management tools • Recent outages • Failed cable – partially worked when tested • Internet-based attack caused brief outage Page 868

Item #12. Audio/Visual Background • Has not been an IT supported or funded tool in past • Base System Installed 2016 • Configured prior to explosion of remote participation • Not IT owned, supported, configured Page 869

Item #12. Current State of Audio- Visual System and Support • Coordinated discussions with staff, vendors and Kent County • Provide “Best Effort” • Band-Aids to keep going • Vendor discussions • June 2023 – Provided quote for updates • Provided some technical improvements • Microphone updates - $14K • Additional PC for input - $6K • Other upgrades under consideration • Better integration with conference software • More accessible for all citizens Page 870

For the Record Item #12. Software • Confirmed issues working with same audio stream in different programs. • Version 6.2 no longer supported • Recommended to purchase version 7.7 • Open source solution had similar issues • On-Line training resources available Page 871

Item #12. After Hours Support • Provide “Best effort” based on availability • IT not staffed/budgeted for after-hours support • Audio-visual not area of expertise • Possible union issues for techs Page 872

Item #12. Back up slides Page 873

Item #12. Attempted logins to City of Dover Page 874

Item #12. City Hall rewiring project • Mixed wiring of Cat 5 and Cat 5e • Difference is significant 100Mbps vs. 1Gbps • Speed on affected PCs degrades to 100MB • Cat 5 has less shielding, greater cross talk especially when run in parallel • WiFi devices nearing end of support • Physical security enhancements Page 875

Item #12. Future of Tyler Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) • Current hold on further Tyler ERP deployment • Decision letter to recommend reverting to HTE/Naviline being finalized • Attached presentation Implementation of Tyler ERP is in year 6 of 2 year plan • Costs for Tyler ERP are likely greater than listed • Utility Billing unlikely work unless rates conform to Tyler • Process likely to take ~2 years to revert, would increase costs of HTE/Naviline during transition • Would require HR third party solution • provides more details • Need legal review of contracts and amendments Page 876

Item #17. COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT FUND Page 877

Item #17. CITY COUNCIL COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT FUND JULY 1, 2023 - JUNE 30, 2024 100-10-12-99-000-53037 Current Balance- $ 11,200.00 BUDGETED COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT FUND - $2,500 FOR EACH COUNCIL MEMBER PER DISTRICT AND $5,000 FOR THE AT-LARGE COUNCIL MEMBER. $ 25,000.00 AMOUNT THE PURPOSE OF THE FUND IS TO ALLOW MEMBERS TO CONTRIBUTE FUNDS TO A SMALL PROJECT OR COMMUNITY NEEDS IN EACH DISTRICT. FINAL BUDGET TOTAL $ 25,000.00 COUNCIL TOTAL YEAR TO DATE VENDOR DESCRIPTION P.O. #/INVOICE # BALANCE SPONSOR CHARGES DATE Councilman Anderson authorized the designation of $500.00 of his Women and Children Email from David Anderson dated 05/24/2023 and community enhancement funds to the Women and Children 7/10/2023 Anderson Transformation Ministry Email & Letter from William Snorton, Jr. received $500.00 $500.00 $24,500.00 Transformation Ministry International, Inc. for their Boys to Men International, Inc. 05/23/2023 Development Program for Gas cards. Councilman Anderson authorized the designation of $300.00 of his Email from David Anderson dated 07/12/2023 and 7/12/2023 Anderson The 302 Movement community enhancement funds to The 302 Movement for the backpack $300.00 $800.00 $24,200.00 email from Tracey Weems dated 07/11/2023 program. Councilman Boggerty authorized the designation of $200.00 of his Email from Andre Boggerty dated 07/17/2023 and 7/17/2023 Boggerty I Am Me, Inc. $200.00 $1,000.00 $24,000.00 community enhancement funds to I Am Me, Inc. for their ME Festival. email from Peirrce McCoy dated 07/17/2023 Council President Hare authorized the designation of $200.00 of his Email from Bill Hare dated 07/17/2023 and email 7/17/2023 Hare I Am Me, Inc. $200.00 $1,200.00 $23,800.00 community enhancement funds to I Am Me, Inc. for their ME Festival. from Peirrce McCoy dated 07/17/2023 7/18/2023 Jenmor Florist Void Void Void -$50.00 $1,150.00 $23,850.00 Councilman Lewis authorized the designation of $300.00 of his Email from Brian Lewis dated 07/25/2023 and email 7/25/2023 Lewis I Am Me, Inc. $300.00 $1,450.00 $23,550.00 community enhancement funds to I Am Me, Inc. for their ME Festival. from Peirrce McCoy dated 07/17/2023 Councilman Anderson authorized the designation of $200.00 of his Email from David Anderson dated 07/25/2023 and 7/25/2023 Anderson United Way $200.00 $1,650.00 $23,350.00 community enhancement funds to United Way for their "Book Bash." email from Kenyatta Livingston dated 07/25/2023 Councilwoman Pillsbury authorized the designation of $250.00 of her Email from Julia Pillsbury dated 07/25/2023 and 7/25/2023 Pillsbury United Way $250.00 $1,900.00 $23,100.00 community enhancement funds to United Way for their "Book Bash" email from Kenyatta Livingston dated 07/25/2023 Councilman Neil authorized the designation of $100.00 of his community Email from Fred Neil dated 07/25/2023 and email 7/25/2023 Neil United Way $100.00 $2,000.00 $23,000.00 enhancement funds to United Way for their "Book Bash" from Kenyatta Livingston dated 07/25/2023 Councilman Boggerty authorized the designation of $1,000.00 of his The Inner City Cultural Email from Andre Boggerty dated 07/31/2023 and 7/31/2023 Boggerty community enhancement funds to The Inner City Cultural League for the $1,000.00 $3,000.00 $22,000.00 League email from Reuben Salters dated 07/25/2023 reasons stated in the email. Councilman Anderson authorized the designation of $250.00 of his Email from David Anderson dated 08/04/2023 and 8/4/2023 Anderson Yeshua Lighthouse community enhancement funds to The Yeshua Lighthouse for bookbags Email & Letter from Liana Pritchett received $250.00 $3,250.00 $21,750.00 for their community day 08/01/2023 Councilman Rocha authorized the designation of $200.00 of his Email from Gerald Rocha dated 08/07/2023 and 8/7/2023 Rocha United Way $200.00 $3,450.00 $21,550.00 community enhancement funds to United Way for their "Book Bash" email from Kenyatta Livingston dated 07/25/2023 Councilman Neil authorized the designation of $100.00 of his community Hispanic Organization of Email from Fred Neil dated 08/12/2023 and email 8/14/2023 Neil enhancement funds to the Hispanic Organization of Latin Americans $100.00 $3,550.00 $21,450.00 Latin Americans (HOLA) from Anthony (Tony) Velazquez dated 08/11/2023 (HOLA) for their Baila Con Dover Festival. Councilperson Arndt authorized the designation of $200.00 of her Hispanic Organization of Email from Tricia Arndt dated 08/14/2023 and email 8/14/2023 Arndt community enhancement funds to the Hispanic Organization of Latin $200.00 $3,750.00 $21,250.00 Latin Americans (HOLA) from Anthony (Tony) Velazquez dated 08/11/2023 Americans (HOLA) for their Baila Con Dover Festival. Page 878

Item #17. Councilman Anderson authorized the designation of $250.00 of his Email from David Anderson dated 08/14/2023 and Hispanic Organization of 8/14/2023 Anderson community enhancement funds to the Hispanic Organization of Latin email from Anthony (Tony) Velazquez dated $250.00 $4,000.00 $21,000.00 Latin Americans (HOLA) Americans (HOLA) for their Baila Con Dover Festival. 08/11/2023 Councilman Boggerty authorized the designation of $250.00 of his Email from Andre Boggerty dated 08/14/2023 and Hispanic Organization of 8/14/2023 Boggerty community enhancement funds to the Hispanic Organization of Latin email from Anthony (Tony) Velazquez dated $250.00 $4,250.00 $20,750.00 Latin Americans (HOLA) Americans (HOLA) for their Baila Con Dover Festival. 08/11/2023 Councilman Lewis authorized the designation of $300.00 of his Hispanic Organization of Email from Brian Lewis dated 08/14/2023 and email 8/14/2023 Lewis community enhancement funds to the Hispanic Organization of Latin $300.00 $4,550.00 $20,450.00 Latin Americans (HOLA) from Anthony (Tony) Velazquez dated 08/11/2023 Americans (HOLA) for their Baila Con Dover Festival. Councilman Rocha authorized the designation of $200.00 of his Email from Gerald Rocha dated 08/18/2023 and Hispanic Organization of 8/18/2023 Rocha community enhancement funds to the Hispanic Organization of Latin email from Anthony (Tony) Velazquez dated $200.00 $4,750.00 $20,250.00 Latin Americans (HOLA) Americans (HOLA) for their Baila Con Dover Festival. 08/11/2023 Councilman Lewis authorized the designation of $150.00 of his Email from Brian Lewis dated and Letter from Dr. 8/18/2023 Lewis DEMCO $150.00 $4,900.00 $20,100.00 community enhancement funds to DEMCO for their Book Bag giveaway. Linda Hackett dated 08/17/2023 Councilwoman Pillsbury authorized the designation of $250.00 of her Email from Julia Pillsbury dated 08/21/2023 and Hispanic Organization of 8/21/2023 Pillsbury community enhancement funds to the Hispanic Organization of Latin email from Anthony (Tony) Velazquez dated $250.00 $5,150.00 $19,850.00 Latin Americans (HOLA) Americans (HOLA) for their Baila Con Dover Festival. 08/11/2023 Interdenomonational Councilman Boggerty authorized the designation of $300.00 of his Email from Andre Boggerty dated 08/25/2023 and 8/28/2023 Boggerty Ministerial Alliance of Dover community enhancement funds to the Annual Community Unity Family email from Bishop W. James Thomas, II dated $300.00 $5,450.00 $19,550.00 and Visinity (IMA) Day 08/22/2023 Councilman Boggerty authorized the designation of $1,000.00 of his Email from Andre Boggerty dated 10/2/2023 and a 10/2/2023 Boggerty Parks & Recreation community enhancement funds to the Parks and Recreation Department $1,000.00 $6,450.00 $18,550.00 memo from Robin Eaton dated 09/26/2023 for the 50 Years of Hip Hop Event. Councilman Rocha authorized the designation of $500.00 of his Email from Gerald Rocha, Sr. dated 10/2/2023 and 10/2/2023 Rocha Parks & Recreation community enhancement funds to the Parks and Recreation Department $500.00 $6,950.00 $18,050.00 a memo from Robin Eaton dated 09/26/2023 for the 50 Years of Hip Hop Event. Email from Julia Pillsbury dated 10/05/23 and an Councilwoman Pillsbury authorized the designation of $250.00 of her 10/5/2023 Pillsbury Dover Police Department email from CPL Killen, City of Dover PD, dated $250.00 $7,200.00 $17,800.00 community enhancement funds to the Hometown Holiday Event 10/05/23 Council President Hare authorized the designation of $600.00 of his Email from Bill Hare dated 10/05/23 and an email 10/5/2023 Hare Dover Police Department $600.00 $7,800.00 $17,200.00 community enhancement funds to the Hometown Holiday Event from CPL Killen, City of Dover PD, dated 10/05/23 Email from David Anderson dated 10/06/23 and an Councilman Anderson authorized the designation of $550.00 of his 10/6/2023 Anderson Dover Police Department email from CPL Killen, City of Dover PD, dated $550.00 $8,350.00 $16,650.00 community enhancement funds to the Hometown Holiday Event 10/05/23 Email from Andre Boggerty dated 10/14/23 and an Councilman Boggerty authorized the designation of $200.00 of his 10/16/2023 Boggerty Dover Police Department email from CPL Killen, City of Dover PD, dated $200.00 $8,550.00 $16,450.00 community enhancement funds to the Hometown Holiday Event 10/05/23 Councilman Neil authorized the designation of $500.00 of his community Email from Fred Neil dated 11/06/23 and an email 11/6/2023 Neil Dover Police Department $500.00 $9,050.00 $15,950.00 enhancement funds to the Hometown Holiday Event from CPL Killen, City of Dover PD, dated 10/05/23 Councilman Lewis authorized the designation of $150.00 of his Email from Brian Lewis dated 11/14/23 and a flyer 11/14/2023 Lewis Tracy Palmer Ministries $150.00 $9,200.00 $15,800.00 community enhancement funds to the Community Thanksgiving Dinner from the Tracy Palmer Ministries Councilman Rocha authorized the designation of $200.00 of of his Email from Gerald Rocha, Sr. dated 11/27/2023 11/27/2023 Rocha United Way of Delaware community enhancement fund to United Way of Delaware Wonderland and email from Kenyatta Livingston dated $200.00 $9,400.00 $15,600.00 Coat and Toy Drive 11/27/2023 Councilman Anderson authorized the designation of $100.00 of of his Email from David Anderson dated 11/27/2023 and 11/27/2023 Anderson United Way of Delaware community enhancement fund to United Way of Delaware Wonderland $100.00 $9,500.00 $15,500.00 email from Kenyatta Livingston dated 11/27/2023 Coat and Toy Drive Central Delaware Habitat for Councilwoman Arndt authorized the designation of $250.00 of her Email from Tricia Arndt dated 12/13/2023 and email 12/13/2023 Arndt $250.00 $9,750.00 $15,250.00 Humanity community enhancement fund to Central Delaware Habitat for Humanity from Timothy M. Bailey dated 12/12/2023 Councilwoman Arndt authorized the designation of $250.00 of her Email from Tricia Arndt dated 12/13/2023 and letter 12/13/2023 Arndt People's Place $250.00 $10,000.00 $15,000.00 community enhancement fund to People's Place from Mamie Charest dated 12/11/2023 I Am My Sisters Keeper Councilman Boggerty authorized the designation of $750.00 of his Email from Andre Boggerty dated 01/11/2024 and 1/11/2024 Boggerty $750.00 $10,750.00 $14,250.00 (MSK) community enhancement funds to I Am My Sister's Keeper (MSK-Dover) an email from Marcille "Dee" Sewell, dated 1/11/24 Page 879

Item #17. Councilman Lewis authorized the designation of $200.00 of his Email from Brian Lewis dated 02/14/24 and flyers 2/14/2024 Lewis Tracy Palmer Ministries community enhancement funds to the Easter Eggstravaganza at the $200.00 $10,950.00 $14,050.00 from the Tracy Palmer Ministries Elizabeth W. Murphey School Councilman Rocha authorized the designation of $300.00 of his Email from Gerald Rocha, Sr. dated 02/21/24 and a 2/21/2024 Rocha Tracy Palmer Ministries community enhancement funds to the Easter Eggstravaganza at the letter from the Tracy Palmer Ministries dated $300.00 $11,250.00 $13,750.00 Elizabeth W. Murphey School 02/18/24 Council President Hare authorized the designation of $250.00 of his Email from Bill Hare dated 02/24/24 and an email & 2/26/2024 Hare Zeta Rho Lambda $250.00 $11,500.00 $13,500.00 community enhancement funds to the Zeta Rho Lambda Chapter 5K letter from Dana T Shelton, dated 02/13/24 Councilman Anderson authorized the designation of $350.00 of his The Inner City Cultural Email from David Anderson dated 02/28/24 and 2/29/2024 Anderson community enhancement funds to The Inner City Cultural League for the $350.00 $11,850.00 $13,150.00 League letter/email from Kathrina Stroud dated 02/27/24 reasons stated in the email. Councilman Neil authorized the designation of $100.00 of his community Hispanic Organization of Email from Fred Neil dated 04/01/24 and email from 4/1/2024 Neil enhancement funds to the Hispanic Organization of Latin Americans $100.00 $11,950.00 $13,050.00 Latin Americans (HOLA) Anthony (Tony) Velazquez dated 03/29/24 (HOLA) for their Baila Con Dover Festival. Councilman Boggerty authorized the designation of $250.00 of his Email from Andre Boggerty dated 04/01/24 and Hispanic Organization of 4/1/2024 Boggerty community enhancement funds to the Hispanic Organization of Latin email from Anthony (Tony) Velazquez dated $250.00 $12,200.00 $12,800.00 Latin Americans (HOLA) Americans (HOLA) for their Baila Con Dover Festival. 03/29/24 Email from Gerald Rocha, Sr. dated 04/19/24 and a Councilman Rocha authorized the designation of $300.00 of his 4/19/2024 Rocha Tracy Palmer Ministries letter from the Tracy Palmer Ministries dated $300.00 $12,500.00 $12,500.00 community enhancement funds to the Tracy Palmer Ministries. 04/19/24 Councilman Lewis authorized the designation of $500.00 of his Email from Brian Lewis dated 04/23/24 and an Hispanic Organization of 4/23/2024 Lewis community enhancement funds to the Hispanic Organization of Latin email from Anthony (Tony) Velazquez dated $500.00 $13,000.00 $12,000.00 Latin Americans (HOLA) Americans (HOLA) for their Baila Con Dover Festival. 03/29/24 Councilman Lewis authorized the designation of $300.00 of his Email from Brian Lewis dated 04/23/2024 and letter 4/23/2024 Lewis Elizabeth Daniels community enhancement fund to Elizabeth Daniels for the Juneteenth $300.00 $13,300.00 $11,700.00 from Elizabeth Daniels dated 04/23/2024. Celebration Councilman Boggerty authorized the designation of $250.00 of his Email from Andre Boggerty dated 04/23/2024 and 4/23/2024 Boggerty Elizabeth Daniels community enhancement fund to Elizabeth Daniels for the Juneteenth $250.00 $13,550.00 $11,450.00 letter from Elizabeth Daniels dated 04/23/2024. Celebration Email from Andre Boggerty dated 04/23/24 and a Councilman Boggerty authorized the designation of $200.00 of his 4/23/2024 Boggerty Tracy Palmer Ministries letter from the Tracy Palmer Ministries dated $200.00 $13,750.00 $11,250.00 community enhancement funds to the Tracy Palmer Ministries. 04/19/24 Councilman Neil authorized the designation of $50.00 of his community Email from Fred Neil dated 04/23/2024 and letter 4/23/2024 Neil Elizabeth Daniels $50.00 $13,800.00 $11,200.00 enhancement fund to Elizabeth Daniels for the Juneteenth Celebration from Elizabeth Daniels dated 04/23/2024. TOTALS $13,800.00 $ 11,200.00 Budgeted District Council Sponsor YTD Expenditures Balance Amount $5,000.00 At-Large Boggerty $4,400.00 $600.00 $2,500.00 1st District Pillsbury $750.00 $1,750.00 $2,500.00 1st District Rocha $1,700.00 $800.00 $2,500.00 2nd District Hare $1,050.00 $1,450.00 $2,500.00 2nd District Lewis $1,900.00 $600.00 $2,500.00 3rd District Arndt $700.00 $1,800.00 $2,500.00 3rd District Neil $850.00 $1,650.00 $2,500.00 4th District Anderson $2,500.00 $0.00 $2,500.00 4th District Sudler $0.00 $2,500.00 TOTAL $13,850.00 $11,150.00 Page 880

Item #18. CITY MANAGER’S MONTHLY REPORT March 2024 Page 881 1

Item #18. Blank Page Page 882 2

Item #18. Page 883 3

Item #18. Page 884 4

Item #18. CENTRAL SERVICES MONTHLY REPORT March 2024 PROCUREMENT & INVENTORY DIVISION Purchase Orders for Stock by Fund FY 2024 to Date Difference from FY 2023 Electric $2,618,773.41 55.7% Water $142,208.98 70.1% Wastewater $769.13 100.0% General $105,284.97 32.8% Total $2,867,036.49 55.6% Issues from Stock by Fund FY 2024 to Date Difference from FY 2023 Electric $1,793,119.41 17.1% Water $83,046.76 49.0% Wastewater $0.00 N/A General $100,588.12 -1.9% Total $1,976,754.29 17.5% Bids/RFPs Solicited FY 2024 to Date Difference from FY 2023 31 58.1% Money Spent for Postal Services FY 2024 to Date FY 2023 to Date $129,092.04 $126,814.05 Fuel Usage Type FY 2024 to Date FY 2023 to Date Unleaded 111,679 106,809 Diesel 57,971 59,302 Dollars Spent $464,981.94 $548,995.91 Page 885 5

Item #18. Warehouse Stock Value FY 2024 FY 2023 $3,684,482.61 $3,014,645.70 Purchase Orders for Stock are up 55.6% compared to this time last year. Issues from Stock are up 17.5% compared to this time last year. Bids/RFP's are up 58.1% compared to this time last year. Postal Expenses are up 1.8% compared to this time last year. Fuel Costs are down 18.1% compared to this time last year. Overall warehouse value is up 18.2% compared to this time last year. FLEET DIVISION PM Work Orders Scheduled: PM Work Orders Total Work Orders PM & 34 Completed: 37 Repair: 91 Total Hours Turned: 274.75 Excess Hours Turned: 0 Time Unaccounted For: 51.6 MEASURE March 2024 March 2023 Completed PM's 37 52 DIFFERENCE -28.85% There were 34 PM's scheduled for this month. A total of 37 PM's were completed along with 54 repair work orders. There were a total of 91 work orders completed. Page 886 6

Item #18. FACILITIES DIVISION Routine Work Orders Emergency Work Orders Completed: 66 Completed: 4 City-owned Facility Work Events & Support Work Orders: 65 Orders: 5 MEASURE March 2024 March 2023 Completed Work Orders 70 54 DIFFERENCE 29.63% There were 70 routine and emergency Work Orders completed during this month. The work orders consisted of 65 for maintenance and repair of City-owned facilities and 5 related to events and other support work. Central Services Narrative The Warehousing & Procurement office continues to see inflated costs and excessive lead times. Facilities staff has been busy with routine work orders. Fleet is operating as normal at this time. Page 887 7

Item #18. CENTRAL SERVICES PROJECT UPDATE March 2024 FY/PROJECT NUMBER DEPARTMENT STATUS CENTRAL SERVICES FC2303 COMPLETE! CITY HALL WINDOWS 3rd floor complete and 2nd floor is underway. 2nd ELECTRIC EA2204 floor abatement is complete WEYANDT HALL HVAC and equipment install has begun. CENTRAL SERVICES FC2402 COMPLETE! CITY HALL EXTERIOR PAINT Roof is complete and doors CENTRAL SERVICES CS2405 are installed. Awaiting door WASH BAY ROOF & DOORS pressure strips. Construction has begun and WATER WASTE WATER WTP WD2409 we are currently awating RENOVATIONS HVAC quotes. Page 888 8

Item #18. Recap of monthly activities / notations – As of March 31, 2024 the City of Dover served 24,935 electric utility customers and 13,158 water utility customers as compared to 2023, which represents 24,918 and 13,076 respectively. These figures were tabulated from the monthy utility bill summary report which tracks billing across all utility bill rate classifications. 2,275 phone calls were answered in the month of March by 6 staff members of customer service. There are 3 properties set to go to monitions sale in April 2024, they are 645 Nimitz RD, 233-239 W Loockerman ST, and 311 Cold Spring PL. Receivable Comparison FY 2023 to Utility Disconnections for March 2024 FY2024 to date (March 2024) Compared 444 accounts were disconnected for non-payment of service. to the same time last year the City had open receivables of $7,034,296.72 vs Total receivable collected through the disconnection process $205,336.09 $9,709,232.37. Ending Utility Receivable Due - $7,039,445.18 Customer Service Department Mission Continually provide quality public service to our diverse group of customers with Page 889 professionalism, respect, & integrity. ~ City of Dover Customer Service Department 9

Item #18. Number of Deeds Stamped for Transfer Tax Dollar Amount for the Month of March 2023/2024 the Month of March 2023/2024 32 29 $400 $336 35 Thousand 30 22 25 $125 20 14 13 12 $200 s 15 $73 $57 $54 $18 10 3 4 4 $28 $0 0 2023 2023 5 $0 0 2024 2024 First Time Buyer for the Month March 2023/2024 Realty of March 2023/2024 Property Sales in Dollars Received Prior to Recording 40 32 29 $22 $25 30 22 $20 Millions Res. Non-First $8 $15 $10 $5 $8 $4 $4 $0 $1 20 14 Time Buyers $5 2023 $0 Res. First Time 2024 10 Buyers 0 2023 2024 Major Updates January February March Assessment Change $100,330 $0 $5,666,900 Residential Sales Ratio Report Sales in Study Total Assessed Total Sale Price Ratio PRD Value 30 $4,669,000 $7,619,200 0.61 1.05 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. Page 890 10

Item #18. Tax Office Wild Meadows / Persimmon Park Place Home Sales for March 2024: Property Address Assessed Value Sales Price N/A N/A N/A Supplemental Billing - April Supplemental bills were generated totaling $3,125 Page 891 11

012ÿ445ÿ6768 7ÿ0 0ÿ20 9 ÿ ÿÿ21 22 ÿ 10ÿ4ÿÿÿÿÿÿ 9068 102  @AB C9 02 C@   2A  2  0209C 0ÿ0112 0ÿ 12 9 02  !"#! "' (" 'ÿ*+,-ÿ.- " "% "$'' # ## : 32 ÿÿÿÿÿ#%$?% #'+3(#& ÿÿÿÿÿ%$? ÿ!  !$%&"! % (" #ÿ/01ÿ23445ÿ( " "% "$' # #" : 32 ÿÿÿÿÿ# ?" #'+3(#& ÿÿÿÿÿ% ? ÿ!  !"""" ! " (" $ÿ-((5ÿ.0( "  "$  # "$%$ . 32 ÿÿÿÿÿ#%? "+3(#& ÿÿÿÿÿ% $?$ ÿ!&  !"%"#$! % (" &$ÿ/(,-60.7ÿ.- "  "$ # #%&# :> 32 ÿÿÿÿÿ#&?# ##+3(#& ÿÿÿÿÿ&? ÿ!#  !"&"#! "' (" "ÿ+(081ÿ( "  "$  # #%% : < ÿÿÿÿÿ#&'?  #+3(#& ÿÿÿÿÿ# $? ÿ!'$  !"%'! # (" #ÿ+.7ÿ( " "& "$ " "#'" . 32 ÿÿÿÿÿ""$? +3(#& ÿÿÿÿÿ# ? ÿ!&%  !"'%! " (" "%ÿ9(8+ÿ( "  "$'% # #" : 32 ÿÿÿÿÿ#"?# #$+3(#& ÿÿÿÿÿ%"? ÿ!  !#% ! ' (" %ÿ1ÿ:(398(ÿ,- " " "$ # "%%& . 32 ÿÿÿÿÿ"#'?$ #"+3(#& ÿÿÿÿÿ# ? ÿ! '!""%! "% (" 'ÿ+044(ÿ( " " "$$ " "$# . 32 ÿÿÿÿÿ" #?  ##+3(#& ÿÿÿÿÿ"? ÿ"!"" '!""! "% ("  ÿ10+0-;ÿ( " "& "$ % " ""  . 32 ÿÿÿÿÿ"%?# #+3(#& ÿÿÿÿÿ# ? ÿ! '!"%"'! "% (" $$&ÿ:8<<,ÿ( " "& "$& " "' . 32 ÿÿÿÿÿ"%'?& ##+3(#& ÿÿÿÿÿ"&$? ÿ!$% '!"%! "% (" $ÿ+.8644ÿ( " "& "$ " ""# . 32 ÿÿÿÿÿ"%? "#+3(#& ÿÿÿÿÿ""$? ÿ"!" '!"%"&!# " ( "%ÿ.*3-*3+ÿ.- " "% "$'' # #"% : 32 ÿÿÿÿÿ"%&? #+3(#& ÿÿÿÿÿ#""? ÿ!& '!"%"&'! "% (" "'ÿ:=.7,81ÿ( " "& "$& " " #' . 32 ÿÿÿÿÿ" #?' "+3(#& ÿÿÿÿÿ%? ÿ!' '!" " ! ' (" %"ÿ63,*01<-81ÿ,- " " "$ # "#&' . < ÿÿÿÿÿ"#'?# &+3(#& ÿÿÿÿÿ#"? ÿ!&$  !%#" ! "& (" %# ÿ/3(3ÿ( " ' # # "' .> 32 ÿÿÿÿÿ" ?' # +3(#& ÿÿÿÿÿ#'? ÿ!  !&#$! # (" &"#ÿ,ÿ<(1:((5ÿ41 " "% #"" % #"% .> 32 ÿÿÿÿÿ"''?$  +3(#& ÿÿÿÿÿ#$? ÿ!&  !#"!"% ( ""ÿ.*3,ÿ*344ÿ " # "$ % " $%$ : < ÿÿÿÿÿÿ#? '+3(#& ÿÿÿÿÿ"%$? ÿ!& 12 Page 892 Item #18.

012ÿ445ÿ6768 7ÿ0 0ÿ20 9 ÿ ÿÿ21 22 ÿ 10ÿ6ÿÿÿÿÿÿ 9068 102  456 79 02 74   25  2  02097 0ÿ0112 0ÿ 12 9 02   !"#" $ $# % & %ÿ()*ÿ+,--ÿ %$ %.! % %%/ 0 ÿÿÿÿÿÿ!$1! $% 2,& $ ÿÿÿÿÿ%31 ÿ#. 13 Page 893 Item #18.

012ÿ445ÿ6768 7ÿ0 0ÿ20 9 ÿ ÿÿ21 22 ÿ 10ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ 9068 102  ?@A B9 02 B?   2@  2  0209B 0ÿ0112 0ÿ 12 9 02   !"#$%!&!' $  ( &&'ÿ*ÿ+,*ÿ-.      "#% 4! 9( ÿÿÿÿÿÿ#>& &!<5(!& ÿÿÿÿÿ&> ÿ$&  !"#$&!'!#'$ & (& ""ÿ/ÿ*0(.1ÿ-. &% ' $  & 4! 9( ÿÿÿÿÿÿ%%>" !<5(!& ÿÿÿÿÿÿ > ÿ$'  !"#$'!!""$  ( '&ÿ*0(.10/*ÿ(  ' && & %% 4= 58 ÿÿÿÿÿ %> '!<5(!& ÿÿÿÿÿ& > ÿ$#'  !"#$'! !'$  ( &'ÿ*0(.10/*ÿ(  ' & & % # 4= 58 ÿÿÿÿÿ '>" &!<5(!& ÿÿÿÿÿ&> ÿ$"  !""$ !'!&$  (& ÿ-ÿ*/ÿ-. &%  & %& 4 58 ÿÿÿÿÿ&'>  %!<5(!& ÿÿÿÿÿ&&> ÿ$ #  !""$"!%!#$ # ( ''ÿ23,405.ÿ-.   &%  ' & 2! 58 ÿÿÿÿÿ&#>" "!<5(!& ÿÿÿÿÿ''> ÿ$##  !""$'!&!"$  ( ÿ-5465(5467*ÿ58 ' #  % 4! 58 ÿÿÿÿÿ'>% !<5(!& ÿÿÿÿÿ% > ÿ$"%  !""$"!!# $  ( 'ÿ-ÿ2(590(ÿ-.  '% &  4! : ÿÿÿÿÿ '>  !<5(!& ÿÿÿÿÿ&& > ÿ$#%  !""$%!&!%$  ( %ÿ8(:(*ÿ(    &  # 4 58 ÿÿÿÿÿ >% &&!<5(!& ÿÿÿÿÿ&> ÿ$#&  !% $%!!$ & ( "#ÿ1033;ÿ(    %  %% 4 58 ÿÿÿÿÿ&>  &%!<5(!& ÿÿÿÿÿ&%> ÿ$#  !% $&!'! $ & ( ' ÿ<7<0-5ÿ58   "&  "#% 4 9( ÿÿÿÿÿ #># %!<5(!& ÿÿÿÿÿ&> ÿ$  14 Page 894 Item #18.

Item #18. For the month of March 2024, the Electric Department contributed to the quality of life for all our customers. The city experienced a system peak of 89.4 megawats, a decrease of 6.2 megawats from last month and a 2.6 megawat decrease from the same month last year. There was a total of 6 outages for the month affec�ng a total of 3,444 customers with an average outage �me of 119 minutes. Project Updates: The department con�nues to work in Towne Point, Verona Woods, Rojan Meadows, and we are tes�ng all electric poles in the city. City crews have tested approximately 2500 poles with a failure rate of 2.4% or 60 poles. The Department has received all LED roadway lights to replace the roughly 2000 conven�onal lights installed in the city. So far there have been approximately 700 lights replaced around the city. Work at the Garrison Oak Technical Park substa�on con�nues and is s�ll es�mated to be complete in May. Work at McKee Genera�on Sta�on is progressing well. The City held a town hall mee�ng at Fairview Elementary on March 19th. In atendance were Mayor Chris�ansen, Councilman Rocha, Electric Director Waddell and four members of Total Wrecking & Environmental. Approximately 25 residents atended to ask ques�ons and the majority had a posi�ve outlook a�er the hour-long forum. Van Sant was not called on for dispatch for the month of March. FY 24 YTD Outages and Response Time: Total – 67 Average Response Time – 31.55 (Goal – Less than 30 minutes) Sta�s�cs: 3-year average: FY Average: Average Interrup�on Dura�on Index (SAIDI) 173.3 minutes 57.12 minutes Goal – Not to exceed 100 mins System Average Interrup�on Frequency Index (SAIFI) 1.7 per cust .56 per cust Goal – Not to exceed 1 per customer Customer Average Interrup�on Dura�on Index (CAIDI) 9.9 minutes 102.1 minutes Lost Time Accidents – Workorders Generated – Current Month – 0 Total FY – 0 Current Month – 129 Total FY – 1,600* *This number is corrected due to an error in previous counts. Page 895 15

Item #18. FY24 Historical Peak Load 180 160 140 120 100 2022 Megawatts 80 2023 2024 60 40 20 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Page 896 16

Item #18. HUMAN RESOURCES March 2024 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. MARCH SUMMARY: March Hiring Trends FY24: The month of March shows a small increase in the hiring rate to include 7 new hires. The positions hired include 6 full-time roles and 1 part-time role. March Voluntary Termination/Involuntary Termination Trends FY24: In the month of March, there were 4 voluntary and 0 involuntary terminations. Page 897 17

Item #18. HUMAN RESOURCES MARCH EEO DATA EEO DATA AMERICAN INDIAN ASIAN BLACK CAUCASIAN HISPANIC OTHER RACE 2% 1% 4% 2% 14% 77% AMERICAN INDIAN 2% ASIAN 1% AFRICAN AMERICAN 14% CAUCASIAN 76% HISPANIC 2% OTHER RACE 4% Page 898 18

Item #18. HUMAN RESOURCES MARCH EEO DEMOGRAPHICS EEOC DEMOGRAPHICS 94 MINORITY 293 CAUCASIAN CAUCASIAN 293 MINORITY 94 Page 899 19

Item #18. HUMAN RESOURCES MARCH GENDER REPORT Gender Report FEMALE MALE NONBINARY 0% 26% 74% MALES 74% FEMALE 26% NON-BINARY 0% Page 900 20

Item #18. HUMAN RESOURCES FULL-TIME VS. PART-TIME EE’S FULL TIME vs PART TIME 450 387 388 387 400 356 358 362 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC FULL TIME PART TIME TOTAL EE'S Numbers do not reflect temporary, seasonal, relief fire dispatchers, committee, or council members. MONTH JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC FULL TIME 356 358 362 PART TIME 31 30 25 TOTAL EE'S 387 388 387 Page 901 21

Item #18. HUMAN RESOURCES INTERNAL EE AGE DEMOGRAPHICS AGE DEMOGRAPHICS 18-24 7% 25-34 26% 35-44 21% 45-54 24% 55-64 18% 65+ 5% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% AGE PERCENTAGE 18-24 7% 25-34 26% 35-44 21% 45-54 24% 55-64 18% 65 + 5% Page 902 22

Item #18. HUMAN RESOURCES HIRING DETAILS Position Hired: 1 FT Electrical Engineer, 1 FT MEO, 4 FT Police Patrolman Academy, 1 PT Library Clerk Transferred/Promoted: 0 Position Terminated/Resigned/Retired/Other: 0 Terminal Leave: N/A MARCH VACANT POSITIONS VACANT POSITIONS BY DEPT. MAR-24 CAMP COUNSELOR I/PARKS AND RECREATION FT/SEASONAL ARBORIST/PARKS AND RECREATION FT MOTOR EQUIPMENT OPERATOR II/ WATER, WASTEWATER DIVISION FT MOTOR EQUIPMENT OPERATOR I/PUBLIC WORKS FT ANIMAL CONTROL OFFICER/ POLICE FT INSPECTOR I - CODE ENFORCEMENT/DEPT OF PLANNING, INSPECTIONS, & COMMUNITY DEV FT CIVIL ENGINEER I/WATER, WASTEWATER DIVISION FT MOTOR EQUIPMENT OPERATOR I/WATER, WASTEWATER DIVISION FT SERVICE CENTER CLERK/PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT PT UTILITY MAINTENANCE MECHANIC I (IN HOUSE)/WATER, WASTEWATER DIVISION FT LIBRARY CLERK/DOVER LIBRARY PT ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTIST/PUBLIC WORKS FT BUILDING SUPERVISOR - 2 POSITIONS/PARKS AND RECREATION DEPT PT VICTIM SERVICES ADVOCATE/POLICE PT PAYROLL SPECIALIST/FINANCE FT PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR/PLANNING DEPT FT PARKING ENFORCEMENT OFFICER/POLICE DEPT FT PLANNER II/PLANNING DEPT FT HUMAN RESOURCES GENERALIST FT FINANCIAL REPORTING & ACCOUNT MANAGER/FINANCE FT POLICE CADET/POLICE DEPT PT PT (AS RELIEF FIRE DISPATCHER/FIRE DEPT NEEDED) *Not used for Budgeting Purposes Page 903 23

Item #18. HUMAN RESOURCES TURNOVER STATISTICS Monthly Number of Average Quarterly Annual Turnover Month Separated Number of Turnover Turnover Rates Employees Employees Rates Rate (Percentage) January 0 387 0.0% February 1 388 0.3% March 4 387 1.0% 1.3% April 0 1 0.0% May 0 1 0.0% June 0 1 0.0% 0.0% July 0 1 0.0% August 0 1 0.0% September 0 1 0.0% 0.0% October 0 1 0.0% November 0 1 0.0% December 0 1 0.0% 0.0% 1.3% Page 904 24

Item #18. HUMAN RESOURCES Monthly Turnover Rates (Percentage) 1.2% 1.0% 1.0% 0.8% 0.6% 0.4% 0.3% 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Page 905 25

Item #18. HUMAN RESOURCES Quarterly and Annual Turnover Rates 1.4% Q1, 1.3% Annual, 1.3% 1.2% 1.0% 0.8% 0.6% 0.4% 0.2% Q2, 0.0% Q3, 0.0% Q4, 0.0% 0.0% Page 906 26

Item #18. HUMAN RESOURCES MARCH WORKER’S COMPENSATION DATA Feb- Mar- MONTH 24 24 WORKERS COMP INJURY DETAIL 5 2 Worker's Compensation Cost March 2024 Total 8524.2 Streets 212.25 Power Plant 1123.13 Police 239.06 Grounds 2170.31 Electric 4779.45 Respectfully Submitted by H. Naomi Poole Page 907 27

Item #18. Information Technology Department March 2024 Report Larry Josefowski, Director Training: I attended “Understanding Targeted Cyber Attacks”, a course taught by FEMA during the month. It was a high-level course into how and why attacks occur. It was geared towards more of the manager/executive level more so than a technical course. It would be very appropriate for City executives to attend to get a perspective of what is involved and what steps should be taken before, during, and after an attack. Network Security: The City Council Meeting on March 26th was interrupted by an interruption in our Internet connection. This was caused by a cyberattack, but our network protection devices quickly reacted, disabled connections from where the attacks were coming from, which restored our connection. We were approved for a grant at the state level for a network monitoring tool, and we have been given a trial version as we wait for funding to arrive. The tool was very helpful in identifying the nature of the attack but has been very good at identifying other operational issues with the equipment. We expect to have the full version in the June timeframe. We also continue to work on network updates. A budget transfer was requested to purchase equipment which should complete this project before the end of the budget year. Tyler Enterprise ERP: Discussions with staff stakeholders and others continue regarding our next steps regarding our Enterprise Resource Planning system. A decision paper is being drafted with recommendations and should be completed next month. Metrics: System/Security Scores: While there hasn’t been much movement in this metric, which is a measurement of how Microsoft’s security and compliance areas are implemented, we have seen a small increase. We have increased some of our licensing levels, which allows us to increase the security in some areas. VOIP Phone Quality: This measures several aspects of calls made to and from our system. VOIP systems run through our network, and we’ve replaced equipment and identified some configuration issues that may contribute to the increase in quality. We’ll be monitoring this over the next couple of months to see if remains at this level, but 80% is the acceptable threshold. # of Tickets: This metric can be somewhat contradictory: An increase in the number of tickets could mean a system that is having issues, or that the team is capturing more of the work that comes in. I tend to believe it is the latter. When short-staffed, tickets tend to decrease as people move on to the next issue before documenting their work, especially if the person did not put a ticket in themselves. I think this is validated by the next metric. Time to Close incidents: This metric measures the average time an incident is open and has been decreasing since we were fully staffed. This reflects, I believe, a significant number of incidents that have been handled in the past without being entered, as there were other incidents that may have taken priority. Page 908 28

Item #18. System Security Scores VOIP Phone Quality 80% 95% 70% 60% 90% 50% 40% 85% 30% 20% 80% 75% Microsoft Compliance Score Microsoft Security Store Call Legs quality # of Tickets/Incidents Time to close incidents 140 22 d 0 h 130 19 d 0 h 120 110 16 d 0 h 100 13 d 0 h 90 10 d 0 h 80 7d0h 70 60 4d0h 50 1d0h Page 909 29

Reference Transactions March 2024 Item #18. Adults 717 Teens 96 Children 230 0 250 500 750 1000 1250 1500 1750 2000 * Electronic Materials include Overdrive & Hoopla starting July 2022 Circulation March '24 FYTD '24 March '23 FYTD '23 City of Dover Residents 9,970 92,432 10,682 93,123 * Electronic Materials 5,144 46,780 4,516 39,364 Kent County Residents 10,218 87,296 7,773 65,387 Non-County Residents 1,388 12,174 1,173 10,961 New Library Registrations City of Dover Residents 233 2,022 254 2,157 Kent County Residents 118 1,241 115 1,012 Non-County Residents 4 59 4 44 Registered Library Users as of 03/31/2024 Registered Library Users as of 03/31/2023 City of Dover Residents 18,874 16,847 Kent County Residents 8,461 6,733 Non-County Residents 665 597 TOTAL 28,000 24,177 Other Visitors 15,044 130,144 16,716 124,184 Meeting Room Attendance 2,399 24,712 2,696 17,935 Number of Computer Users 1,798 15,406 1,680 14,172 Number of Wireless Computer Users 1,559 13,972 1,666 13,295 Inter/Intralibrary - Loaned 45 58 Inter/Intralibrary - Borrowed 78 87 Holds Sent 2,825 3,021 Holds Received 1,488 2,217 TOTAL 4,436 42,664 5,383 44,489 Tech Services/Items Added 1,178 1,655 Tech Services/Items Deleted 1,011 1,175 Passport Services/Customers 280 2,187 451 2,287 Passport Services/Revenue $11,379 $86,895 $18,106 $92,589 Monthly Highlights ►771 attended 65 programs for adults. ►219 attended 11 program for teens. ►1,017 attended 36 programs for children. ► 0 volunteers. Program Spotlight Page 910 30

Item #18. Parks & Recreation Monthly Report - March 2024 Parks & RecreaƟon Highlights  Five Park Projects Update Dover Park Building and Spray Pad progress con nues. Staff con nues to document progress. All Accessible Playground staff is mee ng with site contractor regarding grading of the area. SchuƩe Park Dog Park Completed. We expect to add dog water fountains this spring. Skate Park in progress as noted in the FY25 CIP list.  John W. PiƩs RecreaƟon was the home for our annual Egg Hunt as Mother Nature did not cooperate with an outside event. An es mate 150 children s ll joined in the fun.  EggciƟng News egg hunt contest has been a lot of fun. We’ve hidden 5 golden eggs in our park system for families to find. Winners will receive $25 off a Parks & Recrea on program. Can you find the golden egg?  Summer RecreaƟon Day and Sports Camps are in progress. Pos ng for those and our other summer ac vi es has begun including our Spring & Summer Performing Arts Series. Outdoor Sports & Leagues Recreation Revenue Breakdown ParƟcipant & Spectator Count AcƟvity ParƟcipants Spectators LocaƟon Mens Senior So ball 200 40 Schu e Park Church League So ball 300 75 Schu e Park Girls So ball 75 25 Dover Park March 2024 March 2023 $1,883.00 Eggci ng News General Recrea on $1,298.00 General Recrea on Leagues $7,520.00 Special Event/Sponsor $1,300.00 (egg pics) Sports $3,155.00 Leagues $8,000.00 Park Permits/Rentals $660.00 Sports $1,540.00 Camps $3,815.00 Park Permits/Rentals $650.00 Parks & RecreaƟon March FYTD March FYTD Programs 24 24 23 23 General Recrea on 425 2,131 453 2,293 Open Gym 437 2,026 378 1,563 Sports 0 1,512 0 1,687 JC Jester w/Easter Bunny Leagues (Inside) 0 26,282 233 24,586 AKA: Cody Slavych Bldg, Field, Facility permits 5 75 * 53 *Mark your calendars for Bike to Work Day ‐ Dover: May 16* Page 911 31

Item #18. Grounds Monthly Report Mar-24 Arborist Crew: Arborist Crew - Alley trimming Tree Work Completed - Street tree maintenance Tree's Trimmed 31 - Assisted Street Division with root pruning Tree's Removed 9 for sidewalk replacement Root Pruning 2 Stumps Removed 16 Beautification Crew: Trees Planted 0 - Assisted with alley trimming - Mulched Library and Development flower beds - Flower bed maintenance Mowing Crew: - Assisted with alley trimming - Began spot mowing. 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 - 249 Total 90 gallon cans collected - Removed 6 Shopping Carts Parks Crew: - Completed parks route daily - Set up Bocce ball at Pitts Center - Graded parking lots at Schutte Park - Assisted with alley trimming - Began ball field maintenance - Built new shed at Schutte park Miscellaneous: - Mulched Police Station - Stoned island around vehicle charging station at City Hall - Serviced chippers - Serviced gators and sprayers for upcoming season Page 912 32

Item #18. 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 2024 Trees Removed 80 60 40 20 0 Jan Feb Mar April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec 2021 2022 2023 2024 Trees Trimmed 250 200 150 100 50 0 Jan Feb Mar April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec 2021 2022 2023 2024 Page 913 33

Item #18. City Planner’s Monthly Report Department of Planning & Inspections MARCH 2024 Planning & Inspections Highlights Some Items to Call to Your Attention Efforts for improvements to the City’s land use regulations came to fruition in March with the adop- tion of Ordinance #2024-01 LFA#1 for amendments to the Zoning Ordinance consisting of Text Amendments to the C-2 zone and other development regulations. This will be key to future develop- ment projects in Downtown Dover as the C-2 zoning district is found along the Loockerman Street corridor. Additional work focused on the Downtown Development District with the consultant ser- vices work on the Renewal Application for the Downtown Development District (DDD) designation. This continued with a Public Workshop Session. This DDD Renewal Application process is also look- ing to identify potential boundary expansion areas. March was slightly slower in the number of Building Permits issued with only nine (9) new house starts. Permits include a new Warehouse Building on College Park Drive and a number of renovation projects citywide. The number of Inspections associated with construction activities for Building, Plumbing, and Mechanical Permits was just over 300 inspectors. By month’s end, Certificates of Oc- cupancy were also issued to eight (8) additional dwelling units completed in the City. Now in a new licensing year, the renewal of Rental Dwelling Permits, Lodging House Permits, and Public Occupancy Licenses is now subject to penalties for late payments. Second Notice Renewals have been mailed to current license/permit holders who had not yet renewed. As of the end of March over 86% of the estimated revenue for Rental Dwelling Permits had been received and pro- cessed by Permits and Licensing Staff (see Revenue Report on next page). The Code Enforcement Staff continued to conduct Annual Housing Inspections as part of the Rental Dwelling Permit program with 22 completed in the month. There are currently over 7,900 Rental Dwelling Units within the City. Other Code Enforcement cases focused on exterior property mainte- nance issues/violations and Dover Code of Ordinance violations. For the month, there were over 472 inspections conducted for 233 violations. For the Fire Marshal’s Office Staff, the number of fire investigations in March decreased to three (3) incidents but included one fatality. The Fire Marshal’s Office continues a focus on Inspections of business occupancies within the City to confirm compliance. Page 914 34

Item #18. Planning & Inspections Revenue FY2024 Revenue Estimates from FY2024 Actual Revenue Stream Budget (YTD) March % of Budget Business License $1,450,000 $ 1,475,645 102% Manufactured Home License $16,000 $ 12,870 80% Building Permits $450,000 $ 709,071 158% Cert. of Occupancy $8,000 $ 8,405 105% Public Occupancy $45,000 $ 44,585 99% Lodging House $28,000 $ 28,101 100% Plumbing/Heating/Air $105,000 $ 83,455 79% Rental Inspection Fee $750,000 $ 646,241 86% Miscellaneous $20,000 $ 14,748 74% Fire Protection Fees $70,000 $ 106,096 152% Code Enforcement Fines $100,000 $ 66,346 66% Vacant Building Registration $70,000 $ 22,750 33% Total P&I Revenue $3,112,000 $ 3,218,313 103% Planning Office Operations 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. For Training in March, Dawn Melson-Williams (Principal Planner) attended the “Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and Ethics for Local Officials” on March 28, 2024 presented by the University of Delaware’s Institute for Public Administration and also the Downtown Development District Workshop on March 12, 2024 host- ed by the Office of State Planning Coordination. 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 March 2024, Planning Staff was involved with the review of 71 Building Permits and 11 Certificates of Occupancy permits that were issued for a monthly total of 82 and a year-to- date total of 208. The 2024 year-to-date tally is comparable year-to-date totals of Permits and COs seen in 2023 at 216 and is higher than in 2022 at 166. Staff also reviews new applications for Business Licenses and Rental Dwelling Permits. MARCH 2024 (FY24) TOTAL FOR FY24 New Home Permits Issued 9 77 Value of Commercial Projects $3,097,880.00 $72,183,856.00 Downtown Incentives (Fees Waived) $97.00 $26,317.35 Page 915 35

Item #18. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IMPLEMENTATION 2019 Comprehensive Plan Implementation of the 2019 Comprehensive Plan continues as Departments citywide focus on the plan im- plementation 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 • As part of the annual opportunity and process for Comprehensive Plan Amendments, the process for considera- tion of a Request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment filed requesting a change to the Map 12-1: Land Devel- opment Plan Map continued. This Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2024 (MI-24-01) related to a Land Use Clas- sification change from Office to Mixed for the property at 1079 Silver Lake Boulevard was recommended for ap- proval by the Planning Commission in February. The application’s Public Hearing was conducted by City Council on March 11, 2024 with action deferred on it for 30 days (rescheduled for April 22, 2024). 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 aspects of Plan implementation. In 2023, the Planning Office Staff Working Group focused on potential ordinance and policy changes for the C-2 zoning district. The Planning Staff drafted the Proposed Ordinance #2024-10 for text amend- ments to the Zoning Ordinance consisting of the revisions to the C-2 zoning district focused on uses, building height, parking, and other miscellaneous items. The Planning Commission held a public hearing and recommend- ed approval of the Proposed Ordinance #2024-01 with LFA #1 at their February Meeting. After the Public Hear- ing/Final Reading on March 11, 2024, Ordinance #2024-01 with LFA #1 was adopted by the City Council. • Downtown Development District – Renewal Application: The Downtown Development District (DDD) for the City of Dover was designated in January 2015 for a period of ten years. The City is eligible to apply for a five-year extension of this designation. Rossi, a consultant group, has been retained to assist the City in preparation of the Renewal Application. The project started with data collection, program evaluations, interviews, and focus groups. The process will also look at areas for potential amendments to expand/contract the DDD boundaries. A Public Workshop was held March 19, 2024 to gather ideas on the program incentives and usage, potential expansion areas, and key project identification. A Draft Renewal Application and DDD Plan is being prepared. CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES • In March 2024, Residential Building Permits were issued for five (5) Townhouse units by D.R. Horton and four (4) Duplex units by Chatham Bay in the Eden Hill Farm TND, and a manufactured home placement in Kings Cliffe Manufactured Home Park. • Certificates of Occupancy were issued to two (2) single family detached dwellings in Eden Hill Farm TND for Chat- ham Bay; a single family detached dwelling in Patriot Village Phase III area; and five (5) Townhouse units in Rojan Meadows PND. • Building Permits issued in March were for the new Flex Warehouse Building at 1255 College Park Drive (C-21- 03); a Storage Building at the Kent County Administration Building (S-23-07); for several interior renovation pro- jects including a tenant fit-out 1241 N. DuPont Highway for a food establishment; for office renovations at 834 S. Governors Avenue and 1417 New Burton Road; cooler renovations at Sam’s Club; renovations for a multi- purpose room at Bally’s; and other small renovation projects. • Certificates of Occupancy were issued for the creation of several tenant spaces including Crumbl Cookies at 50 N DuPont Highway in Capital Station, interior renovations to the McDonald’s at 1788 N. DuPont Highway and for the office renovation of Lab Corp at 850 S. State Street. Page 916 36

Item #18. 2024: Welcome to Dover! Progress in Pictures 539 Ruth Way Eden Hill Farm TND by Chatham Bay 833 Monroe Terrace 1513 Hopkins Ave- nue, Patriot Village III 201, 203, 205, 207, 209 Rojan Road Page 917 37

Item #18. 2024: Welcome to Dover! Progress in Pictures 1788 N. DuPont Highway Commercial Renovation 50 N. Dupont Hwy Unit 10, Tenant Fit out 850 S. State Street Tenant Fit- Out Page 918 38

Item #18. BOARD AND COMMISSION ACTIVITY There were March Meetings of the Boards and Commissions supported by the Planning Office. The Planning Commission Meeting on March 18, 2024 consisted of review of two Requests for Extension of Plan Approv- als and a Site Development Plan. The Historic District Commission and the Board of Adjustment did not meet in March due to lack of agenda items. Planning Commission: The Planning Commission met on March 18, 2024. The next Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for April 15, 2024. • S-22-03 Restaurant at 801 North State Street: Request for Extension – The Planning Commission granted approval of a One-Year Extension of the Planning Commission conditional approval granted on March 21, 2022 of a Site Development Plan Application for the construction of a 7,681 SF Restaurant with out- door patio dining and associated site improvements. The property is zoned C-2A (Limited Central Com- mercial Zone). The property consists of 1.943 acres (84,637.08 SF) and is located on the east side of North State Street, southwest of Lepore Drive. The property is bordered by Silver Lake to the south. The owner of record is Lopez Kent County, LLC. • S-22-04 Raymond Street and Railroad Avenue Street Improvements: Request for Extension – The Plan- ning Commission granted approval of a One-Year Extension of Planning Commission conditional approv- al granted on March 21, 2022 of a Site Development Plan Application for the proposed construction of street improvements in the Rights-of-Way of Raymond Street and Railroad Avenue. Improvements con- sist of paved roadways, curbing, sidewalks, and utility infrastructure (water, sewer, and stormwater drain- age). Raymond Street is proposed to be extended west as a 24 ft. paved width roadway to intersect with Railroad Avenue. Railroad Avenue is proposed to be constructed as a 24 ft. paved width roadway extend- ing to the north ending in a cul-de-sac. Portions of the surrounding property totaling 0.61 acres and owned by Patel College Properties LLC and Patel Excess College Road LLC are being dedicated to the City of Dover for the expansion of Right-of-Way. • S-24-03 Delmarva Land Holdings, LLC Warehouse Buildings (Cassidy Commons) at 101-1001 Cassidy Drive – The Planning Commission granted conditional approval of the Site Development Plan Applica- tion to permit construction of six (6) 9,950 square foot manufacturing/warehouse buildings (in addition to the four (4) already constructed) to be divided into smaller tenant spaces with other site improvements. The Planning Commission also granted approval of the Waiver Requests for partial elimination of upright curbing and the partial elimination of sidewalks as well as approval for the Performance Standards Re- view. The property of 10 acres ± is zoned M (Manufacturing Zone) and is subject to the AEOZ (Airport Environs Overlay Zone): APZ I and Noise Zones A and B. The property is located on the south side of Lafferty Lane west of Horsepond Road along a private drive known as Cassidy Drive. Property owned by Delmarva Land Holdings, LLC. This site was most recently subject to Application C-21-01 which was approved by the Planning Commission on January 19, 2021, but Final Plan Approval was not achieved, and the Plan has expired. The initial four buildings were constructed under C-11-04 M & L Ventures at Lafferty Lane. Page 919 39

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM Item #18. CDBG FY23 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 purchased a home and two families are mortgage ready. • 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. This project is underway. Fifty percent 50% of project funds have been spent year to date and 90% of funds have been spent on renovations cost. • Central Delaware Housing Collaborative CDBG funds will be used to provide operations cost for a women’s shelter. This project is underway. Sixty percent (60%) of program funds have been spent year to date. • Milford Housing Homeowner Rehabilitation/Emergency Home Repair Pro- grams CDBG funds will be used to rehabilitate existing owner-occupied housing in the City that are in violation of the City’s Housing Code and complete emergency home repairs to eliminate housing conditions that threaten the health and safety of low-income home- owners. Two owner occupied homes have been rehabbed and five (5) homes received emergency home repairs. • 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 under $1.5 million or 79% of funds have been spent on Round 1 of ARPA funding year to date. Dover Housing Authority, Murphey School and Reading Assist have completed their projects. ARPA Round 2 funding for a little under $500,000 was awarded to subgrantees in April. Pro- jects are currently underway. Twenty-seven percent (27%) of funds have been drawn down for Round 2 with Murphey School completing their project. Page 920 40

Item #18. CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITY Dangerous Buildings, Vacant Buildings & Demolitions  Vacant Buildings currently registered - 153  Dangerous Buildings – 70  Active Rental Dwellings – 7,912 units  Active Demolitions - 137 S Queen St , 130 S New St, 132 S New St & 134 S New St Page 921 41

Building Inspections & Licensing Summary Item #18. July 2022— July 2023– Current June 2024 March 2023 June 2023 PERMITTING AND LICENSING Permits Issued MARCH (2024) MARCH FY 24 FYTD 24 (2023) FY23 FYTD 23 Administrative Permit 5 46 11 48 Building Addition/Renovation Permits 31 273 45 259 Building Permits 23 171 21 202 Demolition Permits 1 26 2 18 Fence Permits 22 129 20 225 Fire Prevention Permits 15 93 9 58 Mechanical Permits 38 260 36 317 Plumbing Permits 25 235 43 321 Sign Permits 7 127 21 74 Swimming Pool Permits 0 6 3 11 Subtotal 1366 1533 Business Licenses 64 1907 53 1791 Merchant Licenses 3 353 2 326 Contractor Licenses 28 1299 36 1198 Subtotal 3559 3315 Lodging House Licenses 3 46 2 44 Public Occupancy 44 503 61 446 Rental Dwelling 231 2552 778 2770 Subtotal 3101 3260 Manufactured Homes 3 277 0 273 BUILDING INSPECTIONS Inspections MARCH (2024) MARCH FY 24 FYTD 24 (2023) FY23 FYTD 23 Building (Inspections/CBI/Site Meetings) 162 1321 532 3036 Plumbing/Mechanical 152 1337 300 3650 Certificate of Occupancy 11 113 25 144 Page 922 42

Item #18. Office of the Fire Marshal The Fire Marshal’s Office staff investigated three incidents during the month of March including a significant fire loss with a fatality on Sunset Terrace. Staff is working on annual fire and life safety inspections at business occupancies. Month Year to Date Previous Year to Date Annual Fire & Life Safety Inspections 19 243 306 Deficiencies From the Above Inspections 45 713 1,040 Fire Code Violations/Deficiencies/ 6 190 229 Complaints C/O & Fire Equipment Acceptance Tests 6 93 114 Meetings & Walk Through 28 180 161 Fire Plan Review & DAC 19 118 104 Month Year to Date Previous Year to Date Accidental 1 totaling $10,500 26 totaling $2,011,004 27 totaling $568,601 Undetermined 2 totaling $300,001 12 totaling $696,603 7 totaling $225,002 Incendiary 0 8 totaling $14,003 34 totaling $4,002,502 Natural 0 1 totaling $60,000 0 Arrest Made with DPD 0 0 2 Investigation Time 13 hours 113 hours 134 hours Injuries 0 7 0 Deaths 1 1 0 Page 923 43

Item #18. Page 924 44

Item #18. Page 925 45

Item #18. Page 926 46

Item #18. Page 927 47

Item #18. CITY OF DOVER DEPARTMENT OF WATER & WASTEWATER MONTHLY REPORT Mar-24 Inflow & Infiltration Costs $300,000.00 This chart indicates the amount of money the City is spending on treating ground and / or rain water $250,000.00 through Kent County. This cost is being offset by the Ground Water Inflow Adjustment rate passed on to the customers. January 2024 had a large amount of rain $200,000.00 and snow, causing higher costs. $150,000.00 $100,000.00 $50,000.00 $- Mar-23 Apr-23 May-23 Jun-23 Jul-23 Aug-23 Sep-23 Oct-23 Nov-23 Dec-23 Jan-24 Feb-24 Mar-24 I & I Cost Water mains and services are typically Water & Wastewater Repairs repaired at a higher rate when drastic 7 change in temperature occurs. This freeze and thaw cycle expands and 6 contracts the soil, causing cracks in the water line. November 2023 had large 5 fluctuations of temperature, causing a large volume of repairs. 4 3 2 1 0 Mar-23 Apr-23 May-23 Jun-23 Jul-23 Aug-23 Sep-23 Oct-23 Nov-23 Dec-23 Jan-24 Feb-24 Mar-24 Water Mains Repaired Water Services Repaired Wastewater Mains Repaired Wastewater Laterals Repaired Page 928 48

Item #18. CITY OF DOVER DEPARTMENT OF WATER & WASTEWATER MONTHLY REPORT Mar-24 Number of Brown Water Complaints 20 This chart indicates the number of 18 complaints the Department receives. March 2024 was high because it has 16 been over 5 months since the last flushing operation. 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Mar-23 Apr-23 May-23 Jun-23 Jul-23 Aug-23 Sep-23 Oct-23 Nov-23 Dec-23 Jan-24 Feb-24 Mar-24 Number of Brown Water Complaints Linear (Number of Brown Water Complaints) Department Spotlight - March The Department of Water & Wastewater has reached out to all licensed plumbers to provide education on the maintenance responsibilities of the both the customer and the City of Dover as it relates to their sanitary sewer lateral. Page 929 49

Item #19. Page 930

Item #19. Finance Department Monthly Report March 2024 This page intentionally left blank PagePage 2 931

Item #19. Finance Department Monthly Report March 2024 CITY OF DOVER ACTIVITY REPORTS March 2024 FY23 YTD FY24 YTD BANK TRENDS Number of Deposits Made (Hand, ACH & Wire, Lockbox) 4,838 4,924 Total Amount of All Deposits $ 166,203,904 $ 127,037,391 Other Activity Number of Pay Periods 20 20 Number of Direct Deposits Issued 8,221 7,803 Number of Pension Checks Issued 2,378 2,333 Total Pension Benefits Paid - Defined Benefit Plan $ 4,555,091 $ 4,587,289 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE Number of Check Vouchers 4,154 4,951 Number of EFT Vouchers 2,780 3,107 Vouchers Dollar Amount Disbursed $ 80,432,449 $ 79,205,190 FY23 YTD Wages FY24 YTD Wages $85,960 $299,644 $51,303 $590,534 $75,330 $746,744 $175,679 $97,749 $587,003 $660,774 $1,287,546 $1,508,351 $1,468,664 $1,731,299 $14,887,262 $16,689,970 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 Comp Time Comp Time Other Other Other includes: pay adjustments, military differential pay, training, committee meetings, worker compensation tracking/adjustments, etc. PagePage 3 932

Item #19. Finance Department Monthly Report March 2024 City of Dover General Fund Summary Fiscal Year to Date (March 2024) Revenues Original Budget Revised Budget Actual % Property & Transfer Taxes $ 18,056,100 $ 18,056,100 $ 18,022,889 100% Program Revenues 12,354,700 12,354,700 12,024,334 97% Utility Transfers 9,000,000 9,000,000 6,750,000 75% Grants 883,500 923,500 600,508 65% Interfund Services 6,236,400 6,236,400 4,404,517 71% 1 4,066,000 4,221,000 3,480,013 82% All Other $ 50,596,700 $ 50,791,700 $ 45,282,261 89% Expenditures Original Budget Revised Budget Actual % Program Expenses $ 34,903,300 $ 34,839,500 $ 23,164,519 66% Interfund Services 12,177,000 12,227,000 8,430,294 69% Debt Service 630,700 681,400 471,661 69% Post Retirement Benefits 2,548,000 2,548,000 1,911,000 75% Pension Fund Contributions 1,000,000 1,000,000 250,000 25% Capital Project Transfers 2,920,100 2,987,100 2,203,575 74% 2 3,052,800 3,052,800 1,432,214 47% All Other $ 57,231,900 $ 57,335,800 $ 37,863,262 66% 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. PagePage 4 933

Item #19. Finance Department Monthly Report March 2024 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 Revised 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 Revised Budget Actual PagePage 5 934

Item #19. Finance Department Monthly Report March 2024 City of Dover Water Fund Summary Fiscal Year to Date (March 2024) Revenues Original Budget Revised Budget Actual % Customer Sales $ 6,550,000 $ 6,550,000 $ 4,948,148 76% Impact Fees 225,000 225,000 209,646 93% Rents 435,500 435,500 435,588 100% Miscellaneous 1 75,200 75,200 302,851 403% $ 7,285,700 $ 7,285,700 $ 5,896,233 81% Expenditures Original Budget Revised Budget Actual % Program Expenses $ 4,156,100 $ 4,132,700 $ 2,591,976 63% Interfund Services 1,138,000 1,138,000 804,540 71% Debt Service 700,000 700,000 451,287 64% Post Retirement Benefits 226,900 226,900 170,175 75% Capital Project Transfers 1,536,700 1,536,700 1,152,525 75% Electric I&E Fund Transfer 25,000 25,000 - 0% General Fund Transfer 500,000 500,000 375,000 75% All Other 2 32,000 32,000 16,799 52% $ 8,314,700 $ 8,291,300 $ 5,562,302 67% 1 Includes Penalties, Income from Sale of Assets, Miscellaneous Income, and Reconnect Fees. 2 Includes Bank & CC Fees. PagePage 6 935

Item #19. Finance Department Monthly Report March 2024 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 Revised 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 Benefits Capital Project Transfers Electric I&E Fund Transfer General Fund Transfer All Other 2 Original Budget Revised Budget Actual Page 7 Page 936

Item #19. Finance Department Monthly Report March 2024 City of Dover Wastewater Fund Summary Fiscal Year to Date (March 2024) Revenues Original Budget Revised Budget Actual % Customer Sales $ 10,326,000 $ 10,326,000 $ 7,768,970 75% Impact Fees 225,000 225,000 193,613 86% Miscellaneous 1 50,200 50,200 310,535 619% $ 10,601,200 $ 10,601,200 $ 8,273,117 78% Expenditures Original Budget Revised Budget Actual % Program Expenses $ 1,649,200 $ 1,649,200 $ 1,051,659 64% Kent County Treatment Fee 4,730,000 4,730,000 3,426,642 72% Interfund Services 870,900 870,900 616,625 71% Debt Service 696,200 696,200 375,738 54% Post Retirement Benefits 110,000 110,000 82,500 75% Capital Project Transfers 2,270,900 2,270,900 1,703,175 75% Electric I&E Transfer 25,000 25,000 - 0% General Fund Transfer 500,000 500,000 375,000 75% All Other 2 15,000 15,000 4,922 33% $ 10,867,200 $ 10,867,200 $ 7,636,262 70% 1 Includes Interest Income, Penalties, Loss on Disposal, and Miscellaneous Income. 2 Includes Bank & CC Fees. PagePage 8 937

Item #19. Finance Department Monthly Report March 2024 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 Revised 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 Treatment Interfund Services Debt Service Post Retirement Capital Project Transfers Electric I&E Transfer General Fund Transfer All Other 2 Fee Benefits Original Budget Revised Budget Actual Page 9 Page 938

Item #19. Finance Department Monthly Report March 2024 City of Dover Electric Fund Summary Fiscal Year to Date (March 2024) Revenues Original Budget Revised Budget Actual % Customer Sales $ 92,743,400 $ 92,743,400 $ 66,016,337 71% 1 2,299,000 2,299,000 3,773,498 164% All Other $ 95,042,400 $ 95,042,400 $ 69,789,835 73% Expenditures Original Budget Revised Budget Actual % Power Supply & Generation $ 82,658,600 $ 82,856,900 $ 34,153,259 41% Electric Operating Div. Exp. 9,208,700 9,208,700 6,471,271 70% Interfund Services 4,227,500 4,227,500 2,983,352 71% Debt Service 1,482,600 1,482,600 1,050,650 71% Post Retirement Benefits 997,000 997,000 747,750 75% General Fund Transfer 8,000,000 8,000,000 6,000,000 75% 2 3,004,900 3,004,900 1,608,109 54% All Other $ 109,579,300 $ 109,777,600 $ 53,014,391 48% 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, Green Energy Charges, and Delay Damages. 2 Includes Utility Tax, Interest on Deposits, Bank & CC Fees, Bond Issuance Costs, Transfer to Uncollectible Reserve, and Green Energy. Megawatt Hours Sold & Purchased Budget Rev. Budget Actual Sales to Customers MWh (excl. Street Light MWh) 760,876 760,876 544,938 Sales per MWh $119.74 $119.74 $119.25 Purchased/Generated MWh 773,010- 773,010- 575,034- All In MWh Supply & Generation $106.87 $107.12 $59.32 Page Page 10 939

Item #19. Finance Department Monthly Report March 2024 Electric Fund - Revenues Millions $- $10 $20 $30 $40 $50 $60 $70 $80 $90 $100 Original Budget Revised 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 Div. Post Retirement Interfund Services Debt Service General Fund Transfer All Other 2 Generation Exp. Benefits Original Budget $82,658,600 9,208,700 4,227,500 1,482,600 997,000 8,000,000 3,004,900 Revised Budget $82,856,900 9,208,700 4,227,500 1,482,600 997,000 8,000,000 3,004,900 Actual $34,153,259 6,471,271 2,983,352 1,050,650 747,750 6,000,000 1,608,109 Original Budget Revised Budget Actual Page Page 11 940

Item #19. Finance Department Monthly Report March 2024 City of Dover Division Expense Summary (General Fund) Fiscal Year to Date (March 2024) Original Budget Revised Budget Actual % General Fund Divisions % of Budget City Clerk $ 414,200 $ 414,200 $ 278,693 67% Council 260,000 260,000 169,129 65% Mayor Fire 851,600 851,600 603,361 71% Human Resources Grounds 1,741,100 1,741,100 1,168,943 67% Customer Services Library 2,040,700 2,040,700 1,382,710 68% Fleet Maintenance Recreation 1,549,600 1,549,600 1,067,004 69% Procurement & Inventory Life Safety 690,600 690,600 450,287 65% Code Enforcement 1,173,600 1,173,600 505,610 43% Engineering Planning 826,100 826,100 424,594 51% Facilities Management Public Inspections 800,800 800,800 522,485 65% Pub. Services Administration Police 21,550,900 21,473,200 14,662,677 68% Finance Police Extra Duty 405,000 405,000 440,927 109% Information Technology Streets 768,600 783,600 507,293 65% Sanitation 3,060,100 3,060,100 1,896,673 62% City Manager Stormwater 906,400 905,300 510,269 56% Stormwater City Manager 1,300,100 1,350,100 964,516 71% Sanitation Information Technology 874,100 874,100 636,919 73% Streets Finance 1,032,300 1,032,300 560,208 54% Police Extra Duty Pub. Services Administration 646,900 646,900 436,557 67% Police Facilities Management 822,100 822,100 565,655 69% Engineering 279,300 279,300 190,628 68% Public Inspections Procurement & Inventory 873,600 873,600 638,060 73% Planning Fleet Maintenance 1,078,600 1,078,600 817,725 76% Code Enforcement Customer Services 1,417,500 1,417,500 931,643 66% Life Safety Human Resources 501,300 501,300 261,997 52% Recreation Mayor 245,200 245,200 149,177 61% $ 46,110,300 $ 46,096,500 $ 30,743,741 67% Library Grounds Fire Council City Clerk 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% Page Page 12 941

Finance Department Monthly Report March 2024 Item #19. City of Dover Utilities Expenditure Summary Fiscal Year to Date (March 2024) Water Divison Original Budget Revised Budget Actual % Engineering & Inspection $ 386,500 $ 386,500 $ 210,228 54% Water Department 862,100 862,100 536,278 62% Water Treatment Plant 2,907,500 2,884,100 1,845,470 64% $ 4,156,100 $ 4,132,700 $ 2,591,976 63% Wastewater Divison Original Budget Revised Budget Actual % Engineering & Inspection $ 304,100 $ 304,100 $ 111,671 37% Wastewater Department 1,345,100 1,345,100 939,988 70% $ 1,649,200 $ 1,649,200 $ 1,051,659 64% Electric Division Original Budget Revised Budget Actual % Transmission/Distribution $ 4,893,100 $ 4,893,100 $ 3,533,385 72% Electrical Engineering 1,826,600 1,826,600 1,167,187 64% Administration 1,020,200 1,020,200 684,766 67% Meter Reading 460,500 460,500 399,190 87% Systems Operations 1,008,300 1,008,300 686,743 68% $ 9,208,700 $ 9,208,700 $ 6,471,271 70% Page 942 Page 13

Finance Department Monthly Report March 2024 Item #19. Water Division % of Budget Water Treatment Plant Water Department Engineering & Inspection 48% 50% 52% 54% 56% 58% 60% 62% 64% 66% Wastewater Division % of Budget Wastewater Department Engineering & Inspection 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% Electric Division % of Budget Systems Operations Meter Reading Administration Electrical Engineering Transmission/Distribution 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Page 943 Page 14

Finance Department Monthly Report March 2024 Item #19. City of Dover Capital Outlay Summary (All Funds) Fiscal Year to Date (March 2024) General Fund Original Budget Revised Budget Actual % Fire $ 419,600 $ 419,600 $ 252,775 60% City Manager - 40,000 10,000 25% Code Enforcement 34,600 63,600 42,369 67% Public Works Admin 30,000 30,000 27,660 92% Public Works Eng 48,300 48,300 41,322 86% Police 1,186,500 1,398,200 402,974 29% Streets 852,300 3,583,300 573,942 16% Sanitation 707,800 1,464,400 581,775 40% Stormwater 1,135,000 3,549,200 136,700 4% Grounds 214,500 249,300 236,160 95% Library County Grant - 87,300 57,365 66% Recreation 835,000 2,900,600 1,975,316 68% Inspections - 30,100 30,068 100% Purchasing - 70,000 - 0% Information Technology 115,500 115,500 27,294 24% Facilities Management 80,000 159,300 76,249 48% Fleet Maintenance 30,000 535,700 470,158 88% General Fund Capital Projects $ 5,689,100 $ 14,744,400 $ 4,942,128 34% Water Fund Water $ 4,579,300 $ 6,093,000 $ 1,412,677 23% Water Engineering 48,000 48,000 41,322 86% Water Treatment Plant 56,500 423,300 113,237 27% Water Fund Capital Projects $ 4,683,800 $ 6,564,300 $ 1,567,236 24% Wastewater Fund Wastewater $ 2,576,900 $ 4,428,600 $ 578,246 13% Wastewater Fund Capital Projects $ 2,576,900 $ 4,428,600 $ 578,246 13% Electric Fund Electric Generation $ 275,000 $ 12,723,400 $ 2,202,134 17% Transmission/Distribution 2,497,400 2,936,100 1,470,161 50% Electrical Engineering 2,076,000 8,670,600 2,748,872 32% ERP System - 1,856,000 5,740 0% Electric Administration 2,000,000 2,516,100 875,000 35% Electric Fund Capital Projects $ 6,848,400 $ 28,702,200 $ 7,301,908 25% TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS $ 19,798,200 $ 54,439,500 $ 14,389,518 26% Page 944 Page 15

Finance Department Monthly Report March 2024 Item #19. Capital Outlay - All Divisions $14,000,000 $12,000,000 $10,000,000 $8,000,000 $6,000,000 $4,000,000 $2,000,000 $- Original Budget Revised Budget Actual Capital Outlay - By Fund $35,000,000 $30,000,000 $28,702,200 $25,000,000 $20,000,000 $14,744,400 $15,000,000 $10,000,000 $6,848,400 $7,301,908 $6,564,300 $5,689,100 $4,683,800 $4,428,600 $4,942,128 $5,000,000 $2,576,900 $1,567,236 $578,246 $- Original Budget Revised Budget Actual General Fund Capital Projects Water Fund Capital Projects Wastewater Fund Electric Fund Capital Projects Page 945 Page 16

Item #20. DOVER FIRE DEPARTMENT March 2024 FIRE CHIEFS REPORT Page 946

Item #20. Mayor and Council, The Dover Fire Department responded to 150 calls in March, consisting of 1,778 personnel hours. Members performed 18 hours of training consisting of 730 personnel hours. Total Personnel hours for the month of March- 2,508 Personnel hours Working Fires 811 Sunset Terrace (Fatal Fire) On 03/14/24 at 13:19 hours, the Dover Fire Department was alerted for a structure fire in the unit block of Sunset Terrace. While responding, crews were advised that there may be an occupant still in the structure. The Fire Chief and first engine arrived on scene at 13:21 hours (within two and a half minutes from the time the 911 call was taken) and found fire showing from the first floor at the front and back of the residence. Once inside crews encountered fire conditions throughout the residence. The Dover Police Department already had several units on scene. Knowing that there may be an occupant trapped in the structure, Dover Police Officers forced entry through a rear entry door and located one victim and sole occupant of the residence. The victim was extricated from the residence and Patrol Officers on scene began life safety measures along with the City of Dover Fire Marshal’s Office, St. Francis EMS and Kent County Paramedics. The victim was transported to Bayhealth Medical Emergency Room, but sadly succumbed to their injuries. The Dover Fire Department had 2 command vehicles, 1 engine, 2 ladders and 2 squads on scene with 25 firefighters. Additional units from Camden and Little Creek also assisted the Dover Fire Department on scene. Ambulances from St Francis EMS, Camden, Harrington, and the Kent County Paramedics were also on scene. Little Creek, and Clayton Fire Companies covered the City while units operated the fire ground. The scene was placed under control at 14:07 hours and the last unit cleared at 15:18 hours. Page 947

Item #20. On Thursday evening, March 21st, members went door to door distributing “After the Fire” flyers in the Sherwood section of the city where the DFD responded to a house fire the week before. The flyers included tips on how to prevent fires and what to do in the event of a fire. This is a new program to help educate our citizens on fire safety in the immediate area after a major fire. Motor Vehicle Accidents Lafferty Lane and Bay Road car into Structure At approximately 07:45 hours Squad 1, Squad 2, Engine 4, Dover 15 and 16 along with Kent County KM7 and KM5, Saint Francis EMS, and members from the Kent County Special Ops Team were dispatched to a Motor Vehicle Accident involving a structure. One patient was transported to a local hospital. Crews remained on scene for approximately 4- 1/2 hours, securing the structure to remove the vehicle from the building. Puncheon Road and South Dupont On Saturday, March 9th at approximately 12:30am, Squad 1, Squad 2, Engine 4, Dover 16, KM5, KM7, B63, C63 along with Delaware State Police Aviation Section Trooper 4 were dispatched in the area of S. DuPont Highway and the Puncheon Run Connector for a report of a motor vehicle collision with subjects trapped. On arrival they found two patients, one of which was heavily trapped inside. Units worked for approximately an hour and a half on scene. One patient was transported to a local trauma center via Trooper 4, and another was brought to a local hospital. Dover PD is investigating the accident. Kenton Road Fieldstone Place On Friday, March 8th at approximately 4pm. Squad 1, Squad 2 Engine 4, St Francis EMS 63, A63, B63, A43, Kent County Paramedics KM5, KM9 Along with Delaware State Police Aviation Trooper 4 were dispatched to a Motor Vehicle Collison with a subject trapped on Kenton Road at Fieldstone Court. On arrival crews found a two-vehicle accident with a vehicle off the roadway with one person trapped inside. The patient was extricated from the vehicle transported to a nearby hospital. Two patients were transported from the wreck. Units remained on scene for approximately 1 hour. Salisbury and Whatcoat Drive On Thursday, March 7th at approximately 18:40hours, Squad 1, Squad 2, Engine 1, Rescue 43, Dover 16, KM9, KM5, KM7, A63, C63 along with Delaware State Police Aviation Section Trooper 4 were dispatched intersection of Salisbury Road and Whatcoat Drive for a report of a motor vehicle collision with subjects trapped. Units worked for approximately one hour on scene. One patient was transported to a local trauma center via Trooper 4, and another was brought to a local hospital. Leipsic Road and Rt 1 Page 948

Item #20. On Thursday, March 7th at approximately 21:40hours, Squad 1, Squad 2 Dover 16, KM9, KM5, KM7B, B43, A53, A41, C63 along with Delaware State Police Aviation Section Trooper 2 and Trooper 4 were dispatched in the area of Leipsic Rd. for a report of a motor vehicle collision with subjects trapped. EMS63 arrived on scene with one vehicle down an embankment fully engulfed in flames. Units worked for approximately one hour on scene, and a total of three patients were treated. Two patients were transported to a local trauma center via Trooper 2 and Trooper 4, and another was brought to a local hospital. Ladder 2 Ladder 2 has been posted for sale with a fire apparatus sales broker Brinklee Mountain. Tower 2 was delivered from the manufacturer and sent out for equipment mounting. Members of the Fire Department will attend company training on the new Tower 2. A representative from Pierce Manufacturing will teach the class, which incorporates four hours of classroom and six hours of hand-on operation. The members will review set up, Aerial operations, flowing water and basket operations with the parapet and stokes baskets bracket. Each member will be assigned to a trainer and will begin drivers training in April. Tower 2 is expected to be in service and responding to emergencies in the greater Dover area in the beginning of May. Senior Airman Drew Kuntzi of the 512 Aircraft maintenance Squad Group was named Liberty Wing Warrior. Drew is one of our Longterm Duty Crew members and staffs our station on 48 hours a week schedule. Drew also is a full-time student at Delaware State University. We thank him for continued service to the Greater Dover area and our country!! The Fire Chief attended: Attended the City Council Meetings Attended the City Department Head Meeting Attended the Dover Fire Department Company Meeting Attended the Dover Fire Department Board of Directors meeting Attended Fire and Rescue Training at the Dover Fire department and Delaware State Fire School Page 949

Item #20. Page 950

Item #20. Page 951

Item #20. Page 952

City of Dover Item #21. Police Department Monthly Report march 2024 Page 953

CITY OF DOVER DEPARTMENT OF POLICE Item #21. 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 May 13, 2024 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 March: COMPLAINTS/EVENTS YTD Totals compiled through March numbered 10,997. This represents an increase of 1,036 from the 9,961 reported over the same period in 2023. 12,000 10,997 9,922 9,763 9,961 10,000 8,847 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS Burglary: 5 cases reported, 2 cases cleared and 2 cases were cleared from previous months. Robbery: 8 cases reported, 6 cases cleared and 1 case was cleared from previous months. Sex Assault: 4 cases reported, 1 case cleared and 0 cases was cleared from previous months. Homicide: 0 cases reported, 0 cases cleared and 0 cases cleared from previous months. There were 4 Non-Criminal Death Investigations, 4 cases cleared and 0 cases cleared from previous months. 1 Page 954

Item #21. DRUG, VICE, & ORGANIZED CRIME / STREET CRIMES UNIT ENFORCEMENT Marijuana: 187.2 grams seized Cocaine: 155.5 grams seized Ecstasy: 0 doses seized Prescription Pills: 0 doses seized Heroin: 7.938 grams seized Methamphetamine: 0 grams seized Fentanyl: 0 grams seized Other Rx Drugs: 15 grams/doses seized Drug Proceeds: $1,723 seized FIREARM SEIZURES/INSIDE CITY LIMITS 15 10 7 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CI DVOC/STREET CRIMES PATROL SEU HANDGUN RIFLE SHOTGUN Firearms: 8 Handguns TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT YTD Citation Totals compiled through March numbered 1,150. This represents a decrease of 510 from the 1,660 reported over the same period in 2023. 2,500 2,232 2,040 2,000 1,660 1,493 1,500 1,150 1,000 500 0 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 TRAFFIC CRASHES: YTD = 476 2 Page 955

Item #21. 911 CENTER ACTIVITY Total compiled during March numbered 7,323 calls. This represents an increase of 92 from the 7,231 reported during the same period in 2023. 7,400 7,323 7,231 7,200 7,000 6,917 6,810 6,800 6,600 6,544 6,400 6,200 6,000 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 CITY ORDINANCE SUMMONS YTD Totals compiled through March numbered 275. This represents a decrease of 439 from the 714 reported over the same period in 2023. 2,000 1,562 1,500 985 1,000 738 714 574 500 318 275 152 186 115 0 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ISSUED 1,562 985 738 714 275 PAID 574 318 152 186 115 3 Page 956

Item #21. 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 March:  A meeting with Pastor Carol Boldin  Follow up on an illegal dumping situation in Simon Circle  Assisted with the prosecution of low level offenses at JP Court  Assisted a parent with their child who has been attracted to gang membership  Spring cleaning and maintenance of the Community Response Vehicle  Conducted employment interviews with Cadet candidates  Provided facility tour to a Boy Scout Troop  Participated in the DDP Board Meeting  Participated in the multi-cultural career fair at Milford High School  Participated in the Kings Cliff MHP HOA meeting  Participated in the W. Reilly Brown Elementary Mentoring Program  Participated in the W. Reilly Brown Elementary Career Day (K9 Roy)  Participated in a police recruiting event at Immaculata University  Participated in the Silver Lake Commission meeting  Addressed a parking complaint on Representative Lane  Addressed a quality of life issue at 1300 S. Farmview  Provided community outreach efforts to Dover Middle School Campus  Secured Silver Lake Park in anticipation of a pop-up DSU party  Assessed a possible homeless encampment in the vicinity of Dover HS  Provided continued support for a terminally ill toddler (K9 Roy)  Provided family support after his passing (K9 Roy)  Conducted property checks at 457 E. Water St, Minor Street Alley & Loockerman Street  Participated in the St. Patrick’s Day Parade  Assisted Patrol Units during major incidents, high 911 call volume and/or low staffing  Training events included SORT members monthly obligations, Control Tactics Instruction, and the CNT Conference  The BHU made contact with 69 individuals and took official action to provide services to 45 of them. 31 were mental health supports and 14 were substance abuse referrals. Members of the CPU attend numerous meetings with community associations and organizations as a part of our ongoing liaison relationships. 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 Chairperson cancelled the March meeting due to a lack of a quorum from known schedule conflicts and illnesses discovered on the day of the meeting. 4 Page 957

PROGRAMS AND INITIATIVES Item #21. The Police Academy graduated on March 1st in a ceremony at Dover High School. Three of the Recruits were sworn in as Dover Police Officers. They began their field training experience the following week and continue to progress toward independent duty. Five more candidates were identified in March and offered employment to line up with the next Academy session scheduled for April 7th. The spring testing cycle is being planned and a new initiative was rolled out in an attempt to reduce the number of failures in the initial physical agility test. A practice agility test was offered to known applicants so they can assess their own ability to pass the standardized test. Less than 10 of them took advantage of the special session but those that did left with a clear understanding of what they needed to work on before the official test. The 100th Anniversary of the Dover Police Department arrives in March of 2025. A special committee has been formed to create the various ways we might celebrate and commemorate the occasion. Fundraising strategies are being discussed and members are in search of photos and physical items that illustrate our history. It is our hope that City Council can be a partner in this effort to honor our past, acknowledge our present and imagine our future. Another GVI Call-in was conducted on March 13th at the Crossroad Christian Church and the program was administered to 19 individuals identified by the program partners. Many of them chose to accept services and all of them were put on notice about what consequences would come should they continue to participate in gun violence. The Newark PD is considering a program similar to the Dover PD Behavioral Health Unit. We were happy to host the Newark team on March 15th to share our learned experience. The Department was happy to host Senator Carper for a visit to discuss the use of technology funded in whole or in part by Federal dollars. Success stories were shared and bureaucratic challenges were discussed. The overall status of Dover law enforcement challenges was also on the agenda. It was a productive meeting. With the support of the Dover YMCA, the Police Athletic League hosted our second Easter Egg Hunt on March 30th at the Kenton/Walker Road facility. We had an overwhelming turn out and the kids made quick work of the challenge to find the eggs. We would like to thank all of our special supporters who combined to make the day memorable for the youngsters. Please visit our website at www.doverpolice.org for up to date information on crimes and activities in the City of Dover. Respectfully Submitted, Thomas A. Johnson, Jr. Chief of Police 5 Page 958

Item #26. City of Dover MAYOR AND COUNCIL PROPOSED COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2024-07 1 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SIGNATURES FOR BANKING SERVICES ON 2 BEHALF OF THE CITY OF DOVER, DELAWARE. 3 WHEREAS, the City of Dover's investment policy includes the investment of funds up to 4 $100,000 per banking institution, investments in the State of Delaware Investment Pool, and 5 the purchase and sale of investment grade corporate bonds, and U.S. Treasury and agency 6 securities; and 7 WHEREAS, the banking institutions, brokerage firms, trust companies, and other various 8 financial institutions require an Authorizing Resolution for the opening of accounts, and for 9 purchasing, selling, transferring, assigning, and handling securities; 10 WHEREAS, by the Mayor and Council of the City of Dover, that the Controller/Treasurer 11 and Assistant Treasurers are hereby authorized to open accounts with banking institutions and 12 purchase, sell, transfer, assign, and handle securities, and that they are authorized to sign all 13 related forms; 14 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor and Council of the City of Dover, 15 that the Controller/Treasurer and Assistant Treasurers are hereby authorized to open accounts 16 with banking institutions and purchase, sell, transfer, assign, and handle securities and that 17 they are authorized to sign all related forms; 18 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the transactions in these accounts be carried out with 19 any one signature; and 20 That the following are the office holders authorized for these purposes, until further notice: 21 Patricia M. Marney Interim Controller/Treasurer 22 Melanie S. Patterson Assistant Controller/Treasurer 23 Andria L. Bennett Assistant Treasurer 24 Arielle M. Rivera Assistant Treasurer 25 ADOPTED: 26 ROBIN R. CHRISTIANSEN WILLIAM F. HARE 27 MAYOR COUNCIL PRESIDENT 28 Actions History 29 05/13/2024 - Introduction - City Council P.O. Box 475 ❖ Dover, Delaware ❖19903 Community Excellence Through Quality Service Page 959

Item #27. Ro:::S I HOSE COMPANY No. 1 DOVER'S VOL. FIRE DEPT. Since 1.882 Date: 05/06/24 To: Andria Bennett, City Clerk From: Jason Osika, President Reference: Special Election On April 29, 2024, the positions of Deputy Fire Chief and 1't Assistant Fire Chief became vacant because of the resignation of Sean Christiansen and Sierra Brown. On May 1, 2024, the positions of 2ndAssistant Fire Chief, 3,d Assistant Fire Chief, 4th Assistant Fire Chief, 1't Fire Line Captain, and Second Fire Line Captain became vacant because of the resignations of Brian Bashista, James Iannucci, Jason Boc, Chad Knots, and Drew Kuntzi. Per Article I, Section 4 of the By-Laws of the Robbins Hose Company No.1, Inc. the resignations were accepted by virtue of receiving the same. The membership was properly notified of the resignation on May 3,2024, and that nominations for the positions of Deputy Fire Chief, 1't Assistant Fire Chief, 2ndAssistant Fire Chief, 3'd Assistant Fire Chief, 4th Assistant Fire Chief, 1st Fire Line Captain, and Second Fire Line Captain would take place during the May 6, 2024, company meeting. The nominations for the positions of Deputy Fire Chief, 1't Assistant Fire Chief, 2nd Assistant Fire Chief, 3,d Assistant Fire Chief, 4th Assistant Fire Chief, 1't Fire Line Captain, and Second Fire Line Captain were opened during the May 6,2024 company meeting under election of members. As a result, the following were nominated: Deputy Fire Chief, Brian Bashista 1't Assistant Fire Chief, Jason Boc 2ndAssistant Fire Chief, James Iannucci 3,d Assistant Fire Chief, Brian Cullen 4th Assistant Fire Chief, Christopher Riale 1't Fire Line Captain, Drew Kuntzi 2nd Fire Line Captain, Nickolas Senne Per Article I, Section 5 of the By-Laws of the Robbins Hose Company No.1, Inc. due to the vacant positions being unopposed, a single ballot was cast by the Secretary. As a result the following were Page 960

Item #27. selected and will fill the positions of Deputy Fire Chief, 1st Assistant Fire Chief, 2nd Assistant Fire Chief, 3,d Assistant Fire Chief, 4th Assistant Fire Chief, 1't Fire Line Captain, and Second Fire Line Captain. Deputy Fire Chief, Brian Bashista 1't Assistant Fire Chief, Jason Boc 2nd Assistant Fire Chief, James Iannucci 3,d Assistant Fire Chief, Brian Cullen 4th Assistant Fire Chief, Christopher Riale 1't Fire Line Captain, Drew Kuntzi 2nd Fire Line Captain, Nickolas Senne All candidates meet the requirements to hold this position. If there are any questions, concercns, or if you need anything additional, please feel free to contact me at any time. Yours in Service, 'O~ Jason Osika President Page 961

Item #34. FIRST READING City of Dover PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2024-12 WITH STAFF AMENDMENT #1 1 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN 2 COUNCIL MET: 3 4 That Chapter 38 - Emergencies, be amended by inserting a new Article III – Emergency 5 Services, as follows: 6 7 Sec.38-85. Basic Life Support Ambulance Services Enterprise Fund. 8 9 (a) The city manager is hereby authorized to impose a fee and to bill residents and others for 10 ambulance services. Such fees will be assessed monthly and included as a general billing 11 item, included on monthly residential and commercial utility bills. The Basic Life Support 12 Ambulance Service Fee shall apply to all utility customers in the Robbins Hose/Dover Fire 13 Department district boundaries. 14 15 (b) Establishment of Specialized Enterprise fund. 16 17 (1) All revenues received in accordance with this Ordinance shall be deposited in the Basic 18 Life Support Ambulance Service Enterprise Fund. These funds shall be used to pay the 19 contracted annual cost of service, and regular and necessary administrative costs for Basic 20 Life Support aAmbulance sServices, including allowances for externalities and 21 uncertainties. Funds not expended in any fiscal year shall be maintained in the fund and used 22 in subsequent years as necessary, including establishment of self-funded services. 23 24 (2) The proceeds of the Basic Life Support Ambulance Service Fund shall be managed by 25 the City of Dover Department of Finance, which shall regularly report the status of the fund, 26 arrange for audit, and oversee disbursements as provided for by any contractual provisions 27 and the city’s financial management policies. 28 29 (c) Fees and the fee schedule will periodically be reviewed and adjusted to reflect changing 30 costs. The fees are to be added, updated and reflected in the Rates and Tariff annual 31 document, and such amount shall be kept in a separate, interest-earning account and shall be 32 used only for the costs associated with Basic Life Support Ambulance Service. Is subject to 33 the city’s collection policies and procedures but is not lien-able against customers’ property 34 nor subject to the Clean Hands Ordinance. The city manager may authorize commercial 35 collection procedures and utilize the same procedures as other outstanding fees. The Basic 36 Life Support aAmbulance sService fFee shall added to Appendix F as follows;

Item #34. Proposed Ordinance #2024-12 - Amending Chapter 38 - Emergencies Page 2 37 (1) Residential accounts shall be billed one dollar and fifty cents ($1.50) monthly. 38 39 (2) Commercial accounts shall be billed eight six dollars and fifty cents ($8 6.50) 40 monthly. 41 42 (d) Severability. If any provision of this ordinance shall be determined to be invalid in whole 43 or in part, all other provisions shall continue to be separately and fully effective 44 45 (e) Effective Date. The Basic Life Support aAmbulance sService fFee shall be effective on July 46 1, 2024. 47 48 Synopsis 49 50 This ordinance establishes the Basic Life Support aAmbulance sService fFee effective on July 1, 51 2024. The Basic Life Support Ambulance Service Fee shall be a monthly fee applied to all utility 52 customers in the Robbins Hose/Dover Fire Department district boundaries. These funds shall be 53 used to pay the contracted annual cost of service, and regular and necessary administrative costs 54 for Basic Life Support aAmbulance sServices, including allowances for externalities and 55 uncertainties. The staff amendment is to change the title of Fund to Basic Life Support 56 Ambulance Services Fund as recommended by the city’s auditor. This fund would be 57 separate from the city’s general fund. 58 59 (SPONSORS: ARNDT and PILLSBURY) 60 61 62 ADOPTED: * 63 64 Action History 65 05/13/2024 – Scheduled for First Reading with Staff Amendment #1 – City Council 66 04/23/2024 – Introduction at Council Committee of the Whole – Legislative, Finance, and Administration Page 963

FINAL READING Item #35. City of Dover PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2024-13 WITH COMMITTEE AMENDMENT #1 COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS ARE INDICATED IN BLUE TEXT 1 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN 2 COUNCIL MET: 3 4 That Chapter 80 – Personnel, Article IV – Pension Plans and Retirement Benefits (except 5 Police), Division 3 – General Employee Pension Plan, be amended by inserting the text indicated 6 in bold, blue italics and deleting the text indicated in red strikeout as follows: 7 8 Section 80-500 – General employee pension plan established; purpose. 9 10 (a) Generally. There is hereby established the city general employee pension plan. The purpose 11 of the plan is to establish the terms and conditions under which retirement and disability 12 benefits shall be provided to eligible employees of the city. The benefits under the plan shall 13 be in addition to amounts received as social security benefits or from any other pension plan. 14 15 (b) For employee exclusively. This plan is created for the exclusive benefit of the employees of 16 the city and shall be interpreted in a manner consistent with it being an employee's trust, as 17 defined in section 401(a) of the Internal Revenue Code (26 USC 401(a)). Therefore, under 18 no circumstances shall any funds contributed to this plan, or any assets of the plan or trust 19 ever revert to or be used or enjoyed by the city, nor shall any such funds or assets ever be 20 used other than for the benefits of the employees of the city and their beneficiaries, prior to 21 the satisfaction of all liabilities under this plan to the employees. 22 23 Section 80-501 – Eligibility of participant. 24 25 Each eligible employee not drawing any retirement benefits from the mayor and city 26 council as of January 1, 1967, shall, upon compliance with the provisions of this division, 27 become a general employee pension plan participant under this division, commencing on July 28 1, 1967, or at any subsequent time immediately upon his employment. Effective September 28, 29 2009, the general employee pension plan is closed to new participants. 30 31 Section 80-502 – Participation mandatory; exceptions. 32 33 The pension plan shall not be construed to give any employee the right to be retained in 34 the employ of the city. All new employees hired after July 1, 1991, shall be required, as a 35 condition of employment, to join the general employee pension plan or the deferred 36 compensation plan. All new employees hired after September 29, 2009 are required to join the 37 money purchase plan (IRC 401(a)), as defined in division 4. All participants of the general 38 employee pension plan as of September 28, 2009 will remain members of either plan thereafter 39 unless they shall leave the employment of the city, retire, pass away, or elect to terminate their Page 964

Proposed Ordinance #2024-13 - Committee Amendment #1 - Amending Chapter 80 - Personnel, Art. Item #35. 4 - Pension Plans and Retirement Benefits, Division 3 - General Employee Pension Plan Page 2 40 participation in the general employee pension plan and become a member of the money purchase 41 plan (IRC 401(a)), as defined in division 4. 42 43 Section 80-503 – Defraudment. 44 45 It shall be unlawful for any person to knowingly make any false statement or falsify, or 46 permit to be falsified, any record of the pension plan in an attempt to defraud the plan. 47 48 Section 80-504 – Normal retirement. 49 50 The normal retirement date for each participant shall be the first day of the month following 51 the attainment of the age of 65 years, provided that he has completed ten years of continuous 52 service. 53 54 Section 80-505 – Early retirement. 55 56 (a) Reduced benefits. A participant who has completed ten years of continuous service and who 57 has attained the age of 55 years may retire at any time within the ten years preceding his 58 normal retirement date; provided, however, that his retirement benefits shall be computed 59 at a reduced rate of one-half percent for each month computed from the date of early 60 retirement to age 65 years. 61 62 (b) Unreduced benefits. 63 64 (1) Hired May 1, 1994, or later. For eligible employees hired on or after May 1, 1994, a 65 participant who has attained the age of 55 years, and whose attained age plus years of 66 continuous service is equal to or greater than 80, may retire at any time prior to his 67 normal retirement date with no reduction in retirement benefits. 68 69 (2) Hired before May 1, 1994. For eligible employees hired before May 1, 1994, a 70 participant who has completed 25 years of continuous service or has attained the age 71 of 50 years and completed 20 years of continuous service may retire at any time prior 72 to his normal retirement date with no reduction in retirement benefits. 73 74 Section 80-506 – Later retirement. 75 76 If a participant works beyond his normal retirement date, the payment of the participant's 77 retirement benefits shall be deferred until his actual retirement. 78 79 Section 80-507 – Forced retirement with pension. 80 81 The general employee pension plan board, upon recommendation of the city council or the 82 city manager, may require retirement in any case where deemed necessary due to the lack of 83 work or inability of the employee to perform with a satisfactory degree of efficiency, provided 84 that the employee qualifies for either normal retirement pursuant to section 80-504, or early 85 retirement pursuant to section 80-505. The employee shall then be entitled to receive, 86 commencing on the first day of the month coinciding with or next following his date of Page 965

Proposed Ordinance #2024-13 - Committee Amendment #1 - Amending Chapter 80 - Personnel, Art. Item #35. 4 - Pension Plans and Retirement Benefits, Division 3 - General Employee Pension Plan Page 3 87 retirement, pension benefits equal to the benefits computed in accordance with the provisions of 88 section 80-508 on the basis of the employee's service completed prior to actual retirement. 89 90 Section 80-508 – Amount of retirement benefits. 91 92 Retirement January 1, 1995, or later. The amount of retirement benefits payable to a 93 participant who retires on or after January 1, 1995, shall be computed on the basis of one-fiftieth 94 of his average actual monthly earnings multiplied by the total number of years of continuous 95 service. Average actual monthly earnings shall be a participant's base pay plus scheduled 96 overtime, payment for being on call, except those hours reported for being called out, and any 97 retroactive pay corrections which involve any one of the mentioned payments during any period 98 of 36 consecutive months in his final ten years of continuous service which results in the highest 99 average monthly earnings. 100 101 If an employee's approved absence is the result of a workers compensation injury, the base 102 wages that the employee would have earned had he not been on workers compensation leave 103 will be included when determining the highest 36 consecutive months within his final ten years 104 of continuous service. 105 106 The value of lost base salary as a result of mandatory furlough shall be added to an 107 employee's final average compensation and considered in the calculation of the amount of 108 retirement benefits if the time period in which the mandatory furlough was required is within 109 the highest 36 consecutive months or earnings within the final ten years of continuous service. 110 111 Annual Increase. The retirement income of a retired member of this plan shall be 112 increased by two percent per annum every January 1. This increase in retirement pay shall 113 be cumulative and the previous year’s increase shall be included in the retired member’s 114 retirement income for the purpose of calculating the annual two percent increase. 115 116 Section 80-509 – Form of benefits. 117 118 (a) Normal form. A monthly benefit shall be payable on the first day of the second month 119 preceding the date on which application for such benefit is filed. Payment will be retroactive 120 to the retirement date. Payments of benefits shall be payable monthly thereafter during his 121 lifetime and terminating with the last payment on the first day of the month of the death of 122 the participant. 123 124 (b) Death of participant, etc. Upon the death of a participant who has retired, or who is eligible 125 to be retired under any of the provisions of this division, payment shall be made to their 126 eligible survivors in the amount of 50 percent of the monthly payments to which the 127 participant was or would have been entitled. Upon the death of a participant who has 128 completed a minimum of ten years of service but is not yet eligible to retire because of age 129 and/or years of service, payment shall be made to their eligible survivors in the amount of 130 50 percent of the monthly payment to which the participant was or would have been entitled. 131 The pension amount will be based upon section 80-508. There shall be no reduction in 132 benefit. In no instance shall actual monthly payments be less than $200.00, to be effective 133 July 1, 2000. Upon the death of both the participant and eligible survivor, if the benefit Page 966

Proposed Ordinance #2024-13 - Committee Amendment #1 - Amending Chapter 80 - Personnel, Art. Item #35. 4 - Pension Plans and Retirement Benefits, Division 3 - General Employee Pension Plan Page 4 134 payments received in aggregate are less than the member's contributions, the balance of the 135 member's contributions, plus five percent interest, will be paid to the surviving beneficiary 136 designated or his estate if no designation has been made and submitted to the general 137 employee pension plan board. The amount of benefit payments received and the amount of 138 the member's contributions shall be determined from the record of the pension board. 139 140 (c) Eligible survivor. An eligible survivor shall be one of the following in the order of 141 preference listed: 142 143 (1) Spouse. The participant's spouse who was married to the participant for at least one 144 year. Surviving spouse shall be required to provide supporting documents of marriage. 145 146 (2) Children, unmarried. 147 148 a. The surviving children, biological or legally adopted, of the participant, who have 149 not attained their 18th birthday. 150 151 b. If said child is attending school on a full-time basis and provides proof of 152 attendance each year of eligibility, with the payment due for the month in which 153 he ceases to attend school on a full-time basis or with the payment due for the 154 month in which his 22nd birthday shall occur, whichever shall occur first. 155 (d) Commencement of payment. Benefits payable to eligible survivors shall commence on 156 the first day of the month following the date of the participant's death. 157 (e) Benefits payable. Benefits payable to eligible survivors shall cease: 158 (1) Spouse. With respect to an eligible survivor who is a spouse, with the payment due 159 for the month in which their remarriage or death shall occur, whichever occurs 160 first. 161 (2) Children. With respect to an eligible survivor who is a child(ren) with the payment 162 due for the month in which his 18th birthday or death shall occur, whichever shall 163 occur first. Payments shall be made in accordance with subsections (2)a. and b. 164 (f) Eligibility for benefits. The eligibility of any person or persons to receive payment of 165 benefits as an eligible survivor shall be determined conclusively by the general employee 166 pension plan board based on application of such person or persons and any other 167 information which the pension board deems to be appropriate. 168 169 Section 80-510 – Early retirement due to permanent disability. 170 171 Any employee who, after completing at least ten years of continuous service, shall be injured 172 or whose health shall become permanently impaired to such an extent as to render him 173 totally and permanently disabled, shall be retired upon application and approval of the 174 general employee pension plan board. The pension amount will be based upon section 80- 175 508. There shall be no reduction in benefit. 176 177 Section 80-511 – Total and permanent disability. 178 Page 967

Proposed Ordinance #2024-13 - Committee Amendment #1 - Amending Chapter 80 - Personnel, Art. Item #35. 4 - Pension Plans and Retirement Benefits, Division 3 - General Employee Pension Plan Page 5 179 (a) Definition. As used in this division, a participant shall be deemed to be "totally and 180 permanently disabled" when the general employee pension plan board, on the basis of a medical 181 examination by a physician or physicians selected by the pension board, finds the employee: 182 183 (1) Work generally. To be totally and permanently prevented from engaging in any occupation 184 or employment for remuneration or profit as a result of bodily or mental injury or disease, 185 whether occupational or nonoccupational in cause; or 186 187 (2) Employment. To be totally and permanently prevented from continuing in their capacity 188 as an employee as a result of bodily or mental injury or disease, whether occupational or 189 nonoccupational in cause. 190 191 (b) Exclusions. Total and permanent disability, within the terms of this division, shall exclude 192 disability resulting from or consisting of chronic alcoholism, addiction to narcotics, engaging in 193 a felonious criminal act for which they are found guilty, or a willful effort on their part to bring 194 about the injury or illness to themselves or any other person or service in the armed forces of 195 any foreign country. 196 197 Section 80-510 – Total and permanent disability. 198 199 (a) Definition. As used in this division, a participant shall be deemed to be "totally and 200 permanently disabled" when the general employee pension plan board, on the basis of a 201 medical examination by a physician or physicians selected by the pension board, finds the 202 employee: 203 204 (1) Work generally. To be totally and permanently prevented from engaging in any 205 occupation or employment for remuneration or profit as a result of bodily or mental injury 206 or disease, whether occupational or nonoccupational in cause; or 207 208 (2) Employment. To be totally and permanently prevented from continuing in their 209 capacity as an employee as a result of bodily or mental injury or disease, whether 210 occupational or nonoccupational in cause. 211 212 (b) Exclusions. Total and permanent disability, within the terms of this division, shall 213 exclude disability resulting from or consisting of chronic alcoholism, addiction to narcotics, 214 engaging in a felonious criminal act for which they are found guilty, or a willful effort on 215 their part to bring about the injury or illness to themselves or any other person or service 216 in the armed forces of any foreign country. 217 218 Section 80-511 – Early retirement due to permanent disability. 219 220 Any employee who has completed a minimum of ten consecutive years of service and 221 sustains an injury or experiences a permanent health impairment to the extent of total 222 and permanent disability shall be eligible for retirement upon application and 223 certification by the general employee pension plan board that all of the criteria have 224 been met. The pension amount will be based upon section 80-508. There shall be no 225 reduction in benefit. Page 968

Proposed Ordinance #2024-13 - Committee Amendment #1 - Amending Chapter 80 - Personnel, Art. Item #35. 4 - Pension Plans and Retirement Benefits, Division 3 - General Employee Pension Plan Page 6 226 Section 80-512 – Commencement of disability benefits. 227 228 (a) Removed from payroll. A participant who files for a disability pension shall not work and 229 be kept on the active payroll and receive credited service from the inception of the disability 230 to the end of the first full calendar month following the date of application. 231 232 (b) Change in compensation; leave. During the application period above, the participant's 233 compensation shall not be increased. 234 235 (c) Commencement of benefits. The eligibility for payment of disability benefits under this 236 division shall commence, if approved, on the first day of the month following the application 237 period set forth in subsection (a). 238 239 Section 80-513 – Termination of employment. 240 241 (a) Forfeiture of participation. Any participant whose employment is terminated prior to the 242 date he becomes eligible for retirement benefits shall forfeit his status as a participant in the 243 pension plan and all accumulated credit for continuous service. 244 245 (b) Ten years' service. Any participant with a minimum of ten years of continuous service and 246 whose employment is terminated prior to the date he becomes eligible for retirement benefits 247 under sections 80-504—Normal retirement, 80-505—Early retirement, 80-506—Later 248 retirement or 80-510—Early retirement due to permanent disability, upon attaining the age 249 of 65 years, shall be eligible for pension benefits under the provisions of section 80-508— 250 Amount of retirement benefits, upon application to the pension board of trustees. The form 251 of the benefit will be based on the formula which was in effect at the time of termination. 252 253 (c) Layoffs. Upon recall, any participant whose employment is terminated due to a layoff and 254 is recalled within five years of layoff, may apply to the pension board to have their previous 255 service credits restored immediately. If they have withdrawn their contributions, they must 256 repay them as calculated by the city's actuary. A returning employee must make an election 257 to return previously refunded amounts, plus calculated interest, within 30 days of approval 258 of the general employee pension plan board. Contributions will be reimbursed based on the 259 gross amount received. Participants who are laid off and not recalled within five years shall 260 forfeit their status as a participant in the pension plan and all accumulated credit for 261 continuous service. 262 263 (d) Request for refund. When an employee leaves the employment of the city and is entitled to 264 withdraw his contributions with interest thereon at the rate of five percent per annum, 265 compounded annually from the last day of the plan year in which such contribution was 266 made to the earlier of the date of commencement of retirement income or the date on which 267 contributions are payable pursuant to the provisions of the plan, then he shall submit a 268 written notarized request for a refund of these contributions before payment shall be made. 269 Refunds will be issued 90 days from the date when the notarized request is received. 270 Contributions will automatically be refunded five years from date of separation. 271 Page 969

Proposed Ordinance #2024-13 - Committee Amendment #1 - Amending Chapter 80 - Personnel, Art. Item #35. 4 - Pension Plans and Retirement Benefits, Division 3 - General Employee Pension Plan Page 7 272 Section 80-514 – Cessation of disability pension benefits. 273 274 (a) A participant shall cease to qualify for disability pension benefits: 275 276 (1) Recovered. At the time that the general employee pension plan board determines, on 277 the basis of a medical examination by a physician or physicians selected by the pension 278 plan board, that a participant is no longer totally and permanently disabled or has 279 sufficiently recovered, but refuses to resume their regular occupation as an employee 280 or to be reemployed by the city in some other position for which they are suited or 281 which is appropriate to their training and experience; 282 283 (2) Refuses examination. When the participant refuses to undergo a medical examination 284 requested by the general employee pension plan board; or 285 286 (3) Age 65 years. On the first day of the month following the participant's 65th birthday. 287 288 (b) Upon the occurrence of the earliest of the above events, disability pension benefits shall 289 cease, except that, if the event of subsection (a)(3) of this section occurs, payment of the 290 normal retirement benefits shall commence on that date, in the same amount as the 291 disability pension benefits. 292 293 Section 80-515 – Effect of state workers’ compensation on disability benefits. 294 295 Any disability pension benefits received by a participant under the terms of this division 296 as the result of an injury or illness compensable under the workers' compensation laws of the 297 state shall be reduced by the amount of the workers' compensation payments actually received 298 by the participant. 299 300 Section 80-516 – Benefits to cease upon reemployment; exceptions. 301 302 The Internal Revenue Code has provided guidance that to be considered retired for 303 purposes of prohibitions against "in-service distributions," one must have an at least six-month 304 break before returning to employment with the same employer and that such a return cannot be 305 pre-planned at the time of retirement. If the individual is under the normal retirement age of 65, 306 the individual will be subject to an annual earnings limit of $30,000.00. 307 308 Any employee of the city who is receiving, or who shall receive, benefits under this 309 division, and who is thereafter reemployed by the city or appointed to any position by the mayor 310 or council bearing remuneration, shall cease to draw benefits during the period of reemployment. 311 Upon termination of the reemployment, the benefits shall be restored. The provisions of this 312 section shall not apply to any employee who receives remuneration as a result of being elected 313 or appointed to an elective or appointed office in the city, nor to any employee reemployed by 314 the city in a casual/seasonal capacity, not to exceed 180 calendar days. Employees would be 315 eligible to return to casual/seasonal status immediately following retirement. 316 Page 970

Proposed Ordinance #2024-13 - Committee Amendment #1 - Amending Chapter 80 - Personnel, Art. Item #35. 4 - Pension Plans and Retirement Benefits, Division 3 - General Employee Pension Plan Page 8 317 Casual/seasonal employees may be employed by the city on a temporary basis in order to 318 provide assistance for the following situations: 319 320 (a) Casual assistance. Employee is needed on a sporadic or on-call basis where hours 321 cannot be predetermined and vary greatly from week to week. Such employees may be 322 used as needed. 323 324 (b) Seasonal assistance. Employee is needed for peak operating seasons. 325 326 (c) Project assistance. Employee performs duties related to a specific project that has 327 defined objectives and an established time period of completion that does not exceed 328 180 calendar days. 329 330 (d) Primary incumbent replacement. Employee is needed to fulfill the job responsibilities 331 of the primary incumbent who is unable to perform such responsibilities for an 332 extended period of time. Such employees may be used for a maximum of 180 calendar 333 days or the length of time the incumbent is unable to perform the job responsibility, 334 whichever is less. 335 336 (e) Contracting. Any individual participating in the plan who contracts with the city or 337 represents any private enterprise that has a contract with an employer participating in 338 the plan must have a six-month separation from their effective date of retirement if the 339 individual is under 65. The city shall maintain, in a form prescribed by the human 340 resources director, a certification of the worker's status. The certification will be used 341 for a determination of the individual meeting the definition of eligible employees under 342 this section. 343 344 Section 80-517 – Benefit assignment, transfer, etc. 345 346 No participant or beneficiary under the plan shall assign, transfer, hypothecate, encumber, 347 commute, or anticipate any interest he may have in payments, funds, or contracts under this plan. 348 No interest shall in any way be subject to any legal process, levy of execution, attachment, or 349 garnishment proceedings for the payment of any claim against the participant or any beneficiary 350 under the plan, nor shall any such interest be subject to the jurisdiction of any bankruptcy court 351 or insolvency proceedings. 352 353 Section 80-518 – Contributions. 354 355 (a) Payroll deductions. 356 357 (1) Amount. For each year, while a participant of the plan, a participant shall contribute, 358 by payroll deductions, an amount equal to 3½ percent of his average actual monthly 359 earnings as described in section 80-508—Amount of retirement benefits (effective May 360 1, 1994). 361 362 (2) Employer contributions. The city, pursuant to the provisions of section 414(h)(2) of the 363 United States Internal Revenue Code (26 USC 414(h)(2)), shall pick up and pay the Page 971

Proposed Ordinance #2024-13 - Committee Amendment #1 - Amending Chapter 80 - Personnel, Art. Item #35. 4 - Pension Plans and Retirement Benefits, Division 3 - General Employee Pension Plan Page 9 364 contributions which would otherwise be payable by the employee under this section. 365 The contributions so picked up shall be treated as employer contributions for purposes 366 of determining the amounts of federal income taxes to be withheld from the employee's 367 compensation. 368 369 (3) Employee contributions picked up by city. Employee contributions picked up by the 370 city shall be paid from the same source of funds used for the payment of compensation 371 to an employee. A deduction shall be made from each employee's compensation equal 372 to the amount of the employee's compensation picked up by the employer. This 373 deduction, however, shall not reduce the employee's compensation for purposes of 374 computing benefits under the retirement system pursuant to this *division. 375 376 (4) Employee contributions credited. 377 378 a. Employee contributions shall be credited to a separate account within the 379 employee's individual account so that the amount contributed prior to the effective 380 date for the pickup of employee's contributions may be distinguished from the 381 amounts contributed on or after the effective date. 382 383 b. The contributions, although designated as employee contributions, are being paid 384 by the employer in lieu of the contributions by the employee. The employee will 385 not be given the option of choosing to receive the contributed amounts directly 386 instead of having them paid by the employer to the retirement system. 387 388 (b) City contributions. The city shall make such contributions as necessary to meet the 389 requirements of the plan. Effective May 1, 1994, the city shall pick up the employee 390 contributions by a reduction in current earnings. Such picked up contributions shall be 391 treated as employer contributions in determining tax treatment under the Internal Revenue 392 Code; however, the contributions so picked up shall be included in earnings for purposes of 393 the plan. Participant contributions which are picked up shall be treated, for all purposes of 394 this plan, in the same manner as participant contributions made prior to May 1, 1994. 395 396 (c) Other contributions. The general employee pension plan board shall receive all 397 appropriations, contributions and interest allowances as may be received from time to time 398 by the city from the state or any other source, and designated specifically for employee 399 pensions. 400 401 (d) Withdrawal from plan. A member who withdraws from the general employee pension plan 402 for any reason, other than retirement, death or disability, may request their accumulated 403 contributions, plus five percent interest, be paid to them after such date of withdrawal; 404 provided, however, their contributions shall not be refunded to them earlier than 90 days 405 after receipt of their notarized application for the same. 406 (e) Death of ineligible member. Upon the death of a member not eligible to retire under any 407 provision of this division, their employee contributions shall be payable in a single sum to 408 their designated beneficiary or their estate if no designation has been made. 409 410 Section 80-519 – City paramedics transferred to county. Page 972

Proposed Ordinance #2024-13 - Committee Amendment #1 - Amending Chapter 80 - Personnel, Art. Item #35. 4 - Pension Plans and Retirement Benefits, Division 3 - General Employee Pension Plan Page 10 411 412 Notwithstanding any other provision of this division, all persons employed by the city as 413 paramedics, who are transferred to the county emergency medical services department and who 414 make a written election to remain in the city general employee pension plan, shall continue to 415 be considered eligible employees within the meaning of the pension plan as long as they are 416 employed by the county emergency medical services department. All benefits for any such 417 paramedic shall be calculated as if the paramedic had remained a city employee during his 418 employment with the county emergency medical services department. 419 420 Section 80-520– General employee pension plan board; established; duties. 421 422 There is hereby established a general employee pension plan board, the duties of which 423 shall be to manage the general employee pension plan. 424 425 Section 80-521– Composition. 426 427 The general employee pension plan board shall consist of the following persons: 428 429 (1) Manager. The city manager. 430 431 (2) City officials. Two elected city officials who shall be appointed by the council 432 president, subject to confirmation of a voting majority of the city council at its annual 433 meeting. 434 435 (3) Participants. Three participants or retired participants of the plan who shall be elected 436 by the participants and retired participants of the plan. 437 438 (4) Controller/treasurer. The city controller/treasurer. 439 440 (5) Election. 441 442 (a) Such election shall be for three-year staggered terms, beginning July 1 and ending 443 June 30 three years later. A regular election for filling these positions will be held 444 the third week of June each year. 445 446 (b) In the first week of April of each year, the city clerk shall notify those eligible to 447 vote of the exact time and place of the election. Any general employee pension 448 plan member that is eligible to vote and appears on the listing of qualified voters 449 who will be unable to appear at the polling place on the date and time of the 450 election may cast his or her vote by absentee ballot in the general employee 451 pension plan election for the following reasons: 1) armed forces, 2) public service, 452 3) occupation, 4) sickness, 5) disability, 6) religion, 7) vacation, or 8) residency 453 outside of the Dover area which makes it infeasible to vote in person. 454 455 Section 80-522 – Term of office of members. 456 457 The term of office of each member of the general employee pension plan board, except the Page 973

Proposed Ordinance #2024-13 - Committee Amendment #1 - Amending Chapter 80 - Personnel, Art. Item #35. 4 - Pension Plans and Retirement Benefits, Division 3 - General Employee Pension Plan Page 11 458 city controller/treasurer, city manager, and elected city officials, shall commence on the first day 459 of the month following their election and continue for a period of three years or until their 460 successor shall be elected and qualified. 461 462 Section 80-523 – Officers and ex officio members. 463 464 The general employee pension plan board shall elect a chairperson. The city 465 controller/treasurer shall be the pension fund treasurer and their bond shall cover all monies 466 deposited with them. 467 468 Section 80-524 – Vacancies. 469 470 If a vacancy occurs in the offices of the general employee pension plan board, the vacancy 471 shall be filled for the unexpired term within 60 days and in the same manner as the office was 472 originally filled. Should a member of the pension plan board cease to be in the employ of the 473 city, other than by retiring in accordance with this division, their office as a member of the board 474 shall be declared vacant. 475 476 Section 80-525 – Compensation of members. 477 478 Members of the general employee pension plan board shall serve without compensation. 479 480 Section 80-526 – Meetings. 481 482 The general employee pension plan board shall make all rules as to the time and place of 483 meetings; and a majority of its membership shall be required to transact pension board business. 484 485 Section 80-527 – Powers. 486 487 The general employee pension plan board, in administering the pension plan, shall have 488 the following powers in carrying out the purposes thereof: 489 490 (1) Payment of funds. To pay funds to those entitled to receive them. The 491 controller/treasurer shall sign all vouchers for the disbursements of the funds and shall 492 report to the general employee pension board all financial transactions on an annual 493 basis; 494 495 (2) Purchase annuity contracts. To purchase and pay the costs of group annuity contracts 496 from any insurance company for the benefit of participants; 497 498 (3) Employment of agents, employees, etc. To employ agents, employees, or experts to 499 assist the pension board in carrying out the provisions of this division, including an 500 agent to advise and make recommendations concerning the investment of funds, and to 501 pay reasonable compensation for those services, and the compensation may be paid 502 from income or corpus of the pension fund or by direct appropriation by the city council 503 as the pension board and the city council may determine; 504 Page 974

Proposed Ordinance #2024-13 - Committee Amendment #1 - Amending Chapter 80 - Personnel, Art. Item #35. 4 - Pension Plans and Retirement Benefits, Division 3 - General Employee Pension Plan Page 12 505 (4) Investments. To invest and reinvest money in the pension fund, without any limitation, 506 in United States or state municipal bonds or group annuity contracts. Money in the 507 pension fund may also be invested and reinvested in other types of bonds, stocks, and 508 securities to the extent the pension board may deem best and as is not prohibited by 509 any law now or hereafter in force limiting the investments of the trustees. The pension 510 board may from time to time change the investments of the fund and, to this end, may 511 make sales of any investment privately, without advertisement and without the 512 necessity of any court order, upon the terms that the pension board deems proper. The 513 funds and investments may also be from time to time turned over to and placed in the 514 custody of any fiscal agent designated by the pension board; 515 516 (5) Contracts. To generally contract in matters relevant to effectuating and achieving the 517 purposes of this plan; 518 519 (6) Pension benefits. To receive and pay out pension benefits in accordance with the 520 provisions of this division, or designate a fiscal agent to receive and pay out the pension 521 benefits; 522 523 (7) Rules and regulations. To make rules and regulations as may be necessary to effectuate 524 this subdivision. 525 526 Section 80-528 – City solicitor to render legal services. 527 528 The city solicitor shall render whatever legal service the general employee pension plan 529 board shall require. 530 531 Section 80-529 – Appeals. 532 533 Any employee dissatisfied with the action of the general employee pension plan board shall 534 have the right to appeal to the city council within 30 days from the date of formal notification of 535 that action. 536 537 ADOPTED: * 538 539 SYNOPSIS 540 541 The amendments include establishing an annual cost of living adjustment (COLA) and renumbering 542 sections 80-510 to 80-511, and 80-511 to 80-510 to place the definitions section first. These amendments 543 were recommended by the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee meeting on April 09, 2024. 544 545 546 Action History 547 05/13/2024 – Scheduled for Final Reading - Council 548 04/22/2024 – First Reading - Council Page 975