Regular City Council Packet

CITY OF DOVER, DELAWARE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, November 10, 2025 at 6:30 PM City Hall Council Chambers, 15 Loockerman Plaza, Dover, Delaware AGENDA 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://tinyurl.com/bdchf2rb Event number: 2530 878 0957 Event password: DOVER (if needed) If you are new to WebEx, get the app now at www.webex.com/ to be ready when the meeting starts. The meeting can also be viewed on Comcast Channel 14, Verizon Channel 20, and on the City's Streaming Player located at www.cityofdover.com under "Quick Links". OPEN FORUM - 15 Minutes Prior to Official Meeting (6:15 p.m.) The “Open Forum” segment is provided to extend the opportunity to the general public to share their questions, thoughts, comments, concerns, and complaints. Discussion of any item appearing on the agenda as a public hearing is prohibited during the Open Forum as an opportunity will be provided during consideration of that item. Citizen comments are limited to three (3) minutes. Council is prohibited from taking action since they are not in official session; however, they may schedule such items as regular agenda items and act upon them in the future. INVOCATION - Elder Ellis B. Louden PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Councilman Anderson ADOPTION OF AGENDA 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. Page 1

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - November 10, 2025 PAGE 2 PROCLAMATIONS 1. Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Day and Geography Awareness Week PUBLIC HEARING FINAL READING - The First Reading of the Proposed Ordinance was accomplished during the Council meeting of September 22, 2025. The ordinance is available at the entrance of the Council Chambers and on the City's website at www.cityofdover.com under "Government." 2. Proposed Ordinance #2025-15 - Lands of Bayhealth Medical Center, Inc. at 600 South State Street Ordinance #2025-15 Review of a Rezoning application for a parcel of land consisting of 1.0053 acres +/-. The property is zoned RGO (General Residence and Office Zone) and partially subject to the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone). The proposed zoning for the property is IO (Institutional and Office Zone) and partially subject to the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone). The property is located at the southwest corner of South State Street and South Street. (The owner of record is Bayhealth Medical Center, Inc. Property Address: 600 South State Street, Dover DE. Tax Parcel: ED-05-077.13-02-48.00-000. Planning Reference: Z-25- 01. Council District 2.) CONSENT AGENDA ADOPTION OF MINUTES 3. Regular City Council Meeting of October 27, 2025 COMMITTEE REPORTS 4. Council Committee of the Whole Report of October 28, 2025 Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee 5. City of Dover Infrastructure Modernization Project (Joseph Simmons, Information Technology Director) (Committee Action Not Required) 6. Quality of Life Enforcement Initiative Final Report (Thomas Johnson, Chief of Police) (Committee Action Not Required) Utility Committee 7. Evaluation of Proposals - SCADA Equipment Upgrade (Jason Lyon, Water & Wastewater Director) Page 2

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - November 10, 2025 PAGE 3 (Committee Recommendation: Award the contract to Avista for the SCADA Equipment Upgrade, RFP #26-0002WW, for the amount of $480,613.) 8. Sole Source Procurement - Cartanza RTU/RTAC Replacement (EE2602) (Paul Waddell, Electric Director) (Committee Recommendation: Approval of the Sole Source Procurement of SEL RTU/RTAC hardware and associated engineering services for Project EE2602.) 9. Sole Source Procurement - ABB to SEL Relay Replacement (EE2615) (Paul Waddell, Electric Director) (Committee Recommendation: Approval of the Sole Source Procurement of SEL relay hardware and services for Project EE2615.) Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee 10. County and Municipal General Pension Plan Update (Naomi Poole, Human Resources Director, Patricia Marney, Controller/Treasurer, David S. Hugg, III, City Manager) (Committee Action Not Required) 11. Review of The People's Community Center Economic Development Fund Application (Councilwoman Hall and David S. Hugg, III, City Manager) (Committee Recommendation: Refer the application back to staff and have it brought back before the committee by the end of the year.) 12. Proposed Ordinance #2025-18 - Amending Chapter 2 - Administration, Article V - Finance, by adding Sec. 2-427 - New Vehicle Billable Rates (Jason Lyon, Water & Wastewater Director) (Committee Recommendation: Forward Proposed Ordinance #2025-18 to council for approval. Once adopted, staff will implement new billable rates within thirty (30) days.) 13. Proposed Ordinance #2025-20 - Amending Chapter 106 - Traffic and Vehicles, Article I - In General, by adding Sec. 106-18 - Strictly Enforced (Councilman Anderson, Chief Johnson) (Committee Recommendation: Forward Proposed Ordinance #2025-20 to council for approval.) 14. Proposed Ordinance #2025-21 - Amending Chapter 106 - Traffic and Vehicles, Article III - Stopping, Standing, and Parking, by adding Sec. 106-139 - Pedestrian Safety (Councilman Anderson, Chief Johnson) (Committee Recommendation: Forward Proposed Ordinance #2025-21 back to staff to incorporate the edits discussed and bring it back to the committee for further consideration.) Page 3

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - November 10, 2025 PAGE 4 15. City of Dover Vehicle Use Policy (Councilman Anderson) (Committee Recommendation: That a policy be properly drafted and forwarded to council, with consideration of the insurance and cost factors.) 16. Discussion - Open Forum Improvements (Councilwoman Arndt) (Committee Action Not Required) MONTHLY REPORTS - September 2025 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 MAYOR CHRISTIANSEN 22. Code Board of Appeals - One-Year Term to Expire May 2026 A. Belinda L. Main 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 NOVEMBER 24, 2025. The ordinance is available at the entrance of the Council Chambers, on the City's website at www.cityofdover.com under "Government," or by contacting the City Clerk's Office at 302-736-7008 or cityclerk@dover.de.us. 23. Proposed Ordinance #2025-18 - Amending Chapter 2 - Administration, Article V - Finance, by adding Sec. 2-427 - New Vehicle Billable Rates (Jason Lyon, Water & Wastewater Director) 24. Proposed Ordinance #2025-20 - Amending Chapter 106 - Traffic and Vehicles, Article I - In General, by adding Sec. 106-18 - Strictly Enforced (Councilman Anderson, Chief Johnson) CITY MANAGER’S ANNOUNCEMENTS MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS COUNCIL MEMBERS’ ANNOUNCEMENTS ADJOURNMENT Page 4

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - November 10, 2025 PAGE 5 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 5

Item #1. Page 6

Item #2. City of Dover PETITION TO AMEND ZONING DISTRICT Public Hearing & Final Action before the Dover City Council on November 10, 2025 Recommendation from Planning Commission from Meeting on October 20, 2025 With Staff and Development Advisory Committee Review Application: Lands of Bayhealth Medical Center, Inc. at 600 South State Street Rezoning RG-O/SWPOZ to IO/SWPOZ Owner: Bayhealth Medical Center, Inc. Address: 600 South State Street, Dover DE Location: Located at the southwest corner of South State Street and South Street Tax Parcel: ED-05-077.13-02-48.00-000 Size: 1.0053 +/- acres Present Use: Office Building 2019 Comprehensive Plan – Land Use Category: Institutional Present Zoning: RG-O (General Residence and Office Zone) SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone) Proposed Zoning: IO (Institutional and Office Zone) SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone) Reason for Request: Rezoning the property for a future hospital expansion File Number: Z-25-01 Ordinance Number: 2025-15 Planning Commission Recommendation: The Application Z-25-01 Lands of Bayhealth Medical Center, Inc. at 600 South State Street was represented by Mr. Gregg Moore of Becker Morgan Group on behalf of the property owner. A Public Hearing was conducted on October 20, 2025 where six (6) members 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 RG-O/SWPOZ to IO (Institutional and Office Zone) with SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone) resulted in a 7-0 vote in favor (two members absent). (Draft Meeting Minutes attached.) P. O. Box 475 Dover, DE 19903 Page 7 Community Excellence Through Quality Service

Item #2. Z-25-01 Lands of Bayhealth Medical Center, Inc. at 600 South State Street Planning Commission Recommendation Report of October 20, 2025 Page 2 of 9 APPLICATION: Z-25-01 Lands of Bayhealth Medical Center, Inc. at 600 South State Street, Dover DE: Rezoning RG-O/SWPOZ and IO/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 600 South State Street as a parcel of land consisting of 1.0053 acres +/-. The property is zoned RG-O (General Residence and Office Zone) and partially subject to the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone). The proposed zoning for the property is IO (Institutional and Office Zone) and partially subject to the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone). The property is located at the southwest corner of South State Street and South Street. The owner of record is Bayhealth Medical Center, Inc. Property Address: 600 South State Street. Tax Parcel: ED-05-077.13-01-48.00-000. Council District 2. Ordinance #2025-15. See submitted Rezoning Plan sheet (print date 10/8/2025) for site location and information. The First Reading was completed by the City Council on September 22, 2025 referring the Application to the Planning Commission for Public Hearing, Review, and Recommendation. Existing Property: The property currently includes a two-story brick building originally built as a residence and later converted to offices upon purchase by Bayhealth. It is at the corner of South State Street and South Street. This Application only seeks rezoning of the property from RG-O to IO; the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone) zoning designation will remain. The applicant is seeking rezoning to allow for future development of the property as associated with the Bayhealth Medical Center – Kent Campus. Any redevelopment of the site will be subject to a separate application submission for plans or permits. Surrounding Land Uses The surrounding parcels are zoned a mix of institutional and residential: IO (Institutional and Office Zone), and R-8 (One Family Residence Zone). The City’s Historic District Zone involves properties fronting on South State Street north of South Street and continuing north towards The Green and beyond. The property to the north across South Street is the location of the large surface parking lot for the Hospital and another multi-story professional office building zoned IO. To the northeast there are several single family detached residences facing South State Street and then more residential buildings along Elm Terrance. Surrounding the subject site on the west and south is the main parcel of the Bayhealth Medical Center hospital zoned IO. Also zoned IO across South State Street is another parking lot, day surgery building, and child day care associated with the Hospital along Scull Terrace and the Holy Cross Church and School property. Page 8

Item #2. Z-25-01 Lands of Bayhealth Medical Center, Inc. at 600 South State Street Planning Commission Recommendation Report of October 20, 2025 Page 3 of 9 II. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE REVIEW In the 2019 Comprehensive Plan, the Land Development Plan (Map 12-1) recommends that this property be used for Institutional Land Uses. The discussion of this Land Use category and the associated goals and policies are listed in the 2019 Comprehensive Plan excerpts presented below (pages 12-14 and 12-15); see excerpt below: GOVERNMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL LAND USES As the capital city and County seat of government, Dover has an above average amount of land area dedicated to government use. The City of Dover has its facilities here as well (See Chapter 8 for more detailed discussion). The Delaware Legislature and all major departments of State Government except the Department of Agriculture are headquartered within the City limits. Dover is also home to the offices of the Kent County Levy Court and to numerous Federal agency offices. All branches of the judiciary are represented in central Dover including the State Supreme Court, Delaware Court of Chancery, Kent County Superior Court, Delaware Family Court, and the Justice of the Peace Court. As a central City, Dover is also the location of a growing medical services community with Bayhealth Medical Center (Kent General Hospital) at its center and with a growing array of services and facilities across a wide spectrum of health care specialties. The City has experienced a prolonged period of growth and development, and numerous other institutions including colleges and public schools within the community have expanded and many others have plans for future expansion. Several charter and private schools are also located within the City. Assumptions: Government and Institutional Land Uses 1. As the State Capital and County Seat, Dover projects a prominent public image as a center of government. 2. Dover will continue to be the home of major institutions including hospitals and medical centers, places of learning, and agencies providing services to its citizens. 3. Employment in the government, education, and medical sectors will continue to play an important role in Dover’s economic vitality. Goal: Government and Institutional Land Uses Maintain and improve the City’s position as a center of government, education, and medicine through support of existing institutions and encouraging well-designed campuses that are integrated into the community and have room to expand. Policies: Government and Institutional Land Use 1. Preserve and promote the long-term vitality of major institutions and governmental entities through appropriate zoning, providing protection from incompatible uses, and providing ample land for future expansion. Page 9

Item #2. Z-25-01 Lands of Bayhealth Medical Center, Inc. at 600 South State Street Planning Commission Recommendation Report of October 20, 2025 Page 4 of 9 2. Promote alternative modes of access to government facilities and institutions by requiring pedestrian and bicycle amenities, and bus shelters. Ensure that these areas are visually appealing with appropriate landscaping. 3. In cooperation with the State of Delaware continue planning for the “Capital Complex” that would establish locations for State office expansion and public improvements in central Dover. 4. Participate in the “master planning” process for the development of strategies and vision plans for institutional facilities and campuses. Also encourage approval by the Planning Commission of Master Plans for multi-phased construction projects as outlined in the Zoning Ordinance. 5. Recognize the importance of higher education facilities, employees and students to the economy of Dover and their value as a college community, Recommendations: Major Institutional and Governmental The Land Development Plan recommendations for major institutional and governmental uses are presented in the following paragraphs: Hospital Complex Bayhealth Medical Center (Kent General Hospital) is a major Institutional land use within the central area of Dover. The Land Development Plan designates the hospital proper and associated hospital properties including the South Street parking lot, Central Facilities Building, day surgery center, the Scull Mansion and hospital day care center for Institutional use. The Land Development Plan also recommends inclusion of the Holy Cross Church and School complex in the Institutional use designation in recognition of the existing use of the premises and its adjacency to the hospital properties referenced above. The Rezoning Request to IO (Institutional and Office Zone) is consistent with the Land Use Classification of Institutional. 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. IO (Institutional and Office) Institutional Institutional uses may be conditionally permitted in residential zones III. ZONING REVIEW Request for IO (Institutional and Office Zone) Zoning The following code excerpt of the IO zoning district is provided from Article 3 §10 of the Zoning Ordinance. Page 10

Item #2. Z-25-01 Lands of Bayhealth Medical Center, Inc. at 600 South State Street Planning Commission Recommendation Report of October 20, 2025 Page 5 of 9 Article 3 Section 10. Institutional and office zone (IO). 10.1 Uses permitted. In an institutional and office zone (IO), 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) Business, professional, or governmental offices. (b) Banks. (c) Research, design, and development laboratories. (d) Public and institutional uses including hospitals, medical clinics, libraries, police stations, courthouses, transit centers, schools, colleges, universities, places of public assembly, philanthropic and charitable institutions, parks, playgrounds, public indoor recreation centers, athletic fields. (e) Public utility rights-of-way and structures necessary to serve areas within the city. (f) Child day care centers, provided they are established in accordance with all applicable state regulations pertaining to child care and provided that they are established and maintained in accordance with article 5, section 14 of this ordinance. (g) Emergency shelters and transitional housing. (h) Adult day care facilities provided they are established in accordance with all applicable state regulations pertaining to adult care and provided that they are established and maintained in accordance with article 5, section 22 of this ordinance. 10.2 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) Firearm ranges, prisons, and correctional facilities. (b) Public incinerators. (c) Hotels and restaurants. 10.3 Accessory uses. The following uses shall be permitted accessory to other permitted uses on a lot. (a) Clinics, cafeterias, and recreational facilities. (b) Motor vehicle storage and repair facilities accessory to a public or institutional use. (c) Restaurants that are on a campus and intended to support users of the campus. 10.4 Uses prohibited. The following uses are prohibited: (a) Landfills, dumps. 10.5 Enclosed buildings. All permitted uses and all storage accessory thereto, other than offstreet parking, shall be carried on in buildings fully enclosed on all sides, except for outdoor eating areas associated with restaurants approved by the city planner. 10.6 Performance standards. All uses are subject to performance standards as set forth in article 5, section 8.1. 10.7 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. Page 11

Item #2. Z-25-01 Lands of Bayhealth Medical Center, Inc. at 600 South State Street Planning Commission Recommendation Report of October 20, 2025 Page 6 of 9 SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone) The property is partially located within the SWPOZ (Tier 3: Excellent Recharge Area) found in Article 3 Section 29.7 of the Zoning Ordinance. The SWPOZ does include a prohibition of certain uses where the activity may be harmful to water resources; see Zoning Ordinance, Article 3 §29.51. 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. IV. RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING STAFF: This Request is to rezone lands from RG-O (General Residence and Office Zone) to IO (Institutional and Office Zone) and to remain within the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone). The current RG-O zone allows for a mix of residential, office, and some limited commercial uses especially within areas also location within the H (Historic District zone); some of these uses are permitted uses while others require conditional use review. The RG-O zone while permitting offices does not allow hospitals. See Zoning Ordinance, Article 3 §9. The IO Zone generally does not allow residential dwelling units instead focusing on offices, public buildings, places of public assembly, institutional uses, and recreation related facilities. The additional uses in the IO zone beyond office uses are schools and institutional buildings. The IO zone also allows for uses including Child Day Care Centers and Adult Day Care Facilities that would be allowed in any zone per the Zoning Ordinance, Article 5 §22. In the IO zone, the allowable residential uses are related to institutional facilities like housing at colleges, emergency shelter facilities, and transitional housing (allowed by definition in a single-family house setting). The SWPOZ has provisions to protect underground water resources. As part of the process to change the zoning district of a property outlined in Zoning Ordinance, Article 10 Section 5, the City Planner must evaluate the following factors when considering the request: Article 10 § 5.22 City planner report. For each proposed zoning text amendment, the city planner shall issue a report to the planning commission and city council, including comments from other reviewing agencies, that evaluates the following factors: (A) Whether such change is consistent with the aims and principles embodied in the ordinance as to the particular zones concerned; and (B) Whether such proposed amendment is consistent with the aims of the comprehensive plan of the city. Staff recommends that the Rezoning be granted to IO (Institutional and Office Zone). The proposed zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan for the Institutional Land Use Category classification, as it fits the goals of the Comprehensive Plan by grouping similar institutional activities together as this entire City block is the location of the hospital facility and looks toward opportunities for future expansion. Rezoning to IO is one of the possible zoning districts eligible for consideration in this Land Use Category classification. The IO zone permits the institutional use as the hospital. Page 12

Item #2. Z-25-01 Lands of Bayhealth Medical Center, Inc. at 600 South State Street Planning Commission Recommendation Report of October 20, 2025 Page 7 of 9 Staff also recommends that the property remains subject to the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone). The purposes of the SWPOZ will help to protect underground water resource and aquifers of our water supply. The 2019 Comprehensive Plan encourages the long-term vitality of existing major institutions such as the hospital/medical care facilities. These land holdings over an area of potential expansion. There is existing infrastructure for water, sanitary sewer, and electric services in the vicinity of the property (and could be expanded if necessary); and the police, fire, and emergency medical services already service the area. 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 IO (Institutional and Office Zone) zoning district and the SWPOZ. 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 certain uses or redevelopment of the site. 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 City Council for their consideration of the Rezoning Application. RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION: At the Hybrid (In-Person and Virtual) Planning Commission Meeting of October 20, 2025, the Rezoning Application Z-25-01 was represented by Mr. Gregg Moore of the Becker Morgan Group Page 13

Item #2. Z-25-01 Lands of Bayhealth Medical Center, Inc. at 600 South State Street Planning Commission Recommendation Report of October 20, 2025 Page 8 of 9 on behalf of the property owner Bayhealth Medical Center, Inc. During the Public Hearing, six (6) members of the public spoke, and no written comments were received. The Planning Commission’s motion was to recommend approval for Rezoning Application Z-25-01 Lands of Bayhealth Medical Center, Inc. at 600 S. State Street from RG-O (General Residence and Office Zone) to IO (Institutional and Office Zone) and remaining subject to the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone) and resulted in a vote of 7-0 in favor of rezoning (two members absent). The reasons cited for the recommendation of approval include the reason that the entire block would then be the same IO zoning (uniform zoning for the block); the applicant’s presentation; compatibility with existing land uses in the area; adequate public services and infrastructure; consistency with the City’s 2019 Comprehensive Plan; and with reference to the Development Advisory Committee Report which included the Planning Staff’s recommendations of approval (noting uses of the zoning district, compatibility with Comprehensive Plan, and presence of existing infrastructure). See also the included excerpt of the DRAFT Meeting Minutes of the October 20, 2025 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. Following any decision made by City Council regarding 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 new use, redevelopment 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 property is subject to certain requirements of the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone) related to development. 3) 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. 4) The applicant shall be aware that any future use and/or buildings may be subject to 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 • Application Z-25-01 Submission: Existing Conditions Plan Sheet Page 14

Item #2. Z-25-01 Lands of Bayhealth Medical Center, Inc. at 600 South State Street Planning Commission Recommendation Report of October 20, 2025 Page 9 of 9 • Development Advisory Committee Comments from City of Dover Departments of Public Works and Water & Wastewater, Electric Department, City Office of the Fire Marshal, DelDOT, Kent Conservation District, and Dover/Kent County MPO • Excerpt from DRAFT Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of October 20, 2025 • Proposed Ordinance #2025-15 Page 15

Item #2. Page 16

24x36 24x36 Item #2. WWW.beckermorgan.com 1- BAYHEALTH 713-0 5-07 F.H. 02-0 1-00001 X X X 24x36 LANDS N/F SOUTH STREET 180 24x36 13 HOLDEN LEASING, LLC PARCEL ED IO 8 ZON X LANDS N/F 02-05-07713-01-1800-00001 SW PO TM: 02 05 07713 01 4000 000 N ZONED IO N DEED: D 4274/26 MENTOR PROPERTIES 1, LLC E ET STR 13 TM: 02 05 07713 01 4200 000 LANDS N/F X Z ER ET 24x36 ZONING: C3 DEED: D 8681/27 JCD PROPERTIES, LLC WAT 8 S TRE 02-05-07713-01 24x36 1.35 AC. TH TM: 02 05 07713 01 4400 000 TORY SOU EXISTING ONE S ZONING: C3 4800-00001 X 1.01 AC.± 0.26 AC. DEED: D 3418/95 BAYHEALTH BRICK BUILDING . 20 ZONING: C3 SCULL PROPERTY 2-05-07713-01-5100-00001 0.77 AC. AVE X ZONED IO SITE 560 GOVERNORS 24x36 24x36 LANDS N/F 1- 2501-000 T.P.: 2-05-07713-0 LANDS OF JCD PROPERTIES, LLC X 9 1.75 ACRES BAYHEALTH MEDICAL TM: 02 05 07713 01 4300 000 ARCH I T E C TURE 9 SOUTH GOVERN CENTER, INC. DEED: D 3418/95 F.H. SITE 28 SOUTH STATE STREET 24x36 24x36 TM: 02 05 07713 02 0100 000 ZONING: C3 9 ENG I NE E R I NG F.H. DEED: V 48/146 FCM SOUTH GOVERN 0.87 AC. STORY BLDG. SWPO 10 Y EXISTING ONE ZONING: IO Z HWA 2 ORS AVE. MAN RESOURCE BAYHEALTH B ECKER M ORGAN G ROUP ARCHITECTURE - ENGINEERING DELAWARE - MARYLAND - NORTH CAROLINA 0.91 AC. N 03 BAYHEALTH HU ORS AVE. KENT CAMPUS Dover, DE 24x36 ° 32 600 GOVE RN T HIG 24x36 152 SOUTH STATE STREE 02-05-07713-01-5200-00001 ' 40" 3 01 4400 000 S. G ORS AVENUE T.P.: 02 05 0771 309 S. Governors Ave. SPA E 0.77± ACRES ONT 12.12 ACRES Dover, DE 19904 CES OVE 12 ZONED IO Ph. 302.734.7950 24x36 RNO 9 DUP HOPE STREET Fax 302.734.7965 24x36 RS F.H. F.D.C. TH BAYHEALTH Salisbury, MD C-PR-L-TREE-PS AVE SOU HOPE STREET PARCEL 24x36 VAN C-PR-L-TREE-PS C-PR-L-TREE-PS . 100. 00' 312 West Main St. Suite 300 Salisbury, MD 21801 24x36 SWPO VAN FIRE FIP F.H. R.O .W. RADIUS: 1004.93' Z CITY OF DOVER - KENT COUNTY, DELAWARE CITY OF DOVER - KENT COUNTY, DELAWARE Ph. 410.546.9100 Fax 410.546.5824 24x36 477. 36' ARC LENGTH: 279.86' VICINITY MAP SCALE: 1" = 1000' LOCATION MAP SCALE: 1" = 400' Wilmington, NC 24x36 668. CHORD BEARING: N 4° 26' 02" W 17' 2-05-07713-01-5200-00001 2019184-51RZ-V-Map-1000 2019-184-50RZ-V-Map-400 9 9 CHORD LENGTH: 278.96' 63.00' 3205 Randall Parkway, Suite 211 24x36 8 LANE R.O.W. Wilmington, North Carolina 28403 Ph. 910.341.7600 24x36 SIRC FIP Fax 910.341.7506 24x36 F.H. SDH FIP www.beckermorgan.com 24x36 SIRC F.H. F.D.C. F.D.C. 24x36 10 FIRE LANE FCM 24x36 CATH PO LAB NO 50.0 0 PARKING FIRE F.D.C. EXISTING R.O. ' EXISTING CENTRAL SERVICES 24x36 LANE 24x36 W. ONE STORY N . C-PR-L-TREE-C V BRICK BUILDING FIP EXISTING C-PR-L-TREE-C V SWPO 7,700 S.F. BUILDING ZN 73° 21' 04 F.D.C. FOOTPRINT: 20,800 S.F. GAS BAYHEALTH - KENT CAMPUS 24x36 24x36 METER AMBULANCE ER ENTRANCE F.F. ELEV.: 22.16' EXISTING 3 STORY BRICK BUILDING FOOTPRINT : 156,500 S.F. F.H. 24x36 T RAMP RAMP 24x36 "E TRE DUMPSTER 50.00' E FIP COURTYARD EXISTING 24x36 R.O.W. VAN DOCK SERVICE 24x36 F.H. BAYHEALTH MEDICAL CENTER, INC LANDS OF PARKING GARAGE SWPO YARD Z TRUCK DOCK 1 EXISTING ROOF TOP FOOTPRINT: 28,800 S.F. E S T.P.: 2-05-07713-01-5200-000 HELIPAD 24x36 12.1226 AC. FIVE FLOORS - 371 SPACES TRUCK DOCK 2 24x36 COURTYARD DEED REF.: D 5149-337 FIRST FLOOR ELEV.: 29.83' ZONING - IO TRUCK DOCK 3 24x36 HOP FIP DUMPSTER 24x36 COMPACTOR PO 24x36 24x36 SWPO Z EXISTING BRIDGE PO PO 24x36 24x36 4 PO PO PO PO F.D.C. PO FDC F.D.C. PO PO 24x36 29 COURTYARD 24x36 COURTYARD 24x36 F.H. 24x36 45 S PAC ES PROJECT TITLE EXISTING 6 STORY TOWER WELCOME EXISTING BAYHEALTH SOUTH STRE 24x36 16 2004 - 3 STORY EXPANSION CENTER PODIUM BUILDING 24x36 12" W 1986 ADDITION MEDICAL SWPOZ EXISTING FIRE 24x36 ° 03' FDC COMMAND CENTER CENTER, INC 24x36 426.29' N 87 LANDS OF BAYHEALTH MEDICAL CENTER, INC SITE DATA - TAX PARCEL: 02-05-077.13-01-4800-000 REZONING 2019-184-50RZ-Site-Data 24x36 T.P.: 2-05-07713-01-1800-000 1. OWNER OF RECORD: BAYHEALTH MEDICAL CENTER, INC. TAX PARCEL: 24x36 .C. DEED REF.: D 2750/94 620 SOUTH STATE STREET F.D ZONING - IO DOVER, DE 19901 02-05-077.13-01-4800-000 FDC 24x36 F.D.C. F.D.C. C/O : MIKE METZING 24x36 PHONE : 302-744-7027 mike_metzing@bayhealth.org F.H. 3 2. ENGINEER OF RECORD: BECKER MORGAN GROUP, INC. ET 738 SOUTH GOVERNORS AVENUE SWPOZ FIPC DOVER, DE 19901 C-PR-L-TREE-AR 24x36 24x36 X X X X X X C/O : GREGORY V. MOORE S 16° 17' 57" E X X X FIPC X 187.22' PHONE : 302-734-7950 600 SOUTH STATE STREET F.H. 3. TOTAL ACREAGE OF SITE: 1.0053 ACRES CITY OF DOVER N 73° 21' 04" E 24x36 8 C-PR-L-TREE-PS 24x36 C-PR-L-TREE-PS FPK X 4. PROPERTY MAP NO.: 02-05-077.13-01-4800-000 KENT COUNTY, DELAWARE 3 4 5. ZONING CLASSIFICATION: EXISTING: RGO - GENERAL RESIDENCE AND OFFICE ZONE SHEET TITLE FIRC 3 SWPOZ - SOURCE WATER PROTECTION OVERLAY ZONE 24x36 8 24x36 579.0 PROPOSED: IO - INSTITUTIONAL & OFFICE 6' 6 REZONING PLAN SCM 6. TOTAL AREA TO BE REZONED TO IO: 1.0053 ACRES SWPOZ N 77° 21' 05" E 24x36 24x36 EX. TW GENERAL NOTES 2019-184-50RZ-G-Notes 5 0 FRAME STORY FCM D HOU 1. THE BOUNDARY LINES PORTRAYED HEREON HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED BASED SOLELY ON PHYSICAL SE APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF 24x36 F.H. EX. TWO STORY 50.00' EVIDENCE DISCOVERED IN THE FIELD IN CONJUNCTION WITH DETERMINATIONS DERIVED FROM SOURCE OF F.H. B-1 24x36 BRICK HOUSE SOURCE WATER PROTECTION TITLE AND ADJACENT DEED RECORD INFORMATION. 60.00 ' (OFFICE) R.O.W. OVERLAY ZONE - TIER 3 (SWPOZ) 2. B-2 NO TITLE EXAMINATION FURNISHED TO OR PERFORMED BY THE PREPARERS HEREOF. PROPERTY SHOWN C.O.D. NO: Z-25-01 R.O. HEREON IS SUBJECT TO ANY RIGHT-OF-WAY, FDC EASEMENTS, RESTRICTIONS, ETC. AS MAY BE SHOWN OR 24x36 W. NOTED IN ANY RECORD, PUBLIC OR OTHERWISE, OR ANY REQUIREMENT OR REGULATION OF ANY PUBLIC 24x36 F.H. X S 01 PARCEL TO BE 3. AGENCY. PORTIONS OF THE PROPERTIES SHOWN. HEREON ARE LOCATED WITHIN THE SWPOZ (SOURCE WATER ° 34' EX 3 STORY 34" W REZONED TO IO PROTECTION OVERLAY ZONE). HOWEVER, THE CITY GOF DOVER ZONING ORDINANCE (ARTICLE 3 - 29.79), 232.56' X BRICK BU ILD IN 211.99' 24x36 PROVIDES FOR AN EXEMPTION FROM THE REQUIREMENTS 7,800 S.F. AND RESTRICTIONS OF THE SOURCE WATER 24x36 RADIUS: 1402.69' 1.0053 ACRES SWP OVERLAY ZONE BASED ON THE ABOVE S. ST 530 MENTIONED AT E STPROPERTIES LOCATION WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN . ARC LENGTH: 199.25' DEVELOPMENT TARGET AREA. 0 25 50 100 S. S X FCM OZ CHORD BEARING: S 2° 08' 51" E LANDS OF 4. BASED ON THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP (FIRM), 24x36 F.H. TAT CHORD LENGTH: 199.08' BAYHEALTH MEDICAL CENTER, INC PANEL 169 OF 435 COMMUNITY PANEL NO. 10001C0169J, DATED JULY 07, 2014, THE PROPERTY SHOWN 24x36 E S X T.P.: 02-05-07713-01-4800-000 HEREON IS LOCATED WITHIN ZONE X (AREA OF MINIMAL FLOOD HAZARD). Do Not Explode - Select Scale FCM TRE 1.0053 AC. 5. BECKER MORGAN GROUP, INC. CERTIFIES THAT THERE ARE NO FRESH WATER WETLANDS LOCATED SCALE: 1" = 50' 24x36 X SIRC ET FCM WITHIN THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS. 24x36 X Ex. 1 0" W 70.00 ISSUE BLOCK ATER ' R.O.W GENERAL SCOPE OF PROJECT . 2019-184-50RZ-Scope 60.00' X F.H. 24x36 24x36 BAYHEALTH MEDICAL CENTER IS PROPOSING REZONING TAX PARCEL: 02-05-077.13-01-4800-00001 FROM RGO TO SWP RADIUS: 1402.69' Ex. 4"S R.O.W. SIRC ARC LENGTH: 203.40' IO - INSTITUTIONAL & OFFICE. NOTE: THE ADJACENT BAYHEALTH F.H. HEALTH CAMPUS PARCELS ARE ZONED IO. X OZ CHORD BEARING: S 10° 22' 16" E SIRC CHORD LENGTH: 203.22' 24x36 Ex. 10" W 24x36 X ENGINEERS CERTIFICATION 2019-184-50-Engineers-Cert-GVM FCM X CAP SIRC I, GREGORY V. MOORE, P.E., HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I AM A REGISTERED ENGINEER IN THE STATE OF DELAWARE, SIRC THAT THE INFORMATION SHOWN HEREON HAS BEEN PREPARED UNDER VAN C E MY SUPERVISION AND TO THE BEST OF RY Do Not Explode 24x36 24x36 - Select Scale MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF REPRESENTS GOOD ENGINEERING O M PRACTICES AS REQUIRED BY THE APPLICABLE ENSE LIC X 16LANDS N/F LAWS OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE. G O VA N 15 MATTHEW PERZA GR E OR Revised per DAC comments dated 14 1 10-06-25 10/01/2025. ACE X TM: 02 05 07709 05 7101 000 E 24x36 SWP No. 9311 24x36 SCULL TERRINED LANDS N/F DEED: D 8452/199 MARK DATE DESCRIPTION PRIVATELY MA OZ ZONING: R8 R 2025-09-04 PR O CHURCH OF THE HOLY CROSS 13 LAYER STATE: RZ-Bryan SDH X TM: 02 05 07713 01 5600 000 0.13 AC. D EL E NE DEED: Q 20/165 11 GREGORY V. MOORE P.E. NO.: 9311 F ES I AWAR E DATE PROJECT NO.: 2019-184.50 S ION L ENG 10'L x 4'W STORM 24x36 ZONING: IO 24x36 X 11.3 AC. 10 OWNERS CERTIFICATION A DATE: 2025-10-08 2019-184-28L-Owners-Cert Xref- SCALE: AS SHOWN X 1998 184-H INTA WE, BAYHEALTH MEDICAL CENTER, INC., HEREBY CERTIFY THAT WE ARE THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY oly-C DESCRIBED AND SHOWN ON THIS PLAN, THAT THE PLAN WAS MADE AT OUR DIRECTION, AND THAT WE DRAWN BY: M.A.R. PROJ. MGR.: M.A.R. 24x36 24x36 ross LANDS N/F OE ACKNOWLEDGE THE SAME TO US BY ACT AND DESIRE THE PLAN TO BE DEVELOPED AS SHOWN IN ACCORDANCE X OE BAYHEALTH MEDICAL CENTER, INC OE WITH ALL APPLICABLE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. SHEET T.P.: 2-05-07713-01-5100-000 1 1 FP X DEED REF.: D12603/324 10 24x36 2025-09-04 STORM C-PR-U-SD-JB-1 24x36 ZONING - IO FP 9 OF MIKE METZING VP, CORPORATE SUPPORT SERVICES DATE X COPYRIGHT 2025 Page 17 2019184-50 - BayHealth Bryan Rezoning - 2025-10-06 F:\AutoCAD\Projects\2019\2019184-43\DWG\2019-184-43-BayHealth-Dover-Master.dwg, Oct 08, 2025 - 3:55pm Engineers Signature - Seal On Frozen 24x36 24x36

Item #2. CITY OF DOVER DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY STAFF D.A.C. MEETING DATE: OCTOBER 1, 2025 APPLICATION: Lands of Bayhealth Medical Center, Inc. @ 600 South State Street: Rezoning RGO/SWPOZ to IO/SWPOZ FILE #: Z-25-01 REVIEWING AGENCY: City of Dover Department of Public Works and Water & Wastewater CONTACT PERSON: Jason A. Lyon, P.E., Director of Water & Wastewater / Engineering Services 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-05-077.13-01-48.00-000. 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 18

Item #2. CITY OF DOVER DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY STAFF D.A.C. MEETING DATE: OCT 1, 2025 APPLICATION: Lands of Bayhealth Medical Center, Inc. at 600 South State Street: Rezoning RGO/SWPOZ to IO/SWPOZ FILE #: Z-25-01 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-05-077.13-01-48.00-000, Council District 2. 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 19

C F #2. Z-25-01 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: 10/01/25 D S O H V A E L R APPLICATION: Lands of Bayhealth Medical Center Inc at 600 South State Street FILE #: Z-25-01 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. 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) 3. 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: Page 20

Item #2. 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, 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) 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 21

Item #2. CITY OF DOVER D E DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE L APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY D O T =============================================================== APPLICATION: Lands of Bayhealth Medical Center, Inc. FILE#: Z-25-01 REVIEWING AGENCY: DelDOT CONTACT PERSON: Brian Williams PHONE#: 302-760-2141 =============================================================== 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. The Department has no objections to the rezone. Page 22

Item #2. KENT CONSERVATION DISTRICT 1679 SOUTH DUPONT HIGHWAY • DOVER, DELAWARE 19901• (302) 608-5370 • WWW.KENTCD.ORG CITY OF DOVER DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY OCTOBER 2025 APPLICATION: Lands of Bayhealth Medical Center, Inc. 600 South State Street FILE #: Z-25-01 REVIEWING AGENCY: Kent Conservation District CONTACT PERSON: Cullen Baker PHONE: (302) 608 – 5370 EMAIL: stormwater@kentcd.org 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: Source: 2019 Delaware Sediment and Stormwater Regulations CITY AND STATE CODE REQUIREMENTS: Kent Conservation District has no objection to the proposed rezoning of the above referenced site. ADVISORY COMMENTS TO THE APPLICANT: Soil disturbance (e.g. clearing, grading, excavations, tree clearing, or stoning) equal to or greater than 5,000 square feet requires a Sediment and Stormwater Management Plan to be submitted and approved by the Kent Conversation District prior to the commencement of disturbance. Page 23

Item #2. CITY OF DOVER Dover/Kent DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE County Metropolitan ADVISORY BRIEF Planning D.A.C. MEETING DATE: 10/8/2025 Organization Z-25-01 Lands of Bayhealth Medical Center, Inc. at 600 South State Street: Rezoning RGO/SWPOZ to IO/SWPOZ FILE # Z-25-01 REVIEWING AGENCY: Dover/Kent County MPO CONTACT PERSON: Malcolm Jacob PHONE #: (302) 387-6030 Attached, please find comments submitted by Dover Kent MPO for each of the current City of Dover Development Advisory Committee (DAC) applications. These comments are a part of the MPO’s ongoing goals of promoting transportation safety and connectivity within the region. They are submitted in accordance with the support given by the MPO Council on November 6, 2024. 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-25-01 Lands of Bayhealth Medical Center, Inc. at 600 South State Street: Rezoning RGO/SWPOZ to IO/SWPOZ Dover Kent MPO does not have any objections to the proposed rezoning. Further comments regarding pedestrian connectivity, vehicle access, freight implications, and other transportation aspects will be provided if changes to the site take place at a later date. 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 24

Item #2. CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION October 20, 2025 Excerpt from Meeting Minutes – Draft The Meeting of the City of Dover Planning Commission was held on Monday, October 20, 2025 at 7:00 PM as an In-Person Meeting and also using the phone/videoconferencing system Webex. The Meeting Session was conducted with Chair Mr. Witham presiding. Members present were Mrs. Denney, Mrs. Maucher (virtual), Mr. Baldwin, Mrs. Welsh, Mr. Roach (virtual), Mr. Reaves (virtual), and Mr. Witham. Mr. Michael Lewis and Dr. Jones were absent. Staff members present were Mrs. Dawn Melson-Williams, Ms. Sharon Duca, Mrs. Kristen Mullaney, and Mr. Jason Lyon (virtual). NEW APPLICATIONS Z-25-01 Lands of Bayhealth Medical Center, Inc. at 600 South State Street: Rezoning RGO/SWPOZ to IO/SWPOZ - Public Hearing and Review for Recommendation to City Council of a Rezoning application for a parcel of land consisting of 1.0053 acres +/-. The property is zoned RGO (General Residence and Office Zone) and partially subject to the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone). The proposed zoning for the property is IO (Institutional and Office Zone) and partially subject to the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone). The property is located at the southwest corner of South State Street and South Street. The owner of record is Bayhealth Medical Center, Inc. Property Address: 600 South State Street. Tax Parcel: ED-05-077.13-01-48.00-000. Council District 2. Ordinance #2025-15. The First Reading of the Proposed Ordinance occurred on September 22, 2025 and Public Hearings are scheduled for Planning Commission on October 20, 2025 and City Council on November 10, 2025. Representative: Mr. Gregg Moore, Becker Morgan Group Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that this is a Rezoning Application for the Lands of Bayhealth Medical Center, Inc.; specifically for the property located at 600 South State Street. The rendering shown on the screen kind of gives you a sense of where the property is located; it is shown in the center of the page shaded in yellow. It is at the corner of State Street which runs north/south and South Street which is on the north side of this property. It is a property just over an acre in size. Currently, there is a two-story brick building located on property which since having been acquired by Bayhealth has served as offices. They are seeking Rezoning because of future plans for the hospital expansion. The hospital is the remaining portion of that block that’s bounded by South Street, South State Street, Hope Street and then South Governors Avenue. Currently, the property is zoned RGO (General Residence and Office Zone) so the office type use there is permitted. There is a portion of the property that falls within the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone). That is the shaded green curve that kind of passes through this property. That is a zoning classification that helps protect our underground water resources. With this Rezoning, the property would remain subject to the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone). They are making a request for rezoning to IO (Institutional and Office Zone). The IO (Institutional and Office Zone) has a variety of uses that are permitted in that zone. With a Rezoning application, we can’t lock it in to any one of those in particular but for a sense of what can happen in the IO (Institutional and Office Zone), it’s a series of different office types, Excerpt of Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of October 20, 2025 Page 1 of 9 Page 25

Item #2. banks, design and development laboratories, public and institutional uses and those would include things like hospitals, medical clinics, libraries, police stations, courthouses, schools colleges, universities, places of public assembly, philanthropic institutions, and other public uses. The IO (Institutional and Office Zone) also allows for things like child care centers, emergency shelters, transitional housing, and adult daycare facilities. Then there are other things that would be allowed through a Conditional Use which is a specialized review process and then other accessory uses. With a Rezoning application, we have to look to the City’s Comprehensive Plan and what does that say from a land use perspective about how the property should be utilized and in the 2019 Comprehensive Plan, the Land Development Plan Map identifies this property as the Institutional land use category. The goals for Institutional land uses are specifically listed in the Comprehensive Plan. It is to maintain and improve the City’s position as a center of government, education and medicine through support of existing institutions and encouraging well-designed campuses that are integrated into the community and have room to expand. The Comprehensive Plan also outlines the policies and recommendations and specifically speaks to the hospital complex that’s found in this area of the City. With the Comprehensive Plan, the land use category of Institutional identifies the appropriate zoning district that it could be considered to be rezoned to and that is where we find the IO (Institutional and Office Zone). The next slide shows the location of this property that is shaded in the darker gray. You can see the balance of the property at the existing hospital location for Bayhealth. As part of our Report, the Planning Staff must formulate a report and the Planning Commission members were provided that. In it, they discussed different zoning classifications and what it means for IO (Institutional and Office Zone) which is more truly an institutional zone here in the City. Staff is recommending approval of the Rezoning to IO (Institutional and Office Zone) noting that it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and that it’s grouping is in the area of other similar institutional activities and we also recommend that it would remain subject to the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone) recognizing that there are some exemptions for that zone in its requirements because of the location here in Downtown. The Comprehensive Plan encourages the long-term viability of our existing major institutions; so, we also note that. The Rezoning process does not grant approval of a specific use of the property but makes the use of the property subject to the list of permitted uses in the Zoning District that it is applied. Tonight, the Planning Commission, in looking at a Rezoning, will be making a recommendation that will move onto City Council. The Planning Commission is charged with considering this with three factors that are outlined in the Report. The first one being whether it is compatible with existing uses and zones in the area. The second one being whether adequate public services and infrastructure exists or can be created to serve the needs of any demand related to such change. And then, the third is whether the change is in accordance with the City’s Comprehensive Plan. The Development Advisory Committee Report is made up of those background information provided by Staff, our Staff recommendation, and then the conditional comments from the Development Advisory Committee agencies. In this case, most of these agencies are identifying that they have no objection to the Rezoning and they provide some additional guidance about future endeavors should the property seek to redevelop. Those agencies include our Department of Water/Wastewater, Public Works, the City’s Electric Department, Office of the Fire Marshal, the DelDOT and Kent Conservation District as well as the Dover/Kent MPO for this project. Excerpt of Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of October 20, 2025 Page 2 of 9 Page 26

Item #2. Mr. Moore stated that Mrs. Melson-Williams’ presentation was very complete. They agree with the Staff Report with all of the recommendations and all of the conditions that are there. A couple things that he does want to make clear. We do believe that there is a significant change in character of the neighborhood which would facilitate the Rezoning. That is the only parcel that Bayhealth owns in this area that is not IO (Institutional and Office Zone). All of the remaining parcels are IO (Institutional and Office Zone) including the parcel directly across State Street, which is where the surgery center is and the parking lot. The property across South Street is their central utilities office building and parking is also IO (Institutional and Office Zone); as well as the properties that are on the opposite side of Hope Street, which houses some parking for the Bayhealth building on that side. In addition, Holy Cross is also IO (Institutional and Office Zone). So, we are almost completely surrounded by IO (Institutional and Office Zone) which is really why we think it’s very compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods as Mrs. Melson- Williams pointed out. Also, the Comprehensive Plan as Mrs. Melson-Williams pointed out, they are consistent with that. So, this is just allowing us to have all of the parcels of Bayhealth in the IO (Institutional and Office Zone) which makes perfect sense to us. They are planning a major renovation/addition to the entire campus. We are focusing on this very block. We own property around it, but the problem that we are having is that our hospital is starting to spread out too much. We are going to pursue a ten-story addition to the existing building, four stories of which were built in about 2010 and that was actually approved in this chamber for the ten-story tower in 2006. We will be coming back to this Board probably next year and presenting our Comprehensive Master Plan of the entire campus and you all will be seeing that. That ten-story tower addition is the focus of that. That will be what we call a bed tower where we are going to be adding up to in our first bays, about 100 beds and in total for a 30-year master plan, about 200 beds. Part of that is from growth of our community. We are the main health care provider and we are running low on beds and that has been since COVID. That is also presenting us problems in our Emergency Department where we are having problems finding beds for people who come into the Emergency Department. They can’t get a bed and it becomes backed up causing wait times. We are trying to alleviate that for our community. A lot of the building is to the left. The tower is actually right in the center of the South Street block. You can see that there is a square and it is above that area where we are asking for Rezoning. Much of that area to the left is what we would call legacy buildings. Much of it is more than 50 years old. Our original hospital is embedded in there and because of the age, it does not meet current health care codes, it does not meet floor to ceiling distances, and we have a problem being able to repurpose some of those areas because of that. As a result, we are going to go vertically with ten stories and surround the area around the bed tower where people will actually be in rooms. We will migrate everything around there so that they are more efficient. If you have been in the hospital lately, when you go in the main entrance that is the existing four-story podium that was approved in 2006. That four- story podium will allow the six stories to be above it to get to ten stories. This is a very planned process. But if you go there now, many of our beds have locations to the left and there are two different banks of elevators. One is as far as almost 500 feet from the main entrance. We are seeing that our patients, health care providers, and others have confusion as to where they need to go and where are the rooms located. We have some elderly people who have a difficult time in actually making that walk down to the elevators. This will make it more efficient and will go straight up right behind the information desk at the front entrance. Eventually, under their Master Plan, they are going to be tearing down a lot of that component of the hospital that is 50 years and older and that would then become future growth but the hospital would be centered around Excerpt of Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of October 20, 2025 Page 3 of 9 Page 27

Item #2. the ten-story tower. So, that is kind of a snippet of our expansion and we will be bringing that back in detail and we will have all kinds of plans. We did appear before the Board of Adjustment last week with the ten-story tower and some of the details about the tower and with that, it allows us to finish our master planning so that we can submit that to the Planning Department. We have had a number of meetings with Mrs. Melson-Williams about that. This is somewhat of a house cleaning issue for us so that all of our properties are zoned similarly when we present a 30-year master plan. Mrs. Denney stated that when you say ten stories, there are already six floors. Responding to Mrs. Denney, Mr. Moore stated no. There are actually two buildings. When you go straight in the main entrance now, the desk is right in front of you. We call that the podium which is a four story structure and we designed that to allow six stories to go on top. The elevators that you would go to to get into the second, third and fourth floors with the Cancer Center being one of them, that elevator will actually continue to stay in the current location and will go all the way to the top. That is what he is saying is the easy way to find everything. You will be able to walk directly behind the desk, go to the elevator and be able to go all the way to ten stories. You won’t have as much having to walk distances to get to the green elevator or the yellow elevator. Mrs. Denney stated that it is a good plan because she still goes over there frequently on a volunteer basis and it is usually it is about a five-mile walk by the time you go up. This will really make that a lot easier. Responding to Mrs. Denney, Mr. Moore stated that our Master Plan is a three-phase plan. The first phase will be that tower and it will probably take three to five years to execute that and the second phase, which is adding around the tower would probably be starting in five to seven years. The problem that we have is that it is very difficult to maintain healthcare process throughout the whole hospital and it is very difficult for us to make expansions. Mr. Witham stated that from a personal standpoint and a public standpoint, the big issue here is the hospital business. In fact, the wait time in our trauma care and emergency services is absolutely outrageous. He recognizes the problems that they have that really need to be addressed. He realizes that your plan provides all of that but the sooner that issue can be addressed, the sooner it will help. Responding to Mr. Witham, Mr. Moore stated that part of our first phase is improvements both inside and to make some additions to the ED and the tower. That Emergency Department will go from one story to three stories surrounding that tower. We will be adding temporary beds there so that when you come in you will have a place to go, you will be seen. They can decide whether or not you need to get admitted, and then you can go to a room. The other thing that he didn’t mention that they are going to be doing is that we have a number of rooms that are dual occupancy rooms where there are two beds in a room. His father was in one. It is difficult for the providers and it is difficult for the patients. It is not the best program for healthcare. We are going to eliminate all of them and then through our Master Plan, they will all be single person rooms which are more modern healthcare. Part of our two hundred (200) beds is because we have to do that. It is not a full add that we have to split, it’s two hundred (200) rooms and that will give us the same amount of beds in single rooms. But we have nearly one hundred (100) that we need to add for exactly what you are saying for capacity; and part of that is our aging healthcare and our aging population and part of that is growth and part is just modern medicine. We hear your story. We have heard it many times. The hospital knows it Excerpt of Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of October 20, 2025 Page 4 of 9 Page 28

Item #2. well and they want to quickly get into the building phase so that we can address that. Mr. Witham opened the public hearing. Mr. Zach Prebula – Kent Economic Partnership 555 Bay Road Dover, DE 19901 Mr. Prebula stated that they are in support of this project. Part of our goal as the economic development organization is to support businesses looking to expand and Bayhealth is one of our largest employers looking to do just that. By approving this Rezoning, you can help Bayhealth move this expansion forward more smoothly as they only have to focus on one zoning code rather than navigate multiple which will help them get this expansion through more timely. Mr. Nate Attard – 452 East Loockerman Street Dover, DE 19901 Mr. Attard stated that he is the President of the group called The Friends of Old Dover. He is not here to voice his displeasure with this Rezoning. This Rezoning is consistent with the City’s 2019 Comprehensive Plan and it should be supported. He is; however, here to voice his displeasure that the City did not effectively utilize the H (Historic District) overlay for this and other adjacent properties. City Staff has not been willing to recommend this overlay in any meaningful way in any recent years to provide the community a voice and preservation and design outcomes with the exception of the nearby Family Court property where this was used after the demolition of the buildings on the site. The City has not sought to proactively use this overlay to provide a voice to the citizens in what our City will look like in the future. Better outcomes come with community support and involvement. With this Rezoning, it looks like we are going to get another parking garage at this location. He knows Bayhealth can do better so he is just hoping that with this, we get some more positive design outcomes, not just a single faceless parking garage. Many hospitals do this and he knows Bayhealth can do it. He knows their design consultants can rise to the challenge. Mr. Thomas Smith – 126 Hampton Drive Dover, DE 19901 Mr. Smith stated that he is a member of the board called the Historical Society of Dover, aka The Friends of Old Dover. Our mission is to protect and preserve the historic buildings of our City and its wonderful architect. We also realize that rezoning will probably result in the demolition of certain properties that some people in the City consider historic because they knew the people who lived there as part of the community. Preserving our community is important to us. However, these properties that we are concerned with and that will change as the hospital expands are not in the Historic District and we fully realize that. What we want you to know is the expansion of Bayhealth Campus is necessary to the health of our community. We fully understand that and we fully support that. We do not want people to get the idea that we are always against something because we are not always against something. What we are against is the change in the community fabric that has a negative effect on our community. So, the Board of Directors wants Bayhealth and the City of Dover to know that we do not oppose this zoning change. Ms. Laura Kaehler – 307 Merion Drive Dover, DE 19901 Ms. Kaehler stated that the house at 600 South State Street is the house that she grew up in. It is the house where her dad had his office. He was a general practitioner for 30 years and was also involved at Kent General from the 1960’s to the 1990’s. Her family had just heard about this just Excerpt of Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of October 20, 2025 Page 5 of 9 Page 29

Item #2. recently. They didn’t know anything was planned for the house. When her mom sold the house, she was told that it would be a nice block or shield from the industrial look of the hospital next to the Historic District. The house itself is an old home at approximately 100 years old. But because Dover is a historic community and that’s what kind of puts them on the map, she would ask them to reconsider getting rid of that house just because they make a nice shield. When you are coming down that main street, you would see the houses next to the Historic District. That is what we were told it was going to be and now the family is saddened to hear this. She knows that the hospital needs to expand, but she would also ask for consideration of maybe starting a hospital zone 2; maybe something off campus. Just like churches when they expand, they end up having to go out of the City because they need so much room. With this being so close to Downtown Dover and the Historic District, it could be expanded without having to look outside of the main part of Dover and that way it would keep this house as a buffer. If you drive down the street and notice what it looks like, it does make it look much different. Dover is known as historic; it’s what just kind of puts it there. She would just ask that they think about the idea and perhaps an off-campus location could be used to expand for what they need because they will have to do it again. Also, they are just going to become land locked; so, maybe they should just start their future where they can expand. Ms. Anne DeMarie – 712 Oak Drive Dover, DE 19901 Ms. DeMarie stated that her question is since they are asking for the change; they probably have a pretty good idea of what they want to do. She knows that they have all of these options but she would like to know what they really want to do with the property. They probably already know what they want to do with it if they are requesting the zoning IO (Institutional and Office Zone). How many stories do they think they are going to make out of that space where the house is or is that going to be part of the emergency department? If they tear down that house, how many stories do you intend on building right there and what do you intend to do there? Are you considering adult day care? If you are, an adult day care facility wouldn’t have to be there. An emergency shelter wouldn’t have to be there. Are you considering transitional housing? Are you considering child day care centers? Because that doesn’t have to be there and certain institutions don’t have to be there; and if they are, are you going to be considering how close they are because they have to be within a certain number of feet or in close proximity to the two schools at Holy Cross and South Dover Elementary. You say you have plans, what are you plans right now for the property at 600 South State Street? She really hasn’t heard what you intentions are there. She will be honest; she doesn’t attend these things but she was kind of bewildered and disappointed that she has not heard questions from the Commission. She is shocked and annoyed and irritated and disappointed that she is not hearing questions. She is hoping that people listening online maybe will come to the next meeting and make a difference. She thought that was the whole idea; to come here and explain really what your plans are in a little more detail. Just these options aren’t really telling the citizens really what you are doing. She is sure that most of the people surrounding that area have no idea that you are even having this meeting tonight. She knows that you sent letters to a certain group but she is thinking about the traffic. She hasn’t even heard anybody interested in the amount of traffic this is going to involve. Just the things that you are allowed to do from the 10.1 until you get to the 10.2 where you need more approvals. But she is not hearing anything else. Like you said, you must have some idea if you want to go to an IO (Institutional and Office Zone), what else is in your mind that you want to do? She would just like to know from someone on the Commission or Staff. Responding to Ms. Excerpt of Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of October 20, 2025 Page 6 of 9 Page 30

Item #2. DeMarie, Mr. Moore stated that he needs to be very clear that they are here for a Rezoning tonight. The Rezoning has legal standard for its approval and that is that we have to prove that it’s a change in character of the neighborhood, which his testimony was that over almost 100 years, the hospital has existed here and this neighborhood has changed as Bayhealth has grown and our community has grown. Thus, much of the property surrounding us is already IO (Institutional and Office Zone). We have to prove that we are compatible with surrounding uses. We have coexisted with Holy Cross and the commercial zones around us for decades and we plan to continue to be good neighbors to them. We have to prove that we are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. What we can’t do legally is come here and show you plans of what they are doing and what they want to do and what it all looks like because that is called contract zoning and that is illegal in Delaware. We are very aware of our community making comments of what it’s going to be. He was clear that what he said they were going to do was based on the presentation to the Board of Adjustment of last week; that is public information. We are beginning the process of outreach to our community. We started that with City Council in this Chamber trying to explain to them. We are in the process now establishing days to outreach to our neighbors in the surrounding area as well as The Friends of Old Dover so that people are aware. We are going to do a good job of that outreach and that has already started by our executive team establishing dates and locations so that when we do outreach, we have a good process to do that. With that, Bayhealth is not trying to be coy by not explaining and bringing drawings. That is not a legal standard that they have to prove and it is contract zoning. We want to make sure that they are proper to the process. Mrs. Denney stated that for her last thirty to forty years of her career she spent in medical management. She has managed both a primary care and an orthopedic surgeon practice here locally. The one thing that she can tell everyone for sure is, that for a long time there has not been enough beds in that hospital. It needs to expand in order to accommodate the general population as well as the aging population. While the comments and thoughts about perhaps having an annexed building, that doesn’t really work. You can’t have somebody and think oh we saw them in the emergency room but they have to have surgery so now they are going an ambulance and ride down the street before their appendix bursts. When she saw this application and looked at it initially, it seemed to make common sense to her; the planning aspect is that the zoning should be uniform across the board so that you don’t have just this one little piece standing out especially in that block. She is elated when she realizes that they are planning on going up as opposed to spreading way out. Especially at this point, we don’t know what will happen. But the hospital is one of our biggest employers and it is very important to our community. It is very essential to the health of our residents. For those who know me and know that I speak very firmly about things that near and close to her heart, she is very adamant in declaring that this is the Capital City of the State that started the Nation and we do have to be careful when we start erasing history. She felt that with the Downtown development further up and she expressed that, but there is plenty of history north on State Street. Again, it would be very difficult to preserve that area and expand the hospital the way it needs to be done. It is not just the people who work there and separating rooms, there is a lot of behind the scenes that go on like JACO inspections and many other inspections and types of things that happen. For many years when she first started here, the hospital was very small and we had one insurance plan that would insure doctors here for people to see doctors here and that was the old Principal Health Care. Part of her job was to bring people here and expand. It was very hard to recruit doctors Excerpt of Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of October 20, 2025 Page 7 of 9 Page 31

Item #2. here. It is kind of crazy because you think when you are driving your beat-up old Volkswagen trying to get through med school and you’re thinking “someday, some day, some day.” Recruiting doctors, many of those wives want to live near Central Park in New York City; they don’t want to live in Downtown Dover. They are disappointed with the restaurants and the shopping and that was a callus. For her, it was involving herself with the restoration of the Schwartz Center so we could bring some more and more arts down here. It is a very fine line and while she is certainly empathic to “I grew up in a house there,” she really understands that and how it touches you but this expansion of this hospital which begins in a very small way with a Rezoning, needs to happen for the state of everyone’s health here. It begins with a lot of things and this is the first hurdle right now for us. Mr. Richard Kosior and Mrs. Kathy Kosior – 12 Elm Terrace Dover, DE 19901 Mrs. Kosior stated that they have traffic concerns which are pretty standard in any building project and also the use of the corner lot where 600 S. State Street is now and what that would mean for it. She understands that it is not revealed at this moment but was it a parking garage, was it a parking area and how would it impact State Street to Elm Terrace where we live. Mr. Moore stated that in a Rezoning it is not appropriate to be addressing traffic. We are talking about a use and any project that goes on in Downtown Dover will go through the Department of Transportation and any Traffic Impact Studies will be done if needed. The beauty of this site for 100 years for Bayhealth is that we have two of the main feeders through the Downtown; both Governors Avenue and State Street to allow access from both sides of the hospital. It has functioned greatly there and that is a very good access to have. We have both Hope Street and South Street to give us feeders for that so we can manage traffic. We aren’t concerned about that. We know we have a lot of work to do to address traffic but that’s true of almost every function, whether it’s codes of the buildings or fire or emergency. All of those things will be addressed but the Rezoning is not the place to address them. We think that’s the Site Plan process when we are detailing all of our plans exactly. The public will have part of that process and it has worked well. The Commission has done a great job. He will end by saying that in 2006 he stood in this very Chamber getting a 10-story tower approved. This is not a surprise; this is not new. Being a Delawarean and knowing the growth that we have, 200 hundred beds are direly needed in this facility. Ms. Laura Kaehler – 307 Merion Drive Dover, DE 19901 Ms. Kaehler stated that she just wanted to add that Bayhealth does have another location in Milford, DE. Just like there is another location, there could be another location for Dover. It would be like two locations for Dover, not for people to get sent from one location to the other but if half of the people attended one and the other half to the other. There wouldn’t be as much traffic going to each one. But also, eventually there needs to be something done in the future because Dover will keep expanding and it won’t physically fit there. If that is paid attention to now and planned for now, the second location outside of where the main area of Dover is and the historic area of Dover is, the extra beds and things could go somewhere else. Responding to Ms. Kaehler, Mr. Witham stated that you realize you will have an opportunity to come forward to comment during the Site Plan Development of this parcel. Mr. Witham closed the public hearing. Excerpt of Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of October 20, 2025 Page 8 of 9 Page 32

Item #2. Mrs. Denney moved to recommend approval to City Council for Z-25-01 Lands of Bayhealth Medical Center, Inc. at 600 South State Street: Rezoning RGO/SWPOZ to IO/SWPOZ as this is just a very small piece of what needs to happen here but it begins with Rezoning this small parcel from RGO to IO and all of the zoning in the block will now be equal, seconded by Mrs. Welsh and the motion was carried 7-0 by roll call vote with Mr. Lewis and Dr. Jones absent. Mrs. Denney voting yes; in accordance with her motion and she does think that the Rezoning of this parcel needs to happen just to make that uniform. Mrs. Maucher voting yes; based on DAC comments as well as it being consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Baldwin voting yes; based on aforementioned statements. Mr. Reaves voting yes; for reasons previously stated. Mrs. Welsh voting yes; she will state that we are just voting on the Rezoning at this point in time and she has seen many proposals from Becker Morgan Group to this Commission so she has no doubt that when they come back we will see an excellent presentation that will let us all know what is planned for this site. Mr. Roach voting yes; he encourages the community to continue to show up to these meetings. He definitely understands their concerns and like everyone said, it’s a Rezoning application so continue to come to the future meetings to state your concerns and things like that. Mr. Witham voting yes; the zoning is clearly compatible with the existing uses of the zones in the area. This property is completely surrounded by IO (Institutional and Office Zone) and it makes a lot of sense. There appears to be adequate public services and substantial infrastructure that already exists to meet the needs of future expansion of the hospital which is indicated by the comments. It is sorely needed and the change in the zoning is compatible with the Comprehensive Plan. Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that the Planning Commission’s recommendation will be forwarded along with your public testimony this evening. City Council will consider this Rezoning application at their meeting on November 10, 2025. The Council Agendas are posted about a week before and their meetings begin at 6:30PM. Excerpt of Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of October 20, 2025 Page 9 of 9 Page 33

Item #2. FINAL READING City of Dover PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2025-15 1 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND ZONING MAP OF 2 THE CITY OF DOVER CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY 3 LOCATED AT 600 SOUTH STATE STREET 4 5 WHEREAS, the City of Dover has enacted a zoning ordinance regulating the use of property 6 within the limits of the City of Dover; and 7 8 WHEREAS, it is deemed in the best interest of zoning and planning to change the permitted 9 use of property below from RGO (General Residence and Office Zone) and partially subject to 10 the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone) to IO (Institutional and Office Zone) and 11 partially subject to the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone). 12 13 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE 14 CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 15 16 1. That from and after the passage and approval of this ordinance the Zoning Map and Zoning 17 Ordinance of the City of Dover have been amended by changing the zoning designation 18 from RGO (General Residence and Office Zone) and partially subject to the SWPOZ 19 (Source Water protection Overlay Zone) to IO (Institutional and Office Zone) and partially 20 subject to the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone) on that property located at 21 600 South State Street (on the southwest corner of South State Street and South Street), 22 consisting of 1.0053 acres+/-, owned by Bayhealth Medical Center, Inc. 23 24 (Tax Parcel: ED-05-077.13-01-48.00-000; Planning Reference: Z-25-01; Second Council 25 District) 26 27 ADOPTED: * 28 29 Action History 30 11/10/2025 – Scheduled for Public Hearing/Final Reading – City Council 31 10/20/2025 – Public Hearing – Planning Commission 32 09/22/2025 – First Reading – City Council Page 34

Item #3. REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING The Regular City Council Meeting was held on October 27, 2025, at 6:30 p.m. with Council President Neil presiding. Council members present were Ms. Hall (arrived at 6:34 p.m.), Mr. Boggerty, Mr. Anderson, Dr. Pillsbury (via WebEx), Ms. Arndt, Dr. Sudler, Mr. Rocha, and Mr. Lewis. Staff members present were Police Chief Johnson, Mr. Hugg, Ms. Marney, Ms. Melson- Williams, Mr. Griffith, and Ms. Bennett. Mayor Christiansen was also present. Fire Chief Carey was absent. OPEN FORUM The Open Forum was held at 6:15 p.m., prior to commencement of the Official Council Meeting. Council President Neil declared the Open Forum in session and reminded those present that Council was not in official session and could not take formal action. William G. Faust, Jr., 136 Orchard Avenue, addressed council to express concerns regarding unanswered questions and the lack of public items being placed on meeting agendas. He questioned the approval of raises for non-bargaining employees, noting that the funding appeared to have been drawn from unfilled positions, and asked whether filling those positions in the upcoming year could result in a budget deficit. He also inquired whether security measures implemented for Council meetings would be extended to other City committees and boards, citing potential liability concerns. He expressed frustration that residents’ concerns were not being included on agendas despite council’s stated openness to public input and stated that questions only seemed to be addressed when council was “backed into a corner.” He criticized annual raises for council members while many citizens struggle financially. He stated that recent Council decisions have increased financial burdens on residents, particularly those in Section 8 housing, seniors, and single-income households. He concluded by asking when residents’ concerns would be addressed and when requested items would be placed on the agenda, emphasizing that while citizens are not opposed to raises for City employees, the last two budgets have been balanced “on the backs of the citizens.” Belinda Main, 142 Reese Street, stated that council needed to shift focus from concerns within Council Chambers to issues that truly affect Dover residents. She noted that the agenda reflected what council found important, not what residents considered priorities, and emphasized that residents have not been heard. She observed that attendance at meetings was low, not because residents felt unsafe, but because they felt their concerns were being ignored. She expressed worry about speeding on her street, citing safety concerns for her family and elderly neighbors who prefer walking in the street rather than on the sidewalk. She further noted that broader safety concerns within the city remain unaddressed and that discussions often fall on “deaf ears.” She stated that while council wanted to hear from residents, council did not seem to truly listen. She urged that future agendas include issues that residents feel most urgently need attention. Finally, she suggested that raises need to be cut back and that any charitable contributions be shown to the public to demonstrate that action is being taken. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Councilman Boggerty. Page 35

Item #3. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 27, 2025 PAGE 2 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilman Boggerty. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Ms. Arndt moved for adoption of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Rocha, and carried unanimously (Hall and Pillsbury 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. Rocha moved for adoption of the consent agenda, seconded by Ms. Arndt and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Hall and Pillsbury absent). PRESENTATION – SALAVATION ARMY 50TH ANNIVERSARY The City Clerk read the following Certificate of Recognition into the record: CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION Presented to The Salvation Army – Dover Corps 50th Anniversary Founded in 1865 by William and Catherine Booth in London, The Salvation Army has stood as a beacon of hope and service across the world. Since its arrival in the United States in 1880, the mission has remained steadfast in preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ and meeting human needs without discrimination. In November 1975, The Salvation Army Dover opened its doors, beginning with six Salvationists in a small hall at the corner of State and Loockerman Streets. Over the past five decades, the Dover Corps has faithfully ministered to the community through worship, youth empowerment, outreach programs, emergency assistance, and compassionate service, ultimately establishing its home at 611 Forest Street. Today, we proudly recognize and celebrate the Dover Corps for 50 years of unwavering dedication to spreading the message of salvation, serving the people of Kent County, and uplifting lives with compassion, hope, and love. With deepest appreciation, the City of Dover honors The Salvation Army Dover Corps for its remarkable legacy and continued commitment to building a stronger, more caring community. Presented this 27th day of October 2025. On behalf of the Mayor and Council, Mayor Christiansen presented the Certificate of Recognition to Captain Ardrine and Captain Reginald Montour. Captain Reginald Montour Page 36

Item #3. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 27, 2025 PAGE 3 expressed his gratitude for honoring The Salvation Army Dover Corps. He also expressed gratitude for being part of a group of individuals dedicated to serving and improving the future of their community. He noted that council’s support and belief in their mission have made a meaningful difference in the lives of the individuals and families they serve. He emphasized that the need for their services continues to grow, as they are seeing an increase in requests for assistance. He stated that they want to ensure the Dover Corps is well prepared to support their neighbors’ needs, both now and in the future. That included strengthening and expanding their programs, upgrading their kitchen and pantry, and increasing their capacity to help individuals and families avoid the instability caused by housing insecurity and homelessness. ADOPTION OF MINUTES - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2025 The Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of October 13, 2025, were unanimously approved by motion of Mr. Rocha, seconded by Ms. Arndt, and bore the written approval of Mayor Christiansen (Hall and Pillsbury absent). COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE REPORT OF – OCTOBER 14, 2025 The Council Committee of the Whole met on October 14, 2025, at 6:08 p.m. with Council President Neil presiding. Members of Council present were Mr. Anderson, Ms. Arndt, Mr. Boggerty (via WebEx), Ms. Hall, Mr. Lewis, Dr. Pillsbury, and Mr. Rocha. Dr. Sudler was absent. Mayor Christiansen (out at 7:53 p.m.) was also present. Civilian members present for their Committee meetings were Mr. Iriowen (via WebEx) (out at 6:46 p.m.), Mr. Wilson (Utility), Mr. Shevock, and Mr. Garfinkel (Legislative, Finance, and Administration). ADOPTION OF AGENDA Ms. Hall moved for adoption of the agenda, seconded by Ms. Arndt and unanimously carried. Council Reports – September 2025 First District Dr. Pillsbury reported participating in the Security Ad-Hoc meeting to discuss safety concerns within Council Chambers. Mr. Rocha reported attending meetings about the Lemon House ordinance that would benefit the community. He also mentioned having the pleasure of setting up and escorting Congresswoman Sarah McBride during her visit to the Downtown Dover Partnership, the potential location for the riverwalk, the Peoples Community Center, and the Inner-City Cultural League. He noted that it took up most of the day, but he was able to connect her with some of the nonprofits working to uplift the community and share concerns regarding downtown to explore how to get support from the legislative side once they reopen. Second District Ms. Hall reported attending the Security Ad-Hoc meeting to discuss safety concerns within the Council Chambers. She also reported participating as the co- Page 37

Item #3. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 27, 2025 PAGE 4 chair of the Veterans Stand Down and thanked all the council members who supported the event. She noted that the veterans were well served, and they had a great turn out. She also thanked the city support services provided that day. She reported holding meetings with constituents to discuss the possibility of creating youth programs. She noted meeting with Dr. Hodge with the Peoples Community Center to discuss supporting them as they look to expand their program with workforce development to provide services for those who are transitioning from their addictions to the workforce. Lastly, she emphasized that she is working with a constituent to address veteran homelessness. Mr. Lewis reported attending the grand opening of Raising Cane's and Books-A- Million, along with the Central Delaware Chamber of Commerce. He is attending the ribbon cutting of the new Calvary Baptist Church and the Delaware State University Homecoming Parade. He assisted constituents of Morris Estates with their concerns regarding road repairs and potholes. He noted receiving a complaint from residents of Lotus Street regarding street cleaning matters, which were referred to the assistant city manager. Third District Ms. Arndt reported attending a neighborhood meeting for the Third District, the Downtown Dover Partnership meeting, and the groundbreaking for the Downtown Dover Mobility Center, as well as fielding numerous calls, texts, and emails from Third District residents and speaking to constituents on several issues. Fourth District Mr. Anderson reported attending a number of events and thanked the community for their invitations, as it is an honor to participate. He highlighted the creation of the South Bradford Street Neighborhood Watch program and stated that it is vital that the different communities have their own program as an element to reclaim the city step by step. He also reported attending the Veterans Helping Veterans dinner along with the groundbreaking for the Downtown Dover Mobility Center. He noted that the application for the Innovative Readiness Training was submitted, and he hopes to provide the same services as in 2021. He thanked the staff for the work done with the Community Transportation Fund and the Silver Lake Boulevard barriers that came down during upgrades to the road. Lastly, he noted receiving multiple concerns regarding quality of life and public safety issues, which he has begun creating a file on. Dr. Sudler was absent; no report was given. At-Large Mr. Boggerty thanked the City Clerk and staff for assisting with the Security Ad- Hoc meeting. He reported responding to constituent concerns regarding abandoned vehicles and thanked the Dover Police Department for their prompt response in addressing the matter. He reported meeting with two real estate investors downtown to discuss safety concerns and reassure them that steps are Page 38

Item #3. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 27, 2025 PAGE 5 being taken to address their concerns and to protect their investments. Lastly, he reported attending a meeting with the police department to review staffing needs to remain competitive while recruiting and maintaining quality police officers. Council President Neil Council President Neil reported attending the groundbreaking of the Downtown Dover Mobility Center. He held several meetings with Todd Stonesifer, Phil McGinnis, and Mr. Rocha on the Lemon House Ordinance. He sent a Third District alert featuring the honors and awards received by the Dover Electric Department at the Delaware Municipal Electric Corporation (DEMEC) annual dinner and a series of phishing alerts. He responded to an email request from Thomas Healy, President of the Kings Cliffe Homeowners Association, based on his work with leased land communities, which he shared with the Second District representatives. He thanked Eddie Kopp and Sierra Brown for their investigative work at Kings Cliffe. He reported answering questions regarding the fence that was removed between Persimmon Park Place and Wild Meadows and the plan to replace it once construction is completed. He thanked Jason Lyon for handling the questions. He reported completing the ethics training along with answering questions from a Spotlight Delaware reporter regarding homelessness. He reported having conversations with a Dover couple who sent correspondence regarding Wilmington’s Homeless Task Force Report. He noted being alerted by Cecil Wilson to the passing of past Delaware State University professor Nilakantan “Rajan” Nagarajan, which he requested Andria Bennett, City Clerk, to send the family a certificate. He thanked Mark Nowak and the team for their quick response to replacing a broken trash can in the East Lake area. He thanked Eddie Kopp and his team for their assistance with a nuisance property in the same area. Wanda Mullen, President of the White Oak Towne Point Civic Association, had a complaint regarding an oversized truck, which has been resolved thanks to the Dover Police Department. UTILITY COMMITTEE The Utility Committee met with Chairman Rocha presiding. Adoption of Agenda Ms. Arndt moved for adoption of the agenda, seconded by Dr. Pillsbury and unanimously carried. Revised Cross Connection Control Program (Jason Lyon, Water & Wastewater Director) Mr. Jason Lyon, Water and Wastewater Director, reviewed the background and analysis regarding the revised Cross Connection Control Program. Mr. Lyon noted that he was joined by Kate Mill, Assistant Director of Water and Wastewater. Staff recommended accepting the revisions to the program and removal of the moratorium to the commercial customers of the city. The revisions would be Page 39

Item #3. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 27, 2025 PAGE 6 contingent on the forthcoming results of the review from the Delaware Department of Health and Social Services – Office of Drinking Water. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Lyon stated that high hazard is mandated by the state under Title 16 of the administrative code. It allows every water utility to make its own program, so the water company can be more stringent. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Lyon stated that the program as presented does not require any sort of contribution by the residential properties, only commercial. He noted that there could be changes to the program as it is federally and state- mandated, but currently, it does not affect residential programs. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Lyon stated that when the program was brought forward, it cost about $300 to $700 per install. They have been told that costs can be upward of $2,000. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Lyon emphasized the importance of the residential aspect being talked about with the check valves and education further down in the document. He noted that the City of Dover already has that on its supply system, so there is no additional work needed for that. He stated that number four is a general statement saying that the city is partnering with the customers to make sure that there is nothing coming back into the system. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Lyon stated that in 3.5, the Residential Dual Check (RDC) is a physical check valve that is standard when installing any new service to a house. He noted that it would be inclusive of the cost of the developer, it would not be an additional cost, and everything presented is commercial. He stated that it would be the responsibility of the developer on all residential properties, and it is already in effect. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Lyon stated that 3.6 additional requirements for lawn irrigation systems would affect all properties, but that program has not been instituted yet. He noted that it could affect all residential properties that have irrigation systems of that specific kind when the program goes into effect. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Lyon stated that his first concern would be the matter of equity for the commercial entities that have already complied. He noted that they would have to come up with a way to address those who have complied. He stated that he does not have an issue with requiring any new construction with low-hazard compliance, but he expressed concerns for the 306 people who have already done so. Responding to Mayor Christiansen, Mr. Lyon clarified that a fire suppression backflow preventer costs a little bit more than a residential cost. He stated that, regarding low hazard, any commercial entity or apartment building that has three or more units would be considered low hazard commercial. Page 40

Item #3. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 27, 2025 PAGE 7 Responding to Mayor Christiansen, Mr. Lyon agreed that if a new construction went through the planning office and met the parameters, they would be required to put in a domestic backflow prevention device within one year after notification. Responding to Mayor Christiansen, Mr. Lyon agreed that it does require annual testing. He also noted that the annual testing costs around $150. Mr. Lyon stated that the annual testing for the fire suppression system will still go through the Fire Marshal’s office. All backflow prevention goes through the Department of Water and Wastewater, as they have a cloud-based system where they collect all the surveys, data, and inspections with a consultant. Responding to Mr. Neil, Mr. Lyon stated that after the initial installation, it needs to be inspected by a third party that has credentials to inspect the backflow devices. He noted that the installation companies may have someone on staff who can do the inspections, but he is unsure. He emphasized that yearly it would need to be inspected by a third party that is certified to inspect it. Responding to Mr. Neil, Ms. Mills stated that she is often the one fielding phone calls from customers who were wondering if there were more people that they could reach out to. She stated that the International Plumbing Code requires that any backflow prevention that is installed must be inspected by an American Society of Sanitary Engineering (ASSE) certified tester. She noted that one of the common things she heard was that when they reached out to the partner company, there were only a couple of entities that the customers could reach out to. She stated that since starting the project, they have been able to compile a much larger list that has certified plumbers who are ASSE certified testers. She emphasized that plumbers have been going out and getting certified because there has been a large influx of requests for the installations across Delaware. She explained that they are going to make sure the information is provided to the customers and make sure it is available on the website. She noted that customers will be able to see that there are 15 to 20 plumbers that they can contact and 10 to 15 testers, but the list will continue to be updated so that they can shop around. She emphasized that the low-hazard properties are given a full year plus another 90-day extension, if they cannot do it in the first year, and they will be able to shop around and find a better price. Responding to Mr. Neil, Ms. Mills stated that it may help with some of the complaints by having a larger selection pool. She noted that the company that they are using to help administer the program and send out the notification letters is aware that they need to direct any sort of complaint to the team so that they can address them on a case-by-case basis. She explained that they are working with everyone and understand that it is a new program for everybody. Responding to Mr. Neil, Mr. Lyon stated that, per the regulation, the property owner would be responsible for the backflow preventer on the leased land. Page 41

Item #3. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 27, 2025 PAGE 8 Mr. Lewis read section 3.3 Rights of the City of Dover: “The City reserves the right to direct and administer testing and/or maintenance of any backflow prevention assemblies or devices. All costs associated with testing and any necessary installation, alteration, replacement, relocation, maintenance, or repairs of these assemblies or devices shall be the sole responsibility of the Property Owner.” Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Lyon stated that he was correct, and at this time, the property owner was referring to non-residential. Responding to Ms. Arndt, Mr. Lyon stated that the state code requires an annual inspection. Responding to Ms. Arndt, Mr. Lyon stated that, under their implementation of the code, an inspection would be required for any low or high hazard. Currently, the low hazard is under a moratorium. Mr. Lyon confirmed that the inspection would be required for both high and low hazards, even though the state does not require it for a low hazard. Responding to Ms. Arndt, Mr. Lyon stated that the statistics show that 459 are unknown, so there could potentially be a lot more low-hazard, but they have not received a survey of that yet. Responding to Ms. Arndt, Ms. Mills stated that the testing requirement is part of the International Plumbing Code, and if someone were to have a backflow preventer installed, it must be tested annually. On Ms. Arndt's statement about the low-hazard program being left up to the utilities, it is left up to the utilities, but if it is installed, it must be tested. Responding to Ms. Arndt, Mr. Lyon stated that he believes the penalties for non- compliance, following the fines and fees schedule, are $100, and they could compound. Responding to Ms. Arndt, Mr. Lyon stated that the one-year letter would go out, and it would say that they have an additional 90 days if, for some reason, they are out of town, or their business is temporarily shut down. He noted that those are all things that they take into consideration, as Kate mentioned, they are working with different entities to make sure the program is as painless as it can be. Ms. Arndt explained that she is on board with a high hazard but has some reservations about requiring the low hazard since it is not mandatory at the state level. She emphasized understanding the concern for those commercial properties that have already incurred the expense and will now have to incur the annual expense for the inspection. She also noted that she worries that it may be difficult to get scheduled for both the install and inspections. Page 42

Item #3. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 27, 2025 PAGE 9 Dr. Pillsbury stated that she owns a medical building that was brought into compliance without knowing if it was high-hazard or low-hazard, and she feels it is unfair to excuse the low-hazard people who did not get it done previously. Mr. Anderson moved to recommend accepting the staff recommendation with the amendment that the low hazard only applies to new construction. The motion was seconded by Ms. Arndt. Mr. Lewis noted that he has reservations about the whole program, but unfortunately, it was mandated. Mr. Anderson stated that he does not agree with mandating things that are not mandated, as there are already too many unfunded mandates on businesses and individuals. He noted that there was an outpour of complaints and hundreds of businesses would be affected, and those that had not previously completed it were the businesses that could least afford it. He stated that he believes it would be better not to retrofit them but to require it to be a cost of building a new construction, and it would be a lot cheaper that way. Responding to Mr. Rocha, Mr. Anderson stated that when a new business is to come in, their use should be considered as part of the process and surveyed to determine if it will be high hazard or low hazard. He noted that it could be much like a zoning change of use, which could trigger a code change. Responding to Ms. Hall, Mr. Anderson stated that the motion is to approve the backflow prevention program, with the low hazard being required only on new construction and the high hazard as state-mandated. He stated that they would be imposing new regulations on new construction and grandfathering in previous use and old construction, which is consistent with other code changes. Responding to Dr. Pillsbury, Mr. Lyon stated that they sent out notices to the best available address for the 459 unknowns. He noted that sometimes they did receive a kickback. Mr. Lyon asked for clarification on the motion and whether a new construction would only be considered a new brick and mortar location or if they are in a building, ripping down walls, and putting up new areas. He used the example of a space in Capital Station that is not a new construction per se, but it has a new tenant with a new use, and he would like to know if that would be required for a low-hazard new construction. Responding to Mr. Lyon, Mr. Anderson stated that no, it would not be required unless that use triggers a change. Mr. Anderson noted that he relies on Mr. Lyons' expertise, so he is open to his recommendation. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Lyon stated that it would be his recommendation. Mr. Lyons noted that he assumed from the motion that it would be grandfathered in for current businesses in the same category that they are Page 43

Item #3. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 27, 2025 PAGE 10 working in. He noted that it would be his recommendation because so many other commercial entities have already complied. Ms. Mills clarified that the risk of a backflow happening from various properties around the city, whether high or low hazard, remains the same. The probability is that a high hazard may be from something like a chemical plant or some industrial use, and a low hazard would not have the same types of qualities as a high hazard. She noted that it is not the probability of risk but rather whether the property is deemed high or low hazard. Mr. Anderson moved to replace his previous motion. Mr. Anderson moved to recommend approving the program as recommended by staff, but the low hazard would only apply to new construction or any significant remodeling that adjusts the use of the space, which would require a new backflow prevention assembly to be installed. The motion was seconded by Ms. Arndt. Responding to Ms. Arndt, Mr. Lyon stated that they had submitted the packet a few weeks before the meeting, and they received approval from the Office of Drinking Water on the plan as it was presented. He noted that they would have to bring it back to them with the alterations for acceptance. Mr. Anderson moved to recommend approving the program as recommended by staff, but have the low hazard required for new construction or any significant remodels that adjust the use of the space, which would require a new backflow prevention assembly to be installed. The motion was seconded by Ms. Arndt and carried with Dr. Pillsbury and Mr. Rocha voting no. By consent agenda, Mr. Rocha moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Ms. Arndt, and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Hall and Pillsbury absent). Annual Review and Approval of the Governing Policy for Energy Commodity Risk Management (David S. Hugg, III, City Manager) Mr. David S. Hugg, III, City Manager, reviewed the background and analysis regarding the Governing Policy for Energy Commodity Risk Management. Staff recommended approval of the proposed amendments to the Governing Policy for Energy Commodity Risk Management. Mr. Anderson moved to recommend approval, as recommended by staff. The motion was seconded by Ms. Arndt. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Marney stated that she did not find anything negative with the proposal. She noted that they work very closely with The Energy Authority (TEA), and they have reviewed the policy as advisors. She explained that they have had lots of discussions about the revisions that needed to Page 44

Item #3. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 27, 2025 PAGE 11 be made since the last revision was done in 2021. She stated that the policy supports the current plans for purchasing and hedging. She noted that the policy is positive and there are no negative notions as submitted. Mr. Anderson moved to recommend approval, as recommended by staff. The motion was seconded by Ms. Arndt and unanimously carried. By consent agenda, Mr. Rocha moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Ms. Arndt, and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Hall and Pillsbury absent). Ms. Rocha moved for adjournment of the Utility Committee meeting, hearing no objection the meeting adjourned at 7:12 p.m. LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE The Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee met with Chairman Anderson presiding. Mr. Anderson requested that Item #4, Sale and Disposition of Excess Real Property, be considered as Item #1. Adoption of Agenda Ms. Arndt moved for adoption of the agenda as amended, seconded by Ms. Hall and unanimously carried. Sale and Disposition of Excess Real Property (David S. Hugg, III, City Manager) Mr. David S. Hugg, III, City Manager, reviewed the background and analysis regarding the sale and disposition of the excess real property. Staff recommended approval of Resolution No. 2025-10 approving the transfer of the three properties in support of the Capital City 2030 Plan. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Hugg stated that if the three properties had been sold, they would have had the possibility of making $38,000. He noted that three lots are very small, and it would be very difficult to meet the zoning, setback, and building requirements on those properties. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Hugg stated that a year prior, he had identified several city properties that were being declared surplus. He noted that a lot of them were similar in size and had been acquired over the years. He stated that during the public hearing, the properties were initially included in the presentation to council, but it was determined that they would limit that transaction to the six properties that were critical for the mobility center and award the last three at another time. He explained that they have not been advertised in the sense of Page 45

Item #3. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 27, 2025 PAGE 12 being published in the newspapers, but they have been publicly noticed for over a year. Responding to Mr. Neil, Mr. Hugg stated that the city is responsible for mowing the properties and removing the trash, while the Downtown Dover Partnership (DDP) handles the properties in between. He noted that they are derelict properties that see vandalism, loitering, and improper trash disposal. Responding to Mr. Neil, Mr. Hugg agreed that the property will be used for recreation that is open to the public as a part of the process being handled by the Downtown Dover Partnership. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mayor Christiansen stated that 222 West Reed Street contained a house that burned down many years ago and was abandoned. There was a house next to the church that sat vacant and abandoned, and the last house became vacant. They all owed taxes, and that is how the city acquired them. Todd Stonesifer, Downtown Dover Partnership, recognized the groundbreaking of the Mobility Center. He noted that they intend to develop the property at 20 South Governor’s Avenue into a mixed-use building that will house grocery options, about 120 apartments, micro retail space, and a daycare center. The daycare center will require some active outside space, and they look forward to allowing the outdoor space to be utilized by the community. He noted that the property, when fully developed, would be valued at around $80 million. In talking with the Assistant City Manager, the property is estimated to generate around $150,000 in tax revenue on an annual basis. Therefore, by investing $38,000, the city can, in return, receive about $150,000 per year. Responding to Mr. Rocha, Mr. Stonesifer stated that the property behind the church is expected to be ingress, egress to the park area. Ms. Arndt stated that there is no better use of the properties than to invest them and support the master plan for downtown Dover. She noted that they have demonstrated to the public the benefit to the city fiscally from the revenue generated from the future redevelopment. Ms. Arndt moved to recommend approval of the resolution to approve the transfer of the three properties in support of the Capital City Plan. The motion was seconded by Ms. Hall and unanimously carried. By consent agenda, Mr. Rocha moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Ms. Arndt, and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Hall and Pillsbury absent). Non-Bargaining Step Proposal Discussion (David S. Hugg, III, City Manager, Naomi Poole, Human Resources Director, and Patricia Marney, Controller/Treasurer) Page 46

Item #3. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 27, 2025 PAGE 13 Mr. David S. Hugg, III, City Manager, Naomi Poole, Human Resources Director, and Patricia Marney, Controller/Treasurer, reviewed the background and analysis regarding the Non-Bargaining Step Proposal. Staff recommended approval of the option presented, which provided an average 2% increase per employee at a proposed cost of $69,574.98, and implementing the new scale in January 2026, which would impact the budget preparations for FY2027 moving forward. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Marney stated that the 86 non-bargaining employees were projected in the data set. Of the 86, there are 32 from the Parks and Recreation Department that are not management level, and the 2% is an overall average. She stated that they are looking at the differential between each employee and looking at all 86 employees to get their average number up 2%. She noted that the increase will vary depending on where the employee falls within the scale that was proposed. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Marney stated that, for example, the person from the Parks and Recreation Department who could receive the 8% increase would go from making $16.01 an hour to $17.32 an hour within the scale. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Marney stated that they have a set number approved through the current year's budget. There are salary savings because there have been vacancies for around three months through the end of September 30th for the current fiscal year. Therefore, there are ample savings and salary to cover the expenditure. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Marney stated that they are not eliminating the vacancies as they are only looking at the three months and not the remaining nine months of the year. If the positions become filled for three months of the year for those positions, the salary would have already been allocated to cover the expenditure. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Marney stated that if the vacancies were filled six months down the road, there would still be six months of salary within the budget to cover that expense for six months. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Marney stated that, for discussion purposes, if there was a position that was budgeted for $100,000 in the current year, but no one was hired until six months into the year, the city has saved $50,000 in the fiscal year from that position being vacant. Therefore, the remaining $50,000 would be paid out upon hire for the new employee, but what they are proposing is that the salary savings from the first half of the year be used to fund the proposed project. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Marney stated that they are not delaying the vacancies. The positions that were vacant as of September 30th are still being Page 47

Item #3. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 27, 2025 PAGE 14 filled, but for the three months those positions were open, the funds remain available to cover the increase. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Marney stated that the city can afford the expenditure without raising property taxes in the current year. She noted that she is confident that there are salary savings in the fiscal year 2026 to be able to afford the measure. She stated that going forward, for fiscal year 2027, they will need to evaluate things. She stated that they are proposing that they look at all factors, fees, and revenues, and are not projecting increases, but they will be reviewed during the budget process. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Marney stated that she cannot say that the city will not be able to afford the increase next year without looking at all the factors, but that is always a concern. She noted that the city has other bargaining agreements with scales that they are obligated to pay increases to. She explained that, as Mr. Hugg and Ms. Poole stated, not approving a scale for the non-bargaining employees would continue to push the wage compression issue down the line. She noted that, from experience in her own department, it has become hard to retain staff without knowing where they will be in the future. Responding to Mr. Garfinkel, Ms. Marney stated that she cannot say that they do not have the money to fund the increase. When looking at the scale for fiscal year 2026 and fiscal year 2027, she noted that the employees will max out at step 16. She explained that the scales mirror all the current and existing scales. She noted that there would be an escalator of approximately 6% to the non-bargaining employees, the same as is given to the bargaining employees, which council has approved and agreed to their contracts and scales. She emphasized Ms. Poole’s statement that the city is currently treating the non-bargaining employees differently from the bargaining employees, and the proposed scale would bring equity within the organization. Responding to Mr. Garfinkel, Ms. Marney stated that there would be a 3% growth between steps, and then there would be a 4% Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) on the overall scale. Responding to Mr. Garfinkel, Ms. Marney stated that 4% was approved for fiscal year 2026. She noted that they do not have to approve a 4% COLA for fiscal year 2027. Ms. Arndt thanked Ms. Marney for the reminder that COLA can be changed moving forward. She noted that the long-term savings to the city in retaining employees versus losing them and having to hire them, retrain them, and how it impacts the city operations are important to consider. She stated that the non- bargaining employees deserve the same consideration as the union employees, as they work just as hard and should be recognized and compensated. Page 48

Item #3. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 27, 2025 PAGE 15 Responding to Mr. Anderson, Ms. Marney agreed, stating that they would be importing a comparable scale that has already been utilized within the city for current employees, and the scale would be built into the budget. She also confirmed that the COLA increase is based on the fiscal condition of the city, and the city manager usually reviews the budget and recommends what can be afforded. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Ms. Marney stated that there would still be step increases between the steps, but the COLA would be at the discretion of the city manager. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Ms. Marney noted that it would take effect on January 1, 2026, and be a recurring expense thereafter in July. Mr. Neil moved to recommend accepting the staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Dr. Pillsbury and carried by a roll call vote of eight yes (Hall, Boggerty, Anderson, Pillsbury, Arndt, Rocha, Neil, Shevock), two no (Lewis, Garfinkel), and one absent (Sudler). By consent agenda, Mr. Rocha moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Ms. Arndt, and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Hall and Pillsbury absent). Fuel Pump and Island Upgrade (Barry Wolfgang, Contract and Procurement Manager, and Mike Hamlett, Central Services Director) Mr. Barry Wolfgang, Contract and Procurement Manager, reviewed the background and analysis regarding the fuel pump and island upgrade. Staff recommended approval of the proposal of $619,565 submitted by 1st State Petroleum in RFP #26-0001WH. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Wolfgang stated that they had gone through the process last fiscal year, they received two proposals back, and one of them was significantly higher than the other one. Therefore, when preparing for the current fiscal year, they added additional money in case they had the same results. He stated that a company from Harrington, Delaware, put in a proposal for significantly less than the other company from New Jersey. He explained that the company from Harrington met all the submittal requirements. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Wolfgang stated that the Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC) maintains a list of certified installers, and the proposal was sent out to everyone on their list who was certified to do the work in the state of Delaware. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Wolfgang noted that only two companies responded, and there are only about eight companies that are certified by DNREC to do the required type of work in the state. Page 49

Item #3. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 27, 2025 PAGE 16 Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Wolfgang stated that environmental issues might arise during construction. He mentioned that, as a contingency, they included the possibility of contaminated soil needing disposal. He added they won't know until they start digging around the existing tanks and pumps. He pointed out that once the construction is finished, only minimal annual testing will be required to maintain the system; however, those are ongoing costs that are paid even with the old system. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Wolfgang stated that one of the reasons that there were additional funds allocated was because it costs so much per ton to dispose of contaminated soil, and they must filter the groundwater while they are pumping it out as well. Mr. Neil moved to recommend accepting the staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lewis and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. By consent agenda, Mr. Rocha moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Ms. Arndt, and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Hall and Pillsbury absent). Presentation – Request for Public Safety Funds (Captain Roswell, Dover Police Department) Thomas Johnson, Chief of Police, provided an overview of several emerging technologies being evaluated by the Police Department in response to recent community concerns regarding violent crime and gun violence. He emphasized that while the agenda item appeared as a funding request, the discussion was more exploratory, focusing on assessing the feasibility, timing, and potential costs of implementation. He first discussed ZeroEyes, an artificial intelligence program that integrates with the city’s existing camera system to detect brandished firearms before they are used. The system serves as a preventative tool and would cost approximately $61,000 per year, in addition to a one-time setup fee. Chief Johnson then described the Drone as First Responder (DFR) Program, which would allow drones to deploy automatically in response to 911 calls. The drones would provide real-time aerial footage to enhance situational awareness, officer safety, and response times. The program would cost about $50,000 annually, which includes replacement and maintenance of the drones. Lastly, he introduced Revlen AI, a software program designed to assist investigators in rapidly analyzing ballistic and investigative data to identify links between crimes and suspects. Implementation of the system would depend on statewide coordination and access to shared law enforcement databases. Chief Johnson concluded by emphasizing the department's commitment to exploring cost-effective, data-driven technology that can strengthen public safety in the City of Dover. Page 50

Item #3. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 27, 2025 PAGE 17 Responding to Mr. Shevock, Ms. Marney said she would like to collaborate with the chief to identify which technology is most urgent and determine the available funding. She mentioned that the chief might consider the process of installing the items first and then applying delayed billing, a method used by the Finance Department when introducing new technology. She clarified that they could approach the vendors mentioned by the chief, and if the vendors agree, the expenses would not be recognized until fiscal year 2027, allowing the costs to be included in the next budget or through the Capital Improvement Plan. She noted that she would like to evaluate whether there are any savings within the current budget to enable the use of the technology, understanding that there will be recurring expenses in future years. She further stated that, as the chief mentioned, the contract for body-worn cameras is an unbudgeted expense. She noted that they were included in the budget for the current fiscal year, but considerations for future fiscal years must be considered. She emphasized that while the technology may cost only $60,000, there are other costs and considerations related to technology that also need to be addressed in future budgets. These costs are not covered by grants, and the chances of obtaining grants for these types of expenses are decreasing. She explained that she would like to see them return with a better plan and a more solid answer to the committee than what she was currently able to provide. Responding to Mr. Boggerty, Chief Johnson stated that senior leadership reviewed and prioritized the three technology initiatives. They ranked ZeroEyes as the highest priority due to their ability to integrate with the city’s existing camera system, which is strategically located in higher-crime areas and has recently undergone significant grant-funded improvements. The Drone as First Responder (DFR) program was identified as the second priority, given its potential to support multiple city operations, including police, fire, and emergency medical responses, as well as other departmental needs. Revlen AI was ranked third, as it represents a newer and less-defined technology with greater uncertainty regarding its implementation and effectiveness. Responding to Ms. Hall, Chief Johnson stated that they have not identified the cost of the Revlen AI past the pilot year because the cost is related to the size of the agency and the volume of usage of the technology. He explained that the goal would be to sell the state on the technology so that the city could utilize it and potentially not incur as much of the financial burden. He noted that he is only interested in doing the pilot program to see if the technology provides what it has promised to do. He explained that there are other link analysis-type companies that have different mechanisms to get started with the process, that are not necessarily shell casings and ballistics. He emphasized that he cannot offer the company the $25,000, but he would like to make sure that the funding is available if he finds that he is the only agency that has not gotten the pilot up and running. If it appears that the rest of his peers see the value in trying out the new technology for a year, he does not want to see Dover miss out. Page 51

Item #3. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 27, 2025 PAGE 18 Responding to Ms. Hall, Chief Johnson stated that, to his understanding, there are not many equipment changes; most of them are managed at the level of the Advantech office. He noted that once the city stops paying for the services, they would not be monitoring them anymore, so there would be no incurred fees, and they would remove their box from the 911 center. Responding to Ms. Hall, Chief Johnson stated that they will receive routine updates on the products that are included. Therefore, as ZeroEyes gets better, the city will enjoy the advances in the technology as previous subscribers. He clarified that if the city decided to no longer utilize the program, the cameras would stay the same as before, but they would only lose the new features. Mr. Neil moved to recommend approving the ZeroEyes, the Flock Safety drone, and the Revelen AI technology, if there are funds available and so that the Finance Department would come back to the committee to provide what might be available after they have completed their study. The motion was seconded by Dr. Pillsbury. Chief Johnson clarified that both the ZeroEyes and Revelen AI would be sole- source vendors. However, there would be more than one option for the Drones as a First Responder Program (DFR), and they have not done a formal bid process. He requested that Flock Safety be removed from the motion. Mr. Neil amended his motion to recommend approving ZeroEyes, an appropriate drone program, and Revelen AI technology, and provide an update to the committee when a funding source is available. Dr. Pillsbury seconded the amendment. Responding to Ms. Arndt, Chief Johnson stated that one of the challenges of the item was whether it was informational or whether council would be motivated enough to act immediately. He explained that if the council would like him to bring back more information and a more specific proposal with the funding, then he will do that. He said if he is given the directive to do his due diligence and bring everything in as inexpensively as possible under the best terms possible and work with the city administration to do so, then he will. Ms. Arndt stated that she would feel more comfortable having a better understanding of where the funds come from, whether it is from grant opportunities or grant-in-aid, and if that becomes available, she would be open to considering moving forward. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Chief Johnson stated that, in his experience with Advantech, they do not typically hide fees from him. He went on to explain that they contacted ZeroEyes together and discussed all the issues that were involved with the technology. He noted that they have done significant business with Advantech, and they have never provided a cost that was not anticipated. Page 52

Item #3. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 27, 2025 PAGE 19 Mr. Lewis stated that he would feel more comfortable if the Chief came back later with ideas or funding sources identified. He emphasized that Ms. Marney had already stated that the city does not currently have the funding available. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Chief Johnson stated that the department intended to respond to the sense of urgency expressed by council over several meetings. He noted that it is still early in the fiscal year 2026 budget, and he is unable to determine what available funds he may have. Although he wanted to advance the matter as efficiently as possible without error, he recognized the importance of timely action. Responding to Mr. Garfinkel, Mr. Anderson stated that the motion that was made would approve the items and have the chief and Ms. Marney return with the funding sources. Mr. Garfinkel noted that they cannot approve something without approving a funding source, so the approval would have to be provisional, subject to the approval of the funding source. Mr. Neil clarified that his motion was to find the approved funding source. If the money is not available, then the items cannot be bought. Mr. Rocha stated that he thought they were hearing the information, and then if they were going to make a motion, they would refer it back to staff to allow them to find or explore the funding before bringing it back for approval. Mr. Rocha moved to recommend deferring the decision and referring it back to the staff to come back to council with proposed funding sources by the last meeting of November. The motion was seconded by Ms. Arndt. Mr. Anderson noted that the motion was to defer the item for the staff to find the funding sources and return to the last meeting in November. He explained that if the motion on the floor was defeated, then the underlying motion would take precedence. Chris Miller, 200 West Loockerman Street, expressed support for body-worn cameras if they are not used to track the public. Mr. Rocha moved to recommend deferring the item back to staff to find the appropriate funding sources and return on or before the last meeting in November. The motion was seconded by Ms. Arndt and unanimously carried. By consent agenda, Mr. Rocha moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Ms. Arndt, and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Hall and Pillsbury absent). Page 53

Item #3. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 27, 2025 PAGE 20 Update from the Security Ad-Hoc Committee (Councilman Boggerty, Chair) Mr. Boggerty provided an update regarding the findings of the Security Ad-Hoc Committee. He noted that the committee met at the direction of Council President to discuss security measures for council meetings. After evaluating private security services versus the use of Dover Police Department officers, it was determined that utilizing Dover PD would be more effective, as security firms have limited authority and would need to contact police for enforcement actions. The estimated annual cost for police coverage is approximately $11,000, not including ad hoc meetings, with funding anticipated to come from the existing overtime budget. He noted that Mr. Anderson stated that additional funding sources may be available. Mr. Boggerty explained that police officers are subject to a three-hour minimum pay requirement per meeting. He emphasized questions regarding the legality of carrying concealed weapons in Council Chambers, as existing signage prohibiting weapons appears inconsistent with current policy and requires clarification. The committee also researched the potential use of metal detectors, finding that portable models range from $4,000 to $5,000. There was further discussion regarding the feasibility of using handheld wands for security screening. Ms. Hall moved to recommend approving overtime for the Dover Police Department Officer for a three-hour minimum on the second and fourth Monday and Tuesday evenings for the Regular City Council Meetings and the Council Committee of the Whole Meetings with a wand, while they continue the discussion on the exploration of acquiring a portable metal detector as soon as possible. The motion was seconded by Dr. Pillsbury. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Ms. Marney stated that she would have to follow up on where the funding would be coming from. She noted that if it was coming from the police budget, then there are established overtime budget lines that could be utilized. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Anderson stated that the chief requested an executive session, and after that, it was determined that an ad-hoc committee be formed to look at the issues and the threatened environment. He noted that there have been some high-profile issues, including assassination attempts of high- profile and other public officials, which indicate the current environment. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Hall stated that in any other government building where policy is being made, individuals must pass through a metal detector. Whether it is Legislative Hall, Kent County Levy Court, or any of the court buildings locally, the technology is already in place, and the city is lagging. She challenged that unnecessary expenses are the cost of a life, and they have the opportunity to be proactive about making sure the environment is safe for people to come in, express their ideas, exchange those ideas even in a heated environment, and still feel safe where civil discourse has clearly become not so civil. Lastly, she noted that there were individuals who indicated that they would like to participate in meetings but had angst about someone bringing a weapon, so Page 54

Item #3. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 27, 2025 PAGE 21 they looked to address those concerns so that people could come and air their concerns about what is going on in the city in a safe environment. Mr. Anderson noted that people have mentioned that they have come to council and then been stalked after providing their testimony because they are testifying about violence, and it is possible that they could be in danger. He emphasized that if someone has a bullet, it does not protect the target, and it is about protecting a member of the public, as done in other city buildings. He noted that they have supported technology in the schools, and the city hall has been the last on the priority list. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Anderson stated that residents' yelling is not a safety issue. He noted that there was a specific threat that triggered the cause for concern. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Boggerty stated that the committee did conduct research. They evaluated what safety measures are taken within many of the state buildings. He noted that they compared what the City of Dover does versus buildings such as the Kent County Levy Court. He said that other municipalities tend to have some form of security or police officer presence. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Boggerty stated that he emphasized in his report that they only considered the two council meetings and did not include any other city meetings. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Boggerty stated that the committee stayed within the scope of the request. They were asked to evaluate the city council meetings, including both the regular council and council committee meetings. He clarified that they were not assigned to examine all the city buildings and that the request would fall under the role of the city manager. Mr. Hugg stated that the most secure building is the library, where there is a security service during all those hours that it is open. He noted that they have discussed having two people per shift, and they have a direct connection to the police department, so if they need an officer, the response is quick. He stated that the security service patrols the inside and outside of the library by doing rounds throughout the day. Ms. Marney stated that Wyandt Hall requires badge access for the elevator and most doors. She explained that customer service is on the first floor, and a few years ago, a grant was used to implement and install bulletproof glass in front of the customer service representatives, as well as building walls and doors for added security measures. They limited access in and out by closing the entrance on South State Street that led to the tax assessor's office, which can only be used by employees. The public must now use the side of the old library or Reed Street. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Hugg stated that the Parks and Recreation and Public Works Department require badge access, but they do not have full-time Page 55

Item #3. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 27, 2025 PAGE 22 security. He explained that City Hall allows the public into the main lobby when the front door is open, but there is no access behind the door without being passed through. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Marney stated that because it would require a physical body from the police department, the funding would be processed through pay that is currently budgeted for fiscal year 2026 through the overtime line for the police department. She explained that they would need to schedule on behalf of the police department to make sure that they have adequate coverage in City Hall and elsewhere to remain within their current budgetary constraints for salaries. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Marney confirmed that the funding would be coming out of the police budget, and from her understanding, the officers would be receiving overtime work. Ms. Arndt questioned whether it would be advantageous to have a building security assessment or risk assessment for City Hall done. Mr. Rocha agreed with Ms. Arndt and stated that it may be a good idea to look at the vulnerability throughout all the buildings, but especially City Hall. Mr. Boggerty emphasized the importance of differentiating between building- wide security and security specific to council meetings. He agreed that a full security assessment of the building may be appropriate but noted that the request given to the committee pertained specifically to meetings. He highlighted the inherent vulnerability of elected officials during public engagements and stressed the importance of maintaining open, robust discussions with constituents without conveying a sense of fear. He also questioned the practicality and effectiveness of proposed security measures, noting challenges such as the legality of concealed weapons, limited staffing for screening attendees, and potential security gaps related to chamber access points. Mr. Boggerty stated that he fully supports ensuring the safety of everyone in City Hall but expressed doubt that adding a single officer or security presence during meetings would fully address the underlying concerns. Belinda Main, 142 Reese Street, Dover, expressed disagreement with adding security at council meetings, stating that she feels safe attending and does not believe additional measures are necessary. She emphasized that council should focus on improving safety citywide rather than allocating funds for meeting security. She noted that residents often feel unheard by council and urged members to engage more with the community and take actions that address broader public safety concerns. Ms. Arndt questioned the logistics regarding having an officer use a wand as the public enters the Council Chambers. She emphasized that if there was a need for a pat down, it would bring in an entirely different logistical situation where there would also have to be a female officer present. She said, considering those Page 56

Item #3. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 27, 2025 PAGE 23 specific details, she is not comfortable with the motion as it creates more situations and questions that need to be addressed. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Ms. Arndt stated that in the interim, she would be comfortable with the security presence but leaving the wanding out while evaluating the other options. Ms. Arndt proposed an amendment to the motion to exclude the reference to using a wand. There being no objection, Mr. Anderson stated that the amendment was incorporated by unanimous consent. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Anderson stated that the metal detectors were not a part of the motion, and they were to be brought back for consideration with available funding. Ms. Hall moved to recommend approving the overtime for the Dover Police Department Officer for a three-hour minimum on the second and fourth Monday and Tuesday evenings for the Regular City Council Meetings and the Council Committee of the Whole Meetings, while they continue the discussion on the exploration of acquiring a portable metal detector as soon as possible. The motion was seconded by Dr. Pillsbury. and unanimously carried with Mr. Lewis abstaining. By consent agenda, Mr. Rocha moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Ms. Arndt, and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Hall and Pillsbury absent). Mr. Anderson moved for adjournment of the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee meeting, hearing no objection the meeting adjourned at 9:39 p.m. Christopher T. Miller, 200 West Loockerman Street, Apartment 203, expressed concerns and complaints. He noted concerns about encountering prostitutes, panhandlers, and addicts while walking up and down Loockerman Street. He emphasized that he does not feel safe and noted that nothing appeared to be done about those issues. He stated that he would like to see action taken. Mr. Neil moved for adjournment of the Council Committee of the Whole meeting, hearing no objection the meeting adjourned at 9:45 p.m. By consent agenda, Mr. Rocha moved for acceptance of the Council Committee of the Whole Report, seconded by Ms. Arndt, and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Hall and Pillsbury absent). Page 57

Item #3. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 27, 2025 PAGE 24 QUARTERLY REVENUE REPORT AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 2025 Members were provided the Quarterly Revenue Report as of September 30, 2025. By consent agenda, Mr. Rocha moved for acceptance of the Quarterly Revenue Report as of September 30, 2025, seconded by Ms. Arndt and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Hall and Pillsbury absent). QUARTERLY REVIEW – CAPITAL INVESTMENT PLAN (CIP) (JULY, AUGUST, SEPTEMBER) Members were provided the Quarterly Report for the Capital Investment Plan as of September 30, 2025. By consent agenda, Mr. Rocha moved for acceptance of the Quarterly Report for the Capital Investment Plan as of September 30, 2025, seconded by Ms. Arndt and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Hall and Pillsbury 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. David S. Hugg III, met with the Fire Chief to discuss fire company issues, Mr. Hugg submitted a memorandum outlining the items discussed and noted that the tour included the facility and the grounds to assess the condition and readiness of the facility and apparatus to provide effective fire response to the City of Dover and surrounding areas. By consent agenda, Mr. Rocha moved for acceptance of the report of the Semi-Annual Robbins Hose Company Inspection, as submitted by the City Manager. The motion was seconded by Ms. Arndt, and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Hall and Pillsbury absent). APPOINTMENTS/REAPPOINTMENTS RECOMMENDED BY CITY COUNCIL By consent agenda, Mr. Rocha moved for approval of the following appointment, seconded by Ms. Arndt, and carried by unanimous roll call vote (Hall and Pillsbury absent). Economic Development Committee – One-Year Term to Expire May 2026 A. Codi Canasa APPOINTMENTS/REAPPOINTMENTS RECOMMENDED BY MAYOR CHRISTIANSEN By consent agenda, Mr. Rocha moved for approval of the following appointment, seconded by Ms. Arndt, and carried by unanimous roll call vote (Hall and Pillsbury absent). Page 58

Item #3. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 27, 2025 PAGE 25 Code Board of Appeals – One-Year Term to Expire May 2026 A. Steve LeBoon RESOLUTION NO. 2025-11 – A RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION TO THE DELAWARE STATE HOUSING AUTHORITY TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PILOT PROGRAM TO RECEIVE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FOR ZONING AND LAND USE REFORM TO SUPPORT AFFORDABLE HOUSING(SJR8) The City Clerk read the following Resolution into the record: BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: WHEREAS, the Senate and the House of Representatives of the 153rd General Assembly of the State of Delaware, with the approval of the Governor, directed the Delaware State Housing Authority to create a pilot program to provide technical assistance to local governments to implement zoning and land-use reforms; and WHEREAS, the intent of the program is to support local zoning reforms to expand housing options by allowing higher-density residential development, promoting a variety of housing types, and increasing housing access and choice for current and future residents; and WHEREAS, according to Delaware State Housing Authority’s (“DSHA”) 2023 Statewide Housing Needs Assessment (2023 HNA), Delaware has a shortage of over 19,000 units affordable to renters with incomes of 50% or less of the Area Median Income, or AMI; and WHEREAS, the 2023 HNA also indicated that Delaware needs to add 24,400 housing units by 2030 to keep up with the population growth; and WHEREAS, the Affordable Housing Production Task Force Final Report from April 2025 identified local zoning reform as a key objective, stating that the task force members had “unanimous consensus that changes are needed at the local level to enable more diverse housing types,” and that local zoning ordinances can be barriers to affordable housing development; and WHEREAS, the Mayor and City Council of the City of Dover, Delaware, herein called the “Applicant”, have reviewed this funding opportunity and believe it to be in the public interest and of public benefit to file an application for technical assistance, and to authorize other action in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, the Applicant understands a condition of receiving technical assistance is commitment to implement at least one strategy to permit more diverse housing types. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Dover, Delaware, the governing body of said Applicant, as follows: Page 59

Item #3. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 27, 2025 PAGE 26 1. That commitment to engaging and working with providers of technical assistance by said Applicant is essential and in the best interest of the Applicant, to successfully implement zoning and land use reforms that expand housing options. 2. That said Applicant will work to implement the recommendations provided by the technical assistance provider that are related to the zoning and land use reforms selected below. Said work should include, at a minimum: assigning a municipal staff member as point of contact for the technical assistance provider and DSHA; meeting and sharing information with the technical assistance provider as needed to facilitate their data collection, analysis, and recommendation processes; coordinating with the technical assistance provider on public outreach; and introducing recommended ordinances or regulatory changes for consideration by the appropriate governing body or bodies. If the recommended ordinances/changes are not adopted, the jurisdiction must share documentation of the public engagement that occurred after the changes were introduced and the reasons why adoption did not occur. • Allow Accessory Dwelling Units and/or “missing middle” housing types as a permitted use in residential zones • Increase buildable density for housing by reducing minimum lots sizes and bulk standards • Increase building heights for multifamily housing and/or mixed-use developments • Establish an inclusionary zoning program to address affordable and workforce housing needs • Allow higher density, mixed-use with residential in commercial zones or employment centers • Reduce parking requirements in areas zoned for residential and mixed-use to promote walkable communities in addition to providing more affordable development opportunities 3. That certified copies of this Resolution be included as part of the Application submitted to the Delaware State Housing Authority. ADOPTED: October 27, 2025 Mr. Hugg briefed members of council on the Resolution No. 2025-11 – Authorizing the City Manager to submit an Application to the Delaware State Housing Authority to participate in the pilot program to receive technical assistance for zoning and land use reform to support affordable housing. Page 60

Item #3. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 27, 2025 PAGE 27 Responding to Dr. Sudler, Mr. Hugg stated that, with regard to reducing parking requirements, the relaxation of commercial parking requirements in the downtown area had resulted in increased activity and use of properties, as less space was required for parking. He noted that those were the types of areas recommended for further examination, though it was possible that, upon review, some options may not be suitable for Dover. He further explained that council was not mandated to adopt any ordinances or to study those options. Dr. Sudler stated that he had huge concerns about how the proposed growth could impact adjacent communities. He acknowledged the need for additional housing, but also emphasized the importance of ensuring that road infrastructure can adequately support the projected population growth. He noted that it was essential to plan carefully so that surrounding communities are not restructured in ways that could impact their tranquility and safety. Mr. Anderson stated that his concern was with the provision that stated that direct recommended ordinance changes were not adopted, then they would have to present documentation of public engagement that occurred and the reasons why the adoption did not occur. He noted that this was not exactly giving a “blank check,” but it could mean that they would have to justify their decisions to others. He further noted that he was unclear on the meaning of some items, such as inclusionary zoning, which vary widely by community. While he supported some definitions fully, he disagreed with others. He also expressed opposition to initiatives aimed at forcing individuals away from vehicle use in favor of walkable communities. He stated that, while their community is pedestrian-friendly, residents must retain the right to use vehicles, which were essential for economic mobility and access to better employment opportunities. He noted that such restrictions could hinder economic advancement for several constituents in their districts. He indicated that he wanted to amend the resolution. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Hugg stated that he was not aware of a formal definition of inclusionary zoning and noted that what they were reviewing and being asked to consider was mandated by the State Housing Authority and the state. He mentioned that he has spent most of his career working in that area and emphasized that while some provisions sounded appealing, they could be difficult to implement. He also highlighted that introducing additional housing into a developed community, designed around a specific set of utilities and road infrastructure, could be problematic. He stressed that it was ultimately up to council and staff to recommend ordinance changes and for council to decide whether to adopt them. Although the city would need to demonstrate to the state that it considered issues such as affordable housing, if certain provisions did not fit Dover’s context, there was no mandate to adopt them, but the city must explain why they were not adopted. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Hugg clarified that the technical assistant’s role was to work through the pilot program items and provide examples and suggestions that Dover could consider. He noted that while issues like density and building heights for inclusionary zoning remain important, higher density tends to work best in mixed-use developments, such as those in Middletown with apartments over commercial spaces. He emphasized that parking requirements are less critical than other priorities and stated he would have no objections to a proposed amendment. Mayor Christiansen concurred with Mr. Anderson and Dr. Sudler and cautioned council Page 61

Item #3. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 27, 2025 PAGE 28 regarding the approval of the resolution. He emphasized that council served as the local authority, granted by the city’s charter, to determine the city’s future. He expressed concern about potential pressure or threats from the Governor, noting that yielding under such circumstances would have consequences. He referenced similar efforts in Sussex County and stressed that the city has the legislative authority to address its own needs. He acknowledged the housing shortage but highlighted the importance of balancing the protection of the tax base with providing necessary housing for citizens. Dr. Sudler concurred with Mayor Christiansen and Mr. Anderson, expressing his support for the city in maintaining local control over municipal decisions. He emphasized the need to focus on future road infrastructure, including improvements to bypasses and the installation of speed humps, not speed bumps, as previously referenced by Ms. Main, to enhance safety for current residents and accommodate potential population growth in the City of Dover. He also suggested that, moving forward, any documents presented to council should include a definition of terms when addressing zoning issues or related matters. Mr. Neil stated that he had served on the HB 442 Legislative Task Force for Manufactured Housing Subcommittee and noted that Dover was actively addressing the housing gap through ongoing developments. He highlighted that building heights have been increased from six (6) to ten stories to allow for more apartments. He expressed concern that current state resolutions do not ensure that low and fixed-income housing remains affordable. He explained that when buildings or communities are sold, affordability often disappears, as tenants face higher costs due to investor profits and new loans. He suggested that resolutions should require that affordable housing being sold be offered first to tenants, either as a co-op or a common interest community with professional management to maintain solvency, and that rents could be regulated similarly to utilities. Ms. Arndt encourage council to view this as an opportunity to benefit from the expertise of housing professionals. She noted that the state housing representatives were not bound by prior recommendations but could provide guidance by reviewing the city’s policies, ordinances, and comprehensive plan, and offering suggestions for improvement. She emphasized that council was under no obligation to implement recommendations with which they disagree. Conversely, if there were suggestions that align with council’s goals and would benefit the community, the city could take full advantage of the experts’ technical knowledge. She noted that it was a pilot program, and participation does not commit the city to adopt any recommendations. Mr. Rocha emphasized that if there was no obligation and the city was simply using technical assistance to gain knowledge or to consider future changes to improve housing affordability, he believed it was a good idea. Regarding inclusionary housing, he explained that the state has programs aimed at creating affordable housing for low and moderate-income households, noting the use in New Castle County. He described the two (2) programs: the workforce housing program and the moderately priced dwelling units program, emphasizing that the state does not provide strict definitions. He reiterated that the resolution only provided technical assistance, and he supported the educational component, seeing no other obligations for the city. Responding to Dr. Sudler, Mr. Griffith clarified that the resolution, as originally written, indicated that the city understood a condition of receiving technical assistance was a Page 62

Item #3. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 27, 2025 PAGE 29 commitment to implement at least one (1) strategy to permit more diverse housing types. He noted that the resolution does contain language reflecting that commitment. He further explained that if the resolution were amended to omit certain portions and/or accept portions, a council member could make a motion to amend and make a vote on the amended resolution. Responding to Dr. Sudler, Mr. Griffith clarified that if they commit to the technology opponent of the resolution, they would be entitled to the technical assistance. Ms. Arndt moved for acceptance of Resolution No. 2025-11. The motion was seconded by Mr. Boggerty. Mr. Anderson concurred with Dr. Sudler that the scope of commitment in the resolution should be narrowed, noting that while council has the right to back out, Mr. Griffith had indicated that a commitment was being made. He also agreed with Mayor Christiansen that approving the resolution as written could set a precedent. He stated that if the City were committing significant funds, it might be justified; however, since no financial contribution was required, he saw no reason to compromise the City’s sovereignty for a pilot program intended only to test ideas. Mr. Anderson moved to strike line numbers 52 and 53, which were for reduced parking requirements in the areas zoned, etc. The motion was seconded by Dr. Sudler. Andria Bennett, City Clerk, read lines 52 and 53 that stated, “Reduce parking requirements in areas zoned for residential and mixed-use to promote walkable communities in addition to providing more affordable development opportunities.” Mr. Neil stated that the groundbreaking for the downtown multimodal garage was intended to provide parking for the 120 planned apartments in that area. Mr. Anderson stated that they needed to review parking requirements in the area, noting that at one (1) point, every apartment, including studio units, was required to have two (2) parking spaces. He explained that the city had amended its zoning laws to address that, which he agreed was reasonable. However, he expressed concern that insufficient parking could push residents onto street parking in surrounding neighborhoods, potentially inhibiting Emergency Medical Services (EMS), police, and fire response. Mr. Anderson moved for the amendment of the adoption of Resolution No. 2025-11, to strike out lines 52 and 53, regarding reduced parking requirements. The motion was seconded by Dr. Sudler. Mr. Anderson expressed concerns about density issues and emphasized that outcomes would depend on how lot sizes and setbacks were adjusted. He noted the importance of maintaining green space and cautioned against over-urbanizing the city, which could reduce yard space and create safety concerns. Dr. Sudler concurred with Mr. Anderson, noting that Dover was a “small wonder” with several geographic and cultural jewels. While he supported growth and development, he did not support reshaping the city in a way that undermines its traditional character and history. He suggested reaching out to the state, through DelDOT or the Governor, to request assistance with financing Page 63

Item #3. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 27, 2025 PAGE 30 or revenue for road infrastructure. He cited roads such as Saulsbury Road, Kenton Road, and Forest Avenue, which required modern road infrastructure to help the city grow, to reduce congestion, and prevent issues such as road rage. He emphasized that he supports state assistance, but not at the expense of restructuring or reshaping communities solely for financial gain. Responding to Ms. Hall, Ms. Bennett clarified that council voted to strike lines 52 and 53 of the resolution, which stated: “Reduced parking requirements and areas zoned for residential and mixed use to promote profitable communities, in addition to providing more affordable development opportunities that were stricken.” Mr. Anderson moved to amend Resolution No. 2025-11 by striking lines 52 and 53, reducing parking requirements in areas zoned for residential and mixed-use to promote walkable communities in addition to providing more affordable development opportunities. The motion was seconded by Dr. Sudler and carried by a roll call vote of seven (7) yes (Hall, Boggerty, Anderson, Rocha, Sudler, Lewis, Neil), one (1) no (Arndt), and one (1) absent (Pillsbury). Mr. Anderson moved to approve Resolution No. 2025-11 as amended. The motion was seconded by Dr. Sudler and carried by a roll call vote of seven (7) yes (Hall, Boggerty, Arndt, Rocha, Sudler, Lewis, Neil), one (1) no (Anderson), and one (1) absent (Pillsbury). FINAL READING PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2025-16 – PROJECT CARRY- FORWARD BUDGET BALANCES/PROPOSED BUDGET AMENDMENTS (PATRICIA MARNEY, CONTROLLER/TREASURER) The First Reading of the Proposed Ordinance was accomplished during the Council Meeting of October 13, 2025. Council President Neil reminded members of the public that copies of the proposed ordinance were available at the entrance of the Council Chambers or on the City’s website at www.cityofdover.gov under “Government”. Ms. Arndt moved that the Final Reading of the proposed ordinance be acknowledged by title only, seconded by Mr. Rocha, and unanimously carried. Ms. Patricia Marney, Controller/Treasurer, reviewed the Proposed Ordinance #2025-16 – Project Carry-Forward Budget Balances/Proposed Budget Amendments. By motion of Ms. Arndt, seconded by Ms. Hall, Council, by a unanimous roll call vote (Pillsbury absent), adopted Ordinance #2025-16 (Exhibit #1). CITY MANAGER'S ANNOUNCEMENTS Mr. Hugg had no announcements. MAYOR’S ANNOUNCEMENTS Mayor Christiansen announced that on November 1st, the city will recognize Extra Mile Day in conjunction with the National Extra Mile Association, celebrating volunteerism not only in the City of Dover but throughout the United States. He further announced that on November 11th, Page 64

Item #3. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 27, 2025 PAGE 31 there will be a Veterans Day Commemoration at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, located adjacent to the County Levy Court building. The event is sponsored by the Vietnam Veterans of America Chapter 850. On November 21st, the city will launch its partnership with the International Ministerial Alliance of Dover and Vicinity, Inc. (IMA) for a Turkey and Condiment Drive, offering meals and accompaniments to those in need. He also shared that on December 4th, Dover will host its Home for the Holidays celebration in front of City Hall at 5:30 p.m., and on December 13th, the Dashing Through Dover Electric Light Parade will take place at 5:30 p.m. He encouraged everyone to visit the city’s website for registration details and additional information about the events. COUNCIL MEMBERS' ANNOUNCEMENTS Mr. Rocha stated that, in regard to the increased traffic concerns raised by Mr. Anderson and Dr. Sudler, he suggested that council begin a discussion on how to address those issues and develop recommendations to present to DelDOT. He noted that as the City’s population grows, particularly with more pedestrians downtown and additional rental housing, the resulting increase in density will continue to shape Dover into a more metropolitan environment. Mr. Rocha further stated that a metropolitan traffic study should be initiated to allow the city to proactively make recommendations to DelDOT, rather than relying on recommendations from DelDOT. Responding to Mr. Rocha, Mayor Christiansen stated that each year, the City submits project requests to the Dover/Kent County Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), which works in conjunction with DelDOT on transportation projects. He explained that the Dover/Kent County Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) addresses transportation and traffic needs for both the City of Dover and Kent County in coordination with DelDOT. He requested that any additional project proposals be submitted through the City Manager for forwarding to the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). He also mentioned that Governor Matt Meyer has appointed a Transportation Study Committee to address financing, infrastructure, and related matters, and noted that he serves on that committee. He assured Council that he would carry forward the city’s and council’s requests to that body. Responding to Mr. Rocha, Mayor Christiansen responded by stating that over the past several years, multiple freight studies have been conducted regarding trucking. He noted that the East/West Bypass Study and additional service road projects for the industrial areas have been considered to help alleviate congestion. He explained that this was an ongoing process and that additional information was available through Marilyn Smith, Executive Director of the Dover/Kent County Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). He emphasized that transportation issues were being addressed not only within the City of Dover, but throughout Kent County, which was why the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) was established. He added that as development continued to increase, a number of studies were underway and ongoing to effectively manage traffic concerns. Dr. Sudler announced that on Wednesday, October 29th, the Blue Ribbon Opioid Task Force Committee will meet in the City Hall Council Chambers to discuss the best use and distribution of the opioid settlement funds. He noted that the committee is seeking community input and encouraged residents to attend and share their feedback. Page 65

Item #3. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 27, 2025 PAGE 32 Mr. Anderson stated that there is an upcoming opportunity on November 25th for discussion with the Kent Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) and Marilyn Smith during the Safety, Advisory, and Transportation Committee meeting, as presented by Mr. Boggerty. He noted that if preparation begins now, council could develop questions in advance for the Council Committee of the Whole meeting, which he believed would be beneficial. He further mentioned that he would like to receive public input on two (2) proposed traffic ordinances that will be introduced in draft form during the Committee of the Whole meeting on October 29th. He encouraged members of the public to participate by emailing the City Clerk’s Office or himself, or by attending the meeting to share their comments in person. He also addressed shared concerns regarding gun violence, noting that on November 25th, the City is expected to receive an updated ZeroEyes proposal, which Council could review, vote on, and potentially implement. Dr. Sudler stated that he would like to see all council members collaborate with department heads and staff to host an event providing meals for constituents, as a way for the municipality to give back to the community using taxpayers’ dollars. He noted that this gesture would serve as a good-faith effort and a demonstration of unity and solidarity among Council and City staff at future events. The meeting adjourned at 7:35 p.m. ANDRIA L. BENNETT CITY CLERK All ordinances, resolutions, motions, and orders adopted by the City Council during their Regular Meeting of October 27, 2025, are hereby approved. ROBIN R. CHRISTIANSEN MAYOR /AB Exhibits Exhibit #1 – Proposed Ordinance #2025-16 – Project Carry-Forward Budget Balances/Proposed Budget Amendments Page 66

Item #4. COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE The Council Committee of the Whole met on October 28, 2025, at 6:00 p.m. with Council President Neil presiding. Members of Council present were Mr. Anderson, Ms. Arndt, Mr. Boggerty, Ms. Hall, Dr. Pillsbury (via WebEx), Mr. Rocha, and Dr. Sudler. Mr. Lewis was absent. Mayor Christiansen was also present. Civilian members present for their Committee meetings were Dr. Jackson (via WebEx), and Ms. Smack (Safety, Advisory, and Transportation), Mr. Iriowen, and Mr. Wilson (Utility), Mr. Garfinkel, and Mr. Shevock (Legislative, Finance, and Administration). ADOPTION OF AGENDA Ms. Arndt moved for adoption of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Anderson and unanimously carried. SAFETY, ADVISORY, AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE The Safety, Advisory, and Transportation Committee met with Chairman Boggerty presiding. Adoption of Agenda Ms. Arndt moved for adoption of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Rocha and unanimously carried. City of Dover Infrastructure Modernization Project (Joseph Simmons, Information Technology Director) Mr. Joseph Simmons, Information Technology Director, reviewed the presentation entitled “Redundancy, Performance, Scalability, Resiliency, and Ease of Use”. This item was informational; committee action was not required. Responding to Mr. Neil, Mr. Simmons stated that the information he presented is regarding the backbone of the system and would help with any performance issues with Tyler, and any backup concerns. Responding to Ms. Arndt, Mr. Simmons estimated that they received about $285,000 in grant funding. He noted that a majority of the project would be funded by the grant money that was already awarded. He explained that the funding was forwarded to the State of Delaware, and he would not have to wait for the federal funding to begin the project. Responding to Ms. Arndt, Mr. Simmons emphasized that the goal is to have the project completed by 2026. He explained that by doing the upgrades, the city will be less likely to need any upgrades for five to seven more years. Quality of Life Enforcement Initiative Final Report (Thomas Johnson, Chief of Police) Thomas Johnson, Chief of Police, reviewed the background and analysis of the Quality-of-Life Enforcement Initiative. Page 67

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING October 28, 2025 PAGE 2 Item #4. This item was informational; committee action was not required. Responding to Ms. Arndt, Chief Johnson confirmed that under the Quality-of-Life Initiative, only twelve percent of charges were upheld. Chief Johnson noted that, as law enforcement, they input all arrests and events into a criminal justice portal. This system records event details such as dates, times, people involved, and charges. Later, as the court disposes of these events, the results are transmitted back to the police department. He mentioned that they do not have the comprehensive view that the Department of Justice maintains of the individual before the court. Therefore, if a case is settled with the individual pleading guilty to one charge and the other charges being nolle prossed in exchange for this plea, that information is reflected accordingly. He explained that when a person faces four charges, they might plead guilty to two, with the remaining two being dismissed, which is reflected in the data. The Department of Justice can see that the individual was charged with criminal trespassing in Dover, but also has five other open cases in different jurisdictions. He noted that this situation can leave property owners feeling dissatisfied that their case wasn't prosecuted fully, which is a consequence of the system. Responding to Ms. Arndt, Chief Johnson stated that when a lower-level violation occurring in Dover is used as leverage to secure a plea for a different charge elsewhere, it raises questions about whether that approach reflects true justice. He noted that changing such systemic practices to achieve the desired accountability and measurable outcomes would be a long and difficult process. He added that it is challenging to demonstrate accountability when enforcement actions involve chronic offenders who frequently reoffend. Ms. Arndt noted that there are a lot of referral services and not enough resources, which causes a huge disconnect. Responding to Dr. Sudler, Dennis Kelleher, Deputy Attorney General, explained that comparing Dover’s conviction rates to the Department of Justice’s can be misleading. Even when defendants face multiple similar charges, probation or minor penalties are often the result, regardless of the number of counts, meaning dismissals typically occur as part of the plea agreements, not because cases are disregarded. He emphasized that low-level offenses yield proportionate sentences and that systemic challenges such as homelessness, mental health, and substance abuse cannot be solved solely through the criminal justice system. He explained that the Department of Justice remains committed to collaboration with Dover Police and other partners to address the complex, statewide issues. Responding to Dr. Sudler, Mr. Kelleher said that both he and the Department of Justice believe that decisions about whether to arrest someone or put them into intervention diversion should be made locally. He pointed out that officers who interact directly with an individual are in a better position to determine if they would benefit from services or if an arrest is necessary. Mayor Christiansen thanked the men and women of the Dover Police Department for their hard work day in and day out. He noted that there needs to be consequences for people who commit crimes and there must be accountability for their actions. He explained that they tried to compassionately offer services to the people that they encountered during the Quality-of-Life Page 68

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING October 28, 2025 PAGE 3 Item #4. Initiative. He stated that as a community, they must be compassionate without enabling people to be in the current conditions and affecting the community the way that they are. Responding to Mr. Rocha, Watara Heath, Behavioral Health Specialist, stated that there has been a contract to administer mental health treatment as well as substance abuse treatment within the Department of Corrections for the last ten years. When they know someone is being committed, they will often reach out to the Department of Corrections to provide the individual's background and initiate the process. Often, individuals are not forthcoming with certain concerns or health issues that they may have. The goal is that they will be discharged to a residential program or an outpatient program, but all of that is voluntary. Responding to Mr. Rocha, Ms. Heath confirmed that there are supposed to be pathways that they enter, which include individualized therapy and group therapy following assessments to see what the needs of the individual are. However, the individual must be willing to accept the services, and often they see people serving their time and are released back to where they were to begin with. After they initially reach out before intake, they are not provided with whether the individual planned to participate in treatment, if they are being discharged in the area, or if they were set up for certain outpatient services. Often, people are released, unhoused, and have no follow-up appointment for services beyond incarceration. They have spent a significant amount of time sober and then become a high risk for a fatal overdose because they believe they can use the same amount of the same drug that they were using before incarceration. Responding to Mr. Rocha, Ms. Heath stated that she is unsure why there are no incentive programs that strongly encourage them to participate, or there would be consequences. She noted that in 2008, when she first started in the field, there were consequences and court-ordered treatment. She worked in court-ordered rehab where they addressed mental health and substance abuse over six to eighteen months after being released from the Department of Corrections to their facility. If someone in the diversion program violated or tested positive for a substance, after about three times, they would be violated but not sent back to the Department of Corrections; they would be sentenced to a residential program. She explained that from her experience, the treatment was more effective. People had longer recovery times and fewer relapses. Relapses happened, but there were fewer of them. Also, things have changed with insurance policies, and companies are not being paid what they used to be paid. The longest in the State of Delaware that an individual can receive is thirty days, which is an issue within itself. Something has changed over the last fifteen years, and the funding is not there for individuals to get adequate treatment that they need. Mr. Boggerty recalled working for Connections and offering programs such as Welfare to Work, which offered benefits based on their participation and job readiness. If provided services to help them remain sober and aid them in progressing through careers. Responding to Ms. Hall, Mr. Kelleher explained that trespassing is a low-level offense. Trespass in the third degree, which involves being on property that is not a residence, typically results in a fine; trespass in the second degree, involving a building that is not a home, carries a maximum penalty of 30 days in jail but often results in a fine or minimal probation for first offenses. Trespass in the first degree applies to entering an occupied residence. He noted that while such cases are Page 69

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING October 28, 2025 PAGE 4 Item #4. prosecuted, the existing laws limit sentencing options. He emphasized that addressing the issue would require changes to current laws. Responding to Ms. Hall, Mr. Kelleher stated that there are restrictions on what the city council can do with passing ordinances with serious penalties under an ordinance-only offense. He noted that most of what the city is dealing with are state statutes, which the city council does have the ability to lobby state legislators to change penalties. Mr. Anderson thanked Chief Johnson and everyone at the Dover Police Department. He noted that although not all the problems were solved, it definitely made a difference. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Kelleher stated that any state official would say that adding more prosecutors would be helpful. Reducing any particular prosecutor's caseload allows them to spend more time on a particular case, which could provide better outcomes. He noted that case load varies widely depending on the court and the seriousness of the charges. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Kelleher stated that there would be an effect on the ability to handle some of the lower-level crimes, but it would not make a significant dent in the issues the city is facing. If there were more prosecutors, they could try more criminal trespassing cases. The real impact of having more prosecutors would be obtaining better outcomes on more serious cases. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Kelleher stated that the difference between trespassing and what is considered burglary in state law is whether the person intended to commit a crime. Therefore, if there is a homeless person who breaks into a building to sleep, then you cannot make a burden out of the case. If they have broken into a building and they are confronted by the owner and they commit a crime there, then they would be charged with a crime and burglary, which would allow for more serious offenses. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Kelleher stated that the crime could be considered on a case- by-case basis. If it can be proven that they broke into the building and intended to commit any crime, then it could become a burglary case. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Kelleher stated that referrals to the Dover Hope Zone and drug court are fairly regular conditions of a plea to any degree of offense. They are either directed to jail and then probation or straight to probation, and then they engage in substance abuse programs and follow the recommended treatment. The follow-up is done by the Department of Corrections in partnership with various subcontractors. Responding to Mr. Boggerty, Mr. Kelleher stated that while everything he listed are crimes, they are not serious crimes. All trespassing offenses are misdemeanor crimes that are low-level offenses with minimal penalties. If the same person is repeatedly breaking into the same building, their bail conditions should address the concerns because they are often ordered not to have contact with the property. The difference between burglary and trespassing is that they do not just intend to break in but they intend to commit a different crime inside. Typically, people think of burglary as someone breaking in to steal something. The breaking in is part of the crime, but the intent to Page 70

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING October 28, 2025 PAGE 5 Item #4. commit a subsequent offense in the building is what converts it from a misdemeanor offense to a felony. Responding to Mr. Boggerty, Mr. Kelleher stated that the state legislature would have to address the fact that someone is a habitual trespasser on numerous properties and not just one property, thereby avoiding prosecution. Responding to Dr. Sudler, Chief Johnson explained that Chapter 22, Title 16, Section 2211 of Delaware law provides a mechanism for involuntary treatment related to substance abuse, similar to the existing mental health provisions allowing immediate intervention when an individual poses a risk to themselves or others. However, he noted that this section has never been made operational due to the absence of necessary procedures and infrastructure. He stated that, if implemented, the law could allow law enforcement or medical providers to refer individuals at imminent risk, such as those facing a potentially fatal overdose, for mandatory evaluation and treatment until a professional determines it is safe for them to be released. Responding to Dr. Sudler, Mr. Kelleher stated that, as a community member, he does believe that there are people who are such a danger to themselves that taking their free will away from them in order to force them into treatment is an appropriate approach. However, there are significant concerns for people's constitutional rights, and where the balance falls is hard to say. Responding to Mr. Rocha, Mr. Kelleher stated that there is a big difference in the law between breaking into a dwelling or a building. A building is any structure, whether it is an occupied commercial facility or commercial property for rent; it is still a building. A dwelling is defined in the law as a building where someone ordinarily lodges overnight. If someone breaks into your house that you are living in, that is burglary in the second degree, which is a serious felony offense. Arguments have been made about whether there is a dwelling, but nobody is actually living in it. Whether it is new construction or just a house where someone moved out and it is on the market, but there is no one living there, that is now a building and not a dwelling. Responding to Mr. Rocha, Mr. Kelleher stated that the property damages would be written into the resolution. Burglary does not have a dollar amount. But if criminal mischief is committed, it does go up in severity depending on the value of the damage that is done. Responding to Mr. Neil, Mr. Kelleher stated that he disagreed with the characterization of himself as an enabler. He noted that they have a structure, they operate within that structure, and there are certain penalties provided by the state law for certain offenses. He explained that over the course of his career, he has done everything he can to ensure people who commit crimes are held responsible for their actions. However, if all they are committing are offenses that the state law views as fairly minor, there is only so much they can do. Ms. Smack noted that Mr. Kelleher cannot be held responsible for what is being seen in the city. She suggested going to the state level, like Chief Johnson has recommended before. She also recommended looking into scholarships that get people who want to get sober out of Dover to utilize those resources. Page 71

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING October 28, 2025 PAGE 6 Item #4. In closing, Chief Johnson stated that the prosecutor’s office and the police department share the same frustrations. There are so many things that impact the conditions that they are trying to address at the local level that begin at the state level. What the substance of the law says, what the attached penalties are, what the formula for recidivism is, whether it is the same offender in multiple places, or whether it is the same offender. The judges have their formulas for sentencing guidelines, and until the state tells the judges to change their formula, there is nothing the police department or the Department of Justice can do. Mr. Boggerty moved for adjournment of the Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee meeting, hearing no objection the meeting adjourned at 7:56 p.m. UTILITY COMMITTEE The Utility Committee met with Chairman Rocha presiding. Adoption of Agenda Ms. Arndt moved for adoption of the agenda, seconded by Ms. Hall and unanimously carried. Evaluation of Proposals – SCADA Equipment Upgrade (Jason Lyon, Water & Wastewater Director) Mr. Jason Lyon, Water & Wastewater Director, reviewed the background and analysis of the evaluation of proposals for the SCADA Equipment Upgrade. Staff recommended awarding the contract to Avista for the SCADA Equipment Upgrade, RFP #26-0002WW, for the amount of $480,613. Dr. Sudler moved to recommend accepting the staff recommendation to award the contract to Avista for the SCADA Equipment Upgrade, RFP #26-0002WW, for the amount of $480,613. The motion was seconded by Mr. Boggerty and unanimously carried. Sole Source Procurement – Cartanza RTU/RTAC Replacement (EE2602) (Paul Waddell, Electric Director) Mr. Paul Waddell, Electric Director, reviewed the background and analysis of the sole source procurement for the Cartanza RTU/RTAC Replacement (EE2602). Staff recommended approval of the sole-source procurement of SEL RTU/RTAC hardware and associated engineering services for Project EE2602. Ms. Arndt moved to recommend approval of the staff recommendation for the sole source procurement for project EE2602. The motion was seconded by Ms. Hall and unanimously carried. Page 72

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING October 28, 2025 PAGE 7 Item #4. Sole Source Procurement – ABB to SEL Relay Replacement (Paul Waddell, Electric Director) Mr. Paul Waddell, Electric Director, reviewed the background and analysis of the sole source procurement for the ABB to SEL Relay Replacement. Staff recommended approval of the sole-source procurement of SEL relay hardware and services for Project EE2615. Ms. Hall moved to recommend approval of the staff recommendation of the sole source procurement for the SEL relay hardware for project EE2615. The motion was seconded by Ms. Arndt and unanimously carried. Mr. Rocha moved for adjournment of the Utility Committee meeting, hearing no objection the meeting adjourned at 8:05 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 Ms. Hall and unanimously carried. County and Municipal General Pension Plan Update (Naomi Poole, Human Resources Director, Patricia Marney, Controller/Treasurer, David S. Hugg, III, City Manager) Ms. Naomi Poole provided a brief update on the status of the County and Municipal General Employee Pension Plan. Ms. Poole noted that the staff conducted a survey to assess employee interest in joining the State Pension Plan. Of approximately 240 eligible employees, 66 responded, with 53% expressing interest in the pension plan and 47% preferring to retain the current plan. As results showed no clear consensus, it was recommended that meetings be held with all union presidents over the coming weeks to discuss the pension option, its implications, and its alignment with existing contracts, which currently include provisions for the City’s 401(a) and 457 plans. Following these discussions, staff will determine whether there is a collective interest in pursuing the pension plan and will provide an update and documentation outlining next steps. This item was informational; committee action was not required. Review of The People’s Community Center Economic Development Fund Application (Councilwoman Hall and David S. Hugg, III, City Manager) Councilwoman Hall and Mr. David S. Hugg, III, City Manager, reviewed the background and analysis regarding the People’s Community Center’s Economic Development Fund application. It was recommended to approve the People’s Community Center Economic Development Fund application. Page 73

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING October 28, 2025 PAGE 8 Item #4. Responding to Mr. Neil, Mr. Hugg stated that one of their questions is what their goal is and how they are going to measure it. Mr. Anderson noted that workforce development is an important part of economic development. He emphasized the importance of making sure the constituents are trained for the jobs that are being attracted to the area. Dr. Sudler moved to recommend referring the application back to staff and that it be brought back before the committee by the end of the year. The motion was seconded by Ms. Arndt and unanimously carried. Proposed Ordinance #2025-18 – Amending Chapter 2 – Administration, Article V – Finance, by adding Sec. 2-427 – New Vehicle Billable Rates (Jason Lyon, Water & Wastewater Director) Mr. Jason Lyon, Water and Wastewater Director, reviewed the background and analysis regarding the Proposed Ordinance #2025-18. Staff recommended forwarding Proposed Ordinance #2025-18 to council for approval. Once adopted, staff would implement new billable rates within thirty (30) days. Dr. Sudler moved to recommend approval of the staff recommendation to forward Proposed Ordinance #2025-18 to council for approval, and once adopted, staff will implement new billable rates within thirty days. The motion was seconded by Mr. Shevock. Responding to Mr. Garfinkel, Mr. Lyon stated that, for example, if a fire hydrant were damaged, there is generally a police report done, insurance is taken, and the individual department would put together the costs. That would then be sent over to Customer Service, who would bill the entity that needs to pay for the damage. Typically, it is the insurance company. The same process would be used for collections as is done with any utilities. Responding to Mr. Garfinkel, Ms. Marney noted that very rarely do the charges go to collections because they are often paid by the insurance companies. Dr. Sudler moved to recommend approval of the staff recommendation to forward Proposed Ordinance #2025-18 to council for approval, and once adopted, staff will implement new billable rates within thirty days. The motion was seconded by Mr. Shevock and unanimously carried. Proposed Ordinance #2025-20 – Amending Chapter 106 – Traffic and Vehicles, Article I – In General, by adding Sec. 106-18 – Strictly Enforced (Councilman Anderson, and Chief Johnson) Councilman Anderson and Chief Johnson reviewed the background and analysis regarding the Proposed Ordinance #2025-20. It was recommended to forward Proposed Ordinance #2025-20 to council for approval. Page 74

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING October 28, 2025 PAGE 9 Item #4. Chief Johnson stated that while the department will follow whatever direction is decided, he is uncertain how district justices will handle requests for judicial review of speeding cases. He noted that it remains to be seen whether they will apply the new standard or revert to their usual approach. Chief Johnson added that he would prefer to observe how the process unfolds before offering an assessment of the potential outcomes. Mayor Christiansen stated that while both the Chief and Council are focused on public safety and strict law enforcement, judicial authority ultimately determines outcomes once violations reach the court. He emphasized that speed limits, such as 25 mph in neighborhoods and 20 mph in school zones, are not suggestions, and enforcement should reflect that. However, he cautioned that even with new ordinances, enforcement efforts may continue to encounter limitations within the judicial system’s purview. He concluded that the city should move forward with the ordinance but noted that citizens should understand the distinction between the city’s enforcement role and the judiciary’s authority. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Chief Johnson explained that the severity of injuries from a pedestrian collision increases significantly between 25-35 mph. Drawing on his past experience as an accident investigator, he noted that scientific studies show changes in injury outcomes with every five-mile increase in speed. For example, when a victim’s shoes are left at the point of impact and the person is thrown from that location, it typically indicates a speed of around 35 mph. He noted that life-threatening injuries commonly occur in the 25–35 mph range, depending on the individual’s health and other factors. Responding to Dr. Sudler, Mr. Anderson stated that he supports speed cushions. He mentioned that he would like to implement a pilot program in two areas of the city if the residents in those areas agree. This would help collect data on how the community is impacted and how the ordinance functions. He explained that Ms. Main is not the only one who has voiced complaints about speeding in that area, so if they can get a majority of residents to sign a petition, they could proceed with a pilot program. Mr. Anderson suggested running the second pilot on East Loockerman Street if the roadway is not closed. Belinda Main, 142 Reese Street, Dover, expressed concern regarding speeding issues in her neighborhood and questioned the city’s limitations on using signage and other traffic-control measures. She noted that areas outside the city limits effectively utilize stop signs, speed dips, and similar low-cost options. Ms. Main observed that “Children at Play” signs in her area are inconsistently placed and not visible from both directions. She voiced support for affordable traffic-calming measures such as speed cushions, additional stop signs, and improved visibility through tree maintenance. Ms. Main encouraged continued collaboration to identify practical, cost- effective solutions that enhance safety for children and residents throughout the City of Dover. Responding to Ms. Main, Mayor Christiansen stated that the speed dips are part of the wastewater system that was put in to take the water away, but it does help control speed, as she mentioned. Responding to Mr. Garfinkel, Chief Johnson stated that in the real world, he does not envision his officers giving a citation for 26 mph in a 25 mph zone. He explained that due to legal standards and case law, officers typically do not pursue speeding enforcement for violations under five miles Page 75

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING October 28, 2025 PAGE 10 Item #4. per hour over the limit, as such cases rarely hold up in court. He noted that enforcement requires proper device calibration and documentation, and that most judges give drivers the benefit of the doubt within certain tolerances. However, some individuals may choose to pay the fine rather than contest the citation. Responding to Ms. Main, Chief Johnson stated that he agreed with Ms. Main’s comments and clarified that his earlier remarks referred to general traffic enforcement practices. He explained that enforcement tolerances depend on the posted speed limit and surrounding conditions. Lower limits, such as in school or residential zones, allow for less tolerance, while higher-speed areas without pedestrian traffic allow for more. He emphasized that officers consider context, such as the presence of hazards or school zones, when determining appropriate enforcement levels. Mr. Anderson noted that he would not be opposed to a 20 mph speed limit in a residential area. He explained that there are state laws that are involved, and the state law provides 25 mph for residential zones. Responding to Ms. Arndt, Chief Johnson stated that the citation would be an ordinance violation, which would be a different mechanism for charging, and he does not believe that points would be issued like some of the other consequences for a speeding conviction under the state's statute. He noted he may need to have a conversation with Judge Wilson to get his opinion on what would happen if a few local ordinance citations were challenged, as they will require extra paperwork to get onto the court docket, so they could have their day in court. He explained that once he could evaluate the results by more than one judge, he could gather data on how the Justice of the Peace Court 7 would handle the workload of the ordinance-related speeding citations. He noted that he would like to see what the judges do to provide a better answer as to what strictly enforced means because it is a subjective message in signage. Responding to Ms. Arndt, Mr. Anderson stated that no points are issued until the individual is ten miles over the speed limit. He explained that strictly enforced is something that if you are going to strictly enforce the speed limit laws, then it is required by state law as you go through the code. He said that it is a requirement because you have to warn drivers if you are going to strictly enforce the laws. He explained that the signage can be phased in over any timeframe chosen by addressing high-priority neighborhoods first and continuing until finished. He noted that it could take years, but it needs to be started. Mr. Garfinkel moved to recommend forwarding Proposed Ordinance #2025-20 to council for approval. The motion was seconded by Ms. Hall and unanimously carried. Proposed Ordinance #2025-21 – Amending Chapter 106 – Traffic and Vehicles, Article III – Stopping, Standing, and Parking, Division 1 - Generally by adding Sec. 106-139 – Pedestrian Safety (Councilman Anderson, and Chief Johnson) Mr. David S. Hugg, III, City Manager, reviewed the background and analysis regarding the Proposed Ordinance #2025-21. It was recommended to forward Proposed Ordinance #2025-21 to council for approval. Page 76

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING October 28, 2025 PAGE 11 Item #4. Dr. Sudler noted that Delaware Code, Title 21, §4186, prohibits obstructing a driver’s view with objects, passengers, or vehicle loads, and provides tools to address individuals in medians who may distract drivers. He emphasized that while some individuals in medians may be in genuine need, the practice creates safety hazards for both drivers and pedestrians. Dr. Sudler suggested considering innovative solutions to balance public safety with support for those in need, such as placing QR codes in medians to direct donations to organizations or facilities that provide sustainable assistance, rather than giving money directly to individuals. He concluded that this approach could address public concern while ensuring compliance with existing law. Dr. Sudler also noted that the Newark, New Jersey city council implemented a code that if anyone is providing money to individuals in the medians are ticketed because it could cause a delay in traffic, which can result in road rage. Responding to Dr. Sudler, Mr. Anderson noted that a portion of the ordinance includes a similar citation because, as long as the supply component is there, the demand will be as well. He emphasized that the proposed ordinance is not an anti-panhandling ordinance; it is focused on pedestrian safety. He explained that the ordinance is not to target any particular group of people but rather focus on activities that are dangerous. Mr. Hugg added that panhandling is protected by an individual's constitutional right. He noted that it is not a violation to ask someone for money, and it is very hard to enforce. He emphasized that if someone is killed because they are crossing the highway to ask for money, that is a pedestrian or traffic safety issue. Mr. Anderson noted that the proposed ordinance presented had a legal review completed prior to the meeting. Responding to Mr. Shevock, Chief Johnson stated that the individual could be cited for being in a lane of traffic if they are not progressing with their business of crossing the street and doing the standard pedestrian motion. If the individual takes up residency in a lane of traffic, it is in the vehicle code, and the police department can enforce it. Responding to Mr. Shevock, Chief Johnson noted that while certain panhandling behaviors may be protected under First Amendment precedent, there are circumstances, such as public intoxication or impairment, that justify intervention, such as welfare checks. He emphasized that sober individuals exercising a protected activity present a more complex legal challenge. He highlighted that discussions on this topic should remain focused on pedestrian and traffic safety, acknowledging the current legal complexities surrounding enforcement. Responding to Mr. Shevock, Chief Johnson clarified that the act of requesting money in itself is not illegal, regardless of the person’s motivation, whether due to financial need or as part of a small business effort. He noted that law enforcement monitors organized roadside solicitation, explaining that individuals in the group often coordinate among themselves to occupy the most profitable locations during different shifts. Page 77

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING October 28, 2025 PAGE 12 Item #4. Responding to Ms. Arndt, Mr. Hugg stated that the ordinance was based on the ordinance that was passed in Seaford. Mr. Hugg noted that he spoke to the City Manager, and Chief Johnson spoke to the Police Chief to ascertain if the ordinance was effective, but they reported that they have not had any challenges. Responding to Ms. Arndt, Mr. Hugg noted that the intent was for the ordinance to apply to all intersections and not just those noted on the maps presented. He explained that he and Mr. Anderson had a discussion, and he wanted to provide examples of what one hundred and two hundred feet would look like at several intersections. He questioned if the ordinance would apply to all streets, a list of streets, streets meeting a certain criterion, or if there is a set list of priority streets. Ms. Arndt stated that if the ordinance applies to all streets, then the language is pretty ambiguous. She noted that letter A states that “No person, other than a person in or on a vehicle, shall be on a City Street and approach any vehicle in operation, except a vehicle that is legally parked at the curb or the shoulder,” and she could come up situations where someone could be in the street, walking up to a neighbors car, talking to them at their legally parked car, or illegally parked car. She recommended reconsidering the language as written and tightening it up because it is fairly ambiguous. She noted that letters C and B should be reviewed as well. She explained that letter B referenced a person within the median, but there are other sanctioned activities that may be a reason to be in the median. Responding to Ms. Arndt, Mr. Anderson stated that the ordinance does say that it provides two chances for the light to change while being in the median. He noted that the median is not a place for someone to camp out, it is a safe zone to use while crossing the road. Mr. Rocha stated that he was in favor of not having anyone on any medians, even outside of the marked areas. He emphasized that they will not be able to stop panhandling, but no one should be obstructing the flow of traffic by standing in the median because it is unsafe. Mayor Christiansen emphasized that the issue is one of public safety and urged the committee to move forward with the ordinance to clear street corners despite potential legal challenges. He stated he is willing to take responsibility if the ordinance is contested, noting that enforcement is necessary to protect both pedestrians and drivers, even if it results in court proceedings. Mr. Anderson noted that the fee schedule was left out and needed to be added back in. Dr. Sudler moved to recommend forwarding Proposed Ordinance #2025-21 to city council for approval with the amendments brought forth by Ms. Arndt and Mr. Anderson. The motion was seconded by Ms. Hall and unanimously carried. Ms. Arndt noted that she would rather see the item referred back to a committee meeting for continued discussion. Dr. Sudler rescinded his motion, as well as Ms. Hall as the seconder. Page 78

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING October 28, 2025 PAGE 13 Item #4. Ms. Arndt moved to recommend referring Proposed Ordinance #2025-21 back to staff to incorporate the edits discussed and bring it back to the committee for further consideration. The motion was seconded by Ms. Hall and unanimously carried. City of Dover Vehicle Use Policy (Councilman Anderson) Councilman Anderson and Mr. David S. Hugg, III, City Manager, reviewed the background and analysis regarding the City of Dover Vehicle Use Policy. It was recommended that an Ordinance be properly drafted and forwarded to council for approval. Responding to Dr. Sudler, Mr. Hugg stated that he could later provide the budgetary cost of all the department heads having a city vehicle. He noted that there are only a handful of non-police-related vehicles that are taken home on a regular basis. He explained that the on-call Fire Marshal and the on-call employee from the Electric Department. He noted that he does not have a take-home vehicle, nor does any other department head. Mr. Anderson pointed out that the policy was put into effect when Ms. Mitchell was City Manager. He explained that the policy requires that the employee have a city business purpose to utilize the vehicle. He noted that he would expect the police chief to be approved to take home a vehicle because he is on duty 24/7. He stated that it requires the level of scrutiny that it is reviewed before the department head uses a vehicle to make sure that it complies with the code. The code states that the vehicle cannot be used for an employee's own business or another job, which is also included in the policy. Responding to Mr. Rocha, Mr. Anderson stated that the suggestion would be to confirm the policy, and the date would automatically be updated and go into effect. Responding to Mr. Rocha, Mr. Hugg stated that the acceptance of the policy would mean that it was endorsed by council rather than being something staff wrote four years ago, and everyone states they will follow it, but the policy had not officially been adopted. Responding to Ms. Arndt, Mr. Hugg stated that he cannot confirm that the policy is being followed in every department to every degree, but to the best of his knowledge, that is the current process. He noted that he has requested a department head place justification for needing a vehicle in writing. Mr. Waddell stated that most of his employees, except for about ten, are on call at some point during the year. He explained that vehicle use is authorized based on this status, noting that employees may take city vehicles home when traveling for work-related training or conferences. Responding to Ms. Arndt, Mr. Waddell stated that there is a caveat that the response time is capped at thirty minutes, and they are aware of where everyone lives from their division and how many miles it takes to get back to the city. Mr. Waddell explained that he works with his team by allowing them to make minor, direct stops on their way home, such as stopping in Walmart when they live in Cheswold. He emphasized that Page 79

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING October 28, 2025 PAGE 14 Item #4. extended personal trips or multiple stops are not permitted. He also noted that some employees may stop at a nearby gym before work, as long as it does not add extra mileage and they remain available for calls. This practice aligns with the policy proposed by Ms. Mitchell. Responding to Mr. Garfinkel, Mr. Hugg stated that no one has a personal service contract. Responding to Mr. Garfinkel, Mr. Waddell stated that the policy falls in line with the union contract. Responding to Dr. Sudler, Ms. Poole stated that there are concerns from an insurance standpoint. She explained that a list of drivers needs to be compiled for insurance purposes. Also, the policy needs to be compared to the current policy that they are drafting for vehicle usage from an insurance standpoint. She noted that there are liability concerns when they do not know what the drivers are doing. Also, all the drivers need their motor vehicle records run, and that is currently not being done. Responding to Dr. Sudler, Ms. Poole emphasized the importance of reviewing the policy comprehensively to ensure organizational compliance and minimize liability. She recommended consulting with insurance providers and Human Resources to identify necessary updates and ensure adherence to proper procedures, noting that current practices may not fully align with these standards. Responding to Ms. Poole, Mr. Anderson stated that the policy is currently in effect for all City Manager departments, and they are looking to apply the policy to the entire city. Mr. Neil moved to recommend that the policy be properly drafted and forwarded to council with the consideration of the insurance and cost factors. The motion was seconded by Dr. Sudler and unanimously carried. Discussion – Open Forum Improvements (Councilwoman Arndt) Councilwoman Arndt reviewed the background and analysis regarding the Open Forum improvements. This item was informational; committee action was not required. Dr. Sudler recommended starting the open forum at 6:00 p.m. He noted that the open forum started half an hour before the meeting previously. Also, he recommended having continuity in the process of not commenting during the open period, rather than commenting sometimes and not commenting other times. Dr. Sudler suggested removing language implying that public concerns may be addressed at a later date, noting it could create a false expectation of follow-up. He recommended instead that concerns be forwarded to the respective district council member, allowing constituents to discuss issues directly with their representative, who could then present them to the appropriate committee. This approach would help ensure fairness and clarity in the process. Page 80

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING October 28, 2025 PAGE 15 Item #4. Mr. Rocha stated that he liked Dr. Sudler's idea to refer the constituents' concerns to the district council member to have them placed on the appropriate committee. He recommended that they continue with the open forum at the beginning of the meeting, and whether it is for fifteen minutes or thirty minutes, they need to cut it off at that time, get through the business on the agenda, and then go back to the open forum if need be. Mr. Neil emphasized that the meeting should remain focused on essential city business rather than functioning as a town hall. He noted the importance of respecting staff time, highlighting that city and council personnel have obligations and should not be kept waiting, as many of the public comments that are made are repetitive. He noted that many public concerns, such as employee pay raises and taxation, have been previously discussed at the public meetings. He explained that in order not to raise taxes, enterprise funds and services fees were created. He expressed support for limiting public comment to the designated time and ensuring meetings proceed efficiently, while acknowledging a willingness to stay after the meeting to hear all public comments, while allowing staff the ability to go home. Ms. Bennett noted support for Dr. Sudler’s suggestion regarding follow-up on constituent concerns. She noted that it can be challenging to obtain complete address information from some individuals, which may complicate providing timely follow-up. She emphasized the need to develop a process to ensure staff receive the necessary contact information, while acknowledging that some individuals may choose not to disclose full addresses. She confirmed the staff’s willingness to provide follow-up once the information is available, whether it comes from the constituent stopping at the clerk's desk in the back of the chambers or some other means. Mr. Anderson noted that some people have good reasons for not wanting to disclose their address in front of everyone, as it could be used to harm them or their families. He recalled several times where contact information was provided to council members directly rather than publicly. He noted that the members of council cannot be held responsible for contacting a constituent if they do not provide their phone number, email address, or address to contact them. Mr. Rocha recommended allowing those who provide public comment but did not sign up to sign the sign-in sheet after they provided their comments. He noted that if they do not want to write down their address, then they should be directed to call the Clerk’s Office to find out who their council representatives are. He also requested using the small timer that can be displayed on the television screen for each constituent's public comment period. Responding to Mr. Garfinkel, Mr. Anderson stated that citizens have the right to express their opinions even if it means that there are twenty repetitive statements. Mr. Anderson noted that constituents who agree with a previous speaker can be managed through informal methods such as gauging agreement via a show of hands. By doing so, that limits the need for speakers to feel the need to come forward and say two words. Responding to Mr. Garfinkel, Mr. Anderson stated that it would be at the Council President's discretion if a leader should be chosen and provide that person five minutes to speak. He stated that everyone has the right to be heard and individuals may have their own point of view or story that they feel council needs to hear. Page 81

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING October 28, 2025 PAGE 16 Item #4. Ms. Arndt recapped the need for a consistent process regarding public comment, whether comments will be addressed or not, and the role of staff or district representatives in responding to questions afterward. She suggested reviewing the language used by the Council President to announce the open forum to ensure clarity, and noted that displaying a timer would help monitor the three-minute speaker limit. Ms. Arndt requested clarification on whether the Council President retains the discretion to shorten speaking time to accommodate all speakers, and emphasized the importance of starting meetings on time as a courtesy to those on the agenda. Mr. Anderson moved for adjournment of the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee meeting, hearing no objection the meeting adjourned at 10:23 p.m. Mr. Neil moved for adjournment of the Council Committee of the Whole meeting, hearing no objection the meeting adjourned at 10:23 p.m. Fred A. Neil Council President Page 82

Item #17. Page 83

Item #17. CITY COUNCIL COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT FUND JULY 1, 2025 - JUNE 30, 2026 100-10-12-99-000-53037 Current Balance - $ 16,450.00 BUDGETED AMOUNT $ 25,000.00 COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT FUND - $2, 500 FOR EACH COUNCIL MEMBER PER DISTRICT AND $5, 500 FOR THE AT-LARGE COUNCIL MEMBER. THE PURPOSE OF THE FUND IS TO ALLOW MEMBERS TO CONTRIBUTE FUNDS TO A SMALL PROJECT OR COMMUNITY NEEDS IN EACH DISTRICT. Total $ 25,000.00 Date COUNCIL SPONSOR Vendor Description P.O. #/INVOICE # BATCH# TOTAL CHARGES YEAR TO DATE BALANCE Councilman Anderson authorized the designation of $500 Email from David Anderson dated 06/02/2025 and an of his community enhancement funds to the Hispanic email from Anthony (Tony) Velazquez Founder/CEO Hispanic Organization of Latin Organization of Latin Americans (HOLA) for their Baila Con dated 06/02/2025 7/1/2025 Anderson Americans (HOLA) Dover Festival. 6577 $ 500.00 $ 500.00 $ 24,500.00 Councilman Sudler authorized the designation of $1,000 of Email from Roy Sudler, Jr dated 07/03/2025 and a his community enhancement funds to Holy Trinity UAME letter from Pastor Sheila Lomax dated 06/20/2025 7/3/2025 Sudler Holy Trinity UAME Church Church for their Youth Empowerment event. 6577 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 23,500.00 Councilman Rocha authorized the designation of $200 of Email from Gerald Rocha, Sr. dated 07/05/2025 and his community enhancement funds to Holy Trinity UAME an email from Pastor Sheila Lomax dated 07/04/2025 7/5/2025 Rocha Holy Trinity UAME Church Church for their Youth Empowerment event. 6577 $ 200.00 $ 1,700.00 $ 23,300.00 Councilman Anderson authorized the designation of $200 Email from David Anderson dated 07/07/2054 and a of his community enhancement funds to Holy Trinity UAME letter from Pastor Sheila Lomax dated 06/20/2025 7/7/2025 Anderson Holy Trinity UAME Church Church for their Youth Empowerment event. 6577 $ 200.00 $ 1,900.00 $ 23,100.00 Councilman Lewis authorized the designation of $400 of Email from Brian Lewis dated 07/07/2054 and a letter his community enhancement funds to Holy Trinity UAME from Pastor Sheila Lomax dated 06/20/2025 7/7/2025 Lewis Holy Trinity UAME Church Church for their Youth Empowerment event. 6577 $ 400.00 $ 2,300.00 $ 22,700.00 Councilman Boggerty authorized the designation of $150 Email from Andre Boggerty dated 07/09/2025 and a of his community enhancement funds to Holy Trinity UAME letter from Pastor Sheila Lomax dated 06/20/2025 7/9/2025 Boggerty Holy Trinity UAME Church Church for their Youth Empowerment event. 6656 $ 150.00 $ 2,450.00 $ 22,550.00 Councilwoman Pillsbury authorized the designation of Email from Julia Pillsbury dated 07/11/2025 andan $200 of her community enhancement funds to Holy Trinity email from Pastor Sheila Lomax dated 07/04/2025 7/14/2025 Pillsbury Holy Trinity UAME Church UAME Church for their Youth Empowerment event. 6656 $ 200.00 $ 2,650.00 $ 22,350.00 Councilwoman Pillsbury authorized the designation of Email from Julia Pillsbury dated 07/11/2025 and an $200 of her community enhancement funds to the email from Anthony (Tony) Velazquez Founder/CEO Hispanic Organization of Latin Hispanic Organization of Latin Americans (HOLA) for their dated 07/11/2025 7/14/2025 Pillsbury Americans (HOLA) Baila Con Dover Festival. 6656 $ 200.00 $ 2,850.00 $ 22,150.00 Councilman Boggerty authorized the designation of $200 Email from Andree Boggerty dated 07/14/2025 and an of his community enhancement funds to the Hispanic email from Anthony (Tony) Velazquez Founder/CEO Hispanic Organization of Latin Organization of Latin Americans (HOLA) for their Baila Con dated 07/11/2025 7/14/2025 Boggerty Americans (HOLA) Dover Festival. 6656 $ 200.00 $ 3,050.00 $ 21,950.00 Councilwoman Hall authorized the designation of $200 of Email from Donyale Hall dated 07/11/2025 andan her community enhancement funds to Holy Trinity UAME email from Pastor Sheila Lomax dated 06/20/25 7/17/2025 Hall Holy Trinity UAME Church Church for their Youth Empowerment event. 6764 $ 200.00 $ 3,250.00 $ 21,750.00 Councilman Rocha authorized the designation of $250 of his community enhancement funds to the Hispanic Email from Gerald Rocha dated 07/28/2025 and an Hispanic Organization of Latin Organization of Latin Americans (HOLA) for their Baila Con email from Anthony (Tony) Velazquez, Founder/CEO, 7/29/2025 Rocha Americans (HOLA) Dover Festival. dated 07/11/2025 6854 $ 250.00 $ 3,500.00 $ 21,500.00 Councilman Lewis authorized the designation of $500 of his community enhancement funds to the Hispanic Email from Brian Lewis dated 07/31/2025 and an Hispanic Organization of Latin Organization of Latin Americans (HOLA) for their Baila Con email from Anthony (Tony) Velazquez, Founder/CEO, 7/31/2025 Lewis Americans (HOLA) Dover Festival. dated 07/30/2025 6906 $ 500.00 $ 4,000.00 $ 21,000.00 Councilman Lewis authorized designation of $300 of his community enhancement funds to the Caribbean Culture Awareness Inc. for their 2nd Annual Delaware Caribbean Email from Brian Lewis dated 08/11/2025 and an 8/11/2025 Lewis Caribbean Culture Awareness Inc. Carnival. email from Eveann Fenty-Marseil dated 8/09/2025 6959 $300.00 $ 4,300.00 $ 20,700.00 Councilman Rocha authorized the designation of $500 of Email from Gerald Rocha dated 08/12/2025 and A 2nd Chance A Haven for Abused his community enhancement funds to Ms. Faye White at A email from City Clerk's Office dated 08/12/2025 8/12/2025 Rocha and Battered Woman and Children 2nd Chance, for their Annual Veterans Honorary Dinner 6959 $ 500.00 $ 4,800.00 $ 20,200.00 Councilman Neil authorized the designation of $100 of his Email from Fred Neil dated 08/12/2025 and email A 2nd Chance A Haven for Abused community enhancement funds to Ms. Faye White at A 2nd from City Clerk's Office dated 08/12/2025 8/12/2025 Neil and Battered Woman and Children Chance, for their Annual Veterans Honorary Dinner 6959 $100.00 $ 4,900.00 $ 20,100.00 Councilman Anderson authorized the designation of $200 Email from David Anderson dated 08/12/2025 and A 2nd Chance A Haven for Abused of his community enhancement funds to Ms. Faye White at email from City Clerk's Office dated 08/12/2025 8/12/2025 Anderson and Battered Woman and Children A 2nd Chance, for their Annual Veterans Honorary Dinner 6959 $ 200.00 $ 5,100.00 $ 19,900.00 Councilman Sudler authorized the designation of $500 of his community enhancement funds to the Hispanic Email from Roy Sudler dated 08/15/2025 and an Hispanic Organization of Latin Organization of Latin Americans (HOLA) for their Baila Con email from Anthony (Tony) Velazquez, Founder/CEO, 8/15/2025 Sudler Americans (HOLA) Dover Festival. dated 06/06/2025 7002 $ 500.00 $ 5,600.00 $ 19,400.00 Councilman Anderson authorized the designation of $750 of his community enhancement funds to Holy Trinity UAME Email from David Anderson dated 08/19/2025 and an 8/19/2025 Anderson Holy Trinity UAME Church Church for their Back to School Book Bag Drive email from Pastor Sheila Lomax dated 08/19/25 7002 $ 750.00 $ 6,350.00 $ 18,650.00 Councilwoman Pillsbury authorized the designation of $200 of her community enhancement funds to I Am My Email from Julia Pillsbury dated 09/4/2025 and an 9/8/2025 Pillsbury I Am My Sister's Keeper (MSK) Sister's Keeper (MSK) for their Founders Day email from Marcille Sewell-Liningham dated 09/4/25 7165 $ 200.00 $ 6,550.00 $ 18,450.00 Councilman Boggerty authorized the designation of $250 of his community enhancement funds to I Am My Sister's Email from Andre Boggerty dated 09/4/2025 and an 9/8/2025 Boggerty I Am My Sister's Keeper (MSK) Keeper (MSK) for their Founders Day email from Marcille Sewell-Liningham dated 09/4/25 7165 $ 250.00 $ 6,800.00 $ 18,200.00 Councilman Neil authorized the designation of $50 of his community enhancement funds to I Am My Sister's Keeper Email from Fred Neil dated 09/4/2025 and an email 9/8/2025 Neil I Am My Sister's Keeper (MSK) (MSK) for their Founders Day from Marcille Sewell-Liningham dated 09/4/25 7165 $ 50.00 $ 6,850.00 $ 18,150.00 Page 84

Item #17. Councilman Rocha authorized the designation of $200 of his community enhancement funds to 1NA Foundation for Email from Gerald Rocha dated 09/4/2025 and an 9/8/2025 Rocha 1NA Foundation their 2nd Annual 1NA Day of Giving Back email from Deanna Wright dated 09/4/25 7165 $ 200.00 $ 7,050.00 $ 17,950.00 Councilwoman Pillsbury authorized the designation of $200 of her community enhancement funds to 1NA Email from Julia Pillsbury dated 09/4/2025 and an 9/8/2025 Pillsbury 1NA Foundation Foundation for their 2nd Annual 1NA Day of Giving Back email from Deanna Wright dated 09/4/25 7165 $ 200.00 $ 7,250.00 $ 17,750.00 Councilman Boggerty authorized the designation of $300 of his community enhancement funds to 1NA Foundation Email from Andre Boggerty dated 09/12/2025 and an 9/16/2025 Boggerty 1NA Foundation for their 2nd Annual 1NA Day of Giving Back email from Deanna Wright dated 09/1/25 7121 $ 300.00 $ 7,550.00 $ 17,450.00 Councilwoman Hall authorized the designation of $500 of her community enhancement funds to The Veterans The Veterans Awareness Center Awareness Center Foundation Stand-Down for their 9/17/2025 Hall Foundation Stand-Down Delaware 2025 Veterans' Stand Down Email from Donyale Hall dated 09/17/2025 7263 $ 500.00 $ 8,050.00 $ 16,950.00 Councilman Anderson authorized the designation of $500 of his community enhancement funds to the Inner City Cultural League for their Martin Luther King Jr. National Email from David Anderson dated 10/16/2025 and a 10/16/2025 Anderson Inner City Cultural League Holiday Celebration letter from Reuben Salters dated 10/13/2025 7504 $ 500.00 $ 8,550.00 $ 16,450.00 TOTALS $ 8,550.00 $ 16,450.00 BUDGETED AMOUNT DISTRICT COUNCIL SPONSOR YTD EXPENDITURES BALANCE $ 5,000.00 At-Large Boggerty $ 900.00 $ 4,100.00 $ 2,500.00 1st District Pillsbury $ 800.00 $ 1,700.00 $ 2,500.00 1st District Rocha $ 1,150.00 $ 1,350.00 $ 2,500.00 2nd District Hall $ 700.00 $ 1,800.00 $ 2,500.00 2nd District Lewis $ 1,200.00 $ 1,300.00 $ 2,500.00 3rd District Arndt $ - $ 2,500.00 $ 2,500.00 3rd District Neil $150.00 $ 2,350.00 $ 2,500.00 4th District Anderson $ 2,150.00 $ 350.00 $ 2,500.00 4th District Sudler $ 1,500.00 $ 1,000.00 TOTAL $ 8,550.00 $ 16,450.00 Page 85

Item #18. CITY MANAGER’S MONTHLY REPORT September 2025 Page 86 1

Item #18. Blank Page Page 87 2

Item #18. Page 88 3

Item #18. Page 89 4

Item #18. CENTRAL SERVICES MONTHLY REPORT September 2025 PROCUREMENT & INVENTORY DIVISION Purchase Orders for Stock by Fund FY 2026 to Date Difference from FY 2025 Electric $361,855.59 -288.3% Water $11,891.54 -289.6% Wastewater $0.00 0.0% General $31,538.12 -27.9% Total $405,285.25 -268.2% Issues from Stock by Fund FY 2026 to Date Difference from FY 2025 Electric $290,185.39 -53.8% Water $42,586.66 -16.9% Wastewater $829.06 17.1% General $37,070.57 -1.5% Total $370,671.68 -44.2% Bids/RFPs Solicited FY 2026 to Date Difference from FY 2025 10 -20.0% Money Spent for Postal Services FY 2026 to Date FY 2025 to Date $54,977.55 $54,142.67 Fuel Usage Type FY 2026 to Date FY 2025 to Date Unleaded 39,012 39,114 Diesel 17,209 21,006 Dollars Spent $132,244.97 $156,373.42 Page 90 5

Item #18. Warehouse Stock Value FY 2026 FY 2025 $5,507,434.05 $4,561,921.10 Purchase Orders for Stock are down 268.2% compared to this time last year. Issues from Stock are down 44.2% compared to this time last year. Bids/RFP's are down 20.0% compared to this time last year. Postal Expenses are up 1.5% compared to this time last year. Fuel Costs are down 18.2% compared to this time last year. Overall warehouse value is up 17.2% compared to this time last year. FLEET DIVISION PM Work Orders Scheduled: PM Work Orders Total Work Orders PM & 27 Completed: 40 Repair: 89 Total Hours Turned: Excess Hours Turned: Uncaptured Time: 241 0 104.8 MEASURE September 2025 September 2024 Completed PM's 40 62 DIFFERENCE -35.48% There were 27 PM's scheduled for this month. A total of 40 PM's were completed along with 49 repair work orders. There were a total of 89 work orders completed. Page 91 6

Item #18. FACILITIES DIVISION Routine Work Orders Emergency Work Orders Completed: 50 Completed: 6 City-owned Facility Work Events & Support Work Orders: 53 Orders: 3 MEASURE September 2025 September 2024 Completed Work Orders 56 62 DIFFERENCE -9.68% There were 56 routine and emergency Work Orders completed during this month. The work orders consisted of 53 for maintenance and repair of City-owned facilities and 3 related to events and other support work. Central Services Narrative Warehousing & Procurement is operating as normal. Project CS2502 is scheduled for CCW approval. Facilities is operating as normal; two positions posted. Fleet is operating as normal. Page 92 7

Item #18. CENTRAL SERVICES PROJECT UPDATE September 2025 FY/PROJECT NUMBER DEPARTMENT STATUS CITY HALL FC2601 QUOTING FLAT ROOF PEAR STREET FC2600 SCHEDULING VENDOR ABATEMENT CITY HALL FC2602 FIRE ALARM EQUIPMENT SCHEDULING VENDOR UPGRADE WEYANDT HALL EA2601 SCHEDULING VENDOR STAIRWELL FLOORING FUEL ISLAND SCHEDULED FOR CCW CS2502 UPGRADE APPROVAL Page 93 8

Item #18. Recap of monthly activities / notations – As of September 30, 2025, the City of Dover served 25,238 electric utility customers, which is an increase in comparison to 25,091 in September 2024 and 13,311 water utility customers in comparison to 13,260 customers in 2024. Data is sourced from the Monthly Utility Bill Summary Report, which includes all utility rate classifications. The Customer Services Department has successfully hired a candidate for Customer Service Representative position that will be starting Novemeber 12th. Utility service disconnetions resumed the week of October 20th 2025, after being on pause since August 21st due to conformity with HB2. There’s a focus on disconnects being done on Tuesdays and Wednesdays and reconnects within the new metering staff on-call staff hours of Monday through Friday, from 5:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. Receivable Comparison FY 2025 to Utility Disconnections for September 2025 FY2026 to date (September 2025) 0 accounts were disconnected for non-payment of service. Compared to the same time last year the City had open receivables of Total receivable collected through the disconnection process $0. $12,565,596.60 vs $11,366,572.47. Ending Utility Receivable Due - $8,908,826.12. Customer Service Department Mission Continually provide quality public service to our diverse group of customers with professionalism, respect, & integrity. ~ City of Dover Customer Service Department Page 94 9

Item #18. Number of Deeds Stamped for Transfer Tax Dollar Amount for the Month of Sept. 2024/2025 the Month of Sept. 2024/2025 30 26 24 $200 30 18 20 Thousands 25 19 $110 20 $92 $75 15 $100 $54 $43 $3 $3 10 0 3 3 2 $0 5 2024 2024 0 $0 2025 2025 First Time Buyer for the Month of Sept. 2024/2025 Realty Sept. 2024/2025 Property Sales in Dollars 30 Received Prior to Recording 26 30 24 $6 19 $8 $4 $4 $4 $6 Millions 20 Res. Non-First Time $3 $4 $1 $0 Buyers $2 $0 2024 $0 10 Res. First Time 2025 Buyers 0 2024 2025 Major Updates July August September Assessment Change $0 $507,000 $4,359,800 Residential Sales Ratio Report Sales in Study Total Assessed Total Sale Price Ratio PRD Value 38 $5,844,300 $12,401,888 0.47 1.15 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 95 10

Item #18. Tax Office Wild Meadows / Persimmon Park Place Home Sales for September 2025: Property Address Assessed Value Sales Price 106 Persimmon Cir $79,800 $91,101 Page 96 11

012ÿ456ÿ7879 487ÿ 1 2 ÿ0 ÿ0ÿ02 ÿ2 0 ÿ ÿ4ÿÿÿÿÿÿ 17  >?@ A1   A> 22  ?2 20    1 A 202ÿ ÿ 2  1Item #18.  !"#  "' )" ""#ÿ+,-.ÿ/.0ÿ) "  ! ! !"& 9 ,1 ÿÿÿÿÿ!!'= "!7-! ÿÿÿÿÿ%"= ÿ   "#"  # )" $ÿ1,.2,..,ÿ(3 " "# !! ! ##! 9< ,1 ÿÿÿÿÿ!$$= "7-! ÿÿÿÿÿ%"= ÿ $  "#"  # )" &ÿ1,.2,..,ÿ(3 " "# !! ! #$$& 9< ,1 ÿÿÿÿÿ#!= !7-! ÿÿÿÿÿ%=' ÿ  $ "#%  (# ) "!"ÿ+(4ÿ) " ÿÿÿÿÿ#$"= "7-! ÿÿÿ!== ÿ " $ &##  # )" ÿ5263+,)72ÿ(3 " "# "&' ! "'%" 9 ,1 ÿÿÿÿÿ"&#=# "7-! ÿÿÿÿÿ#"= ÿ " $ """#"  " )" &""ÿ588()73ÿ3)0 "  "&$! ! "'#% ( ,1 ÿÿÿÿÿ"$=& !7-! ÿÿÿÿÿ##!= ÿ # $ "!!$  " )" %ÿ.,4588ÿ-. " # "& " "#! (< ,1 ÿÿÿÿÿ"$%=$ "&7-! ÿÿÿÿÿ#= ÿ ' $ "#&  ' ) !""ÿ5,.4)ÿ)  ÿÿÿÿÿÿ&=$ "!7-! ÿÿÿÿÿ!= ÿ #& $ !#%  & )" #""ÿ0ÿ/81)08)7ÿ,1 " " !"' ! "'% (< ,1 ÿÿÿÿÿ"$#= !%7-! ÿÿÿÿÿ##= ÿ ! ' &!  "# )" $'&ÿ+6..)ÿ) "  "&$% ! "# (< ,1 ÿÿÿÿÿ"'#= !#7-! ÿÿÿÿÿ!&= ÿ # ' "!!  "# )" &#"ÿ98//7ÿ) " " "&% " "!' ( ,1 ÿÿÿÿÿ"#=# !%7-! ÿÿÿÿÿ!= ÿ ' ' "#"#  " )" $ÿ0ÿ,73ÿ,1 " "% "&$% " "! ( ,1 ÿÿÿÿÿ""=' 7-! ÿÿÿÿÿ#""= ÿ %& ' ""&   )" !"ÿ3,ÿ-,)3:ÿ3). " "# !" ! "$'' 9 ,1 ÿÿÿÿÿ"&=& &7-! ÿÿÿÿÿ#"= ÿ " ' !"$   )" "%!ÿ0ÿ.633.ÿ()4ÿ) " " !! ! "%#! 9 ,1 ÿÿÿÿÿ!=! !%7-! ÿÿÿÿÿ#%%=& ÿ ' $ %!!&  ! )" "ÿ.633.ÿ0ÿ5,:  "# !!# ! "%#! (< ,1 ÿÿÿÿÿ""=$ #7-! ÿÿÿÿÿ!&= ÿ ! $ %!$"  ! )" "!ÿ)6/.:ÿ9.1 " ' !! " "% (< ,1 ÿÿÿÿÿ"&=$ "'7-! ÿÿÿÿÿ#!%=&& ÿ ! $ %!$%  ! )" ""!ÿ)6/.:ÿ9.1 " ' !! " "% (< ,1 ÿÿÿÿÿ"&= %7-! ÿÿÿÿÿ##"=&& ÿ " $ "%  "% )" !$ÿ0ÿ(,)8.60ÿ-. "  "&&% ! !!% 9 ,1 ÿÿÿÿÿ!'=! !#7-! ÿÿÿÿÿ#'= ÿ  $ !%  "% )" %ÿ9)6,)588ÿ(3 "  "&'$ ! "&" ( / ÿÿÿÿÿ"&%=" '7-! ÿÿÿÿÿ#$= ÿ ! $ %" ""! ) #ÿ(8;)376ÿ) " ! "&$' " "' ( ,1 ÿÿÿÿÿÿ%$=% %7-! ÿÿÿÿÿ"!'= ÿ #$ $ %" ""! ) %%ÿ(8;)376ÿ) " ! "&$' " "' ( ,1 ÿÿÿÿÿÿ%$= %7-! ÿÿÿÿÿ"!= ÿ #' $ %" #%"! ) &ÿ-,)ÿ2,10ÿ) " ! "&$' " $!# ( ,1 ÿÿÿÿÿÿ%%=& %7-! ÿÿÿÿÿÿ$= ÿ % $ %" %'"! ) !"ÿ-,)ÿ2,10ÿ) " ! "&$' " "' ( ,1 ÿÿÿÿÿÿ%=$ %7-! ÿÿÿÿÿ"#= ÿ # $ %" "$"! ) '$ÿ-,)ÿ2,10ÿ) " ! "&$' " ""$$ ( ,1 ÿÿÿÿÿÿ!=! %7-! ÿÿÿÿÿ"%= ÿ # $ %" "#"! ) "#ÿ-,)ÿ2,10ÿ) " ! "&$' " ""$$ ( ,1 ÿÿÿÿÿÿ!=! %7-! ÿÿÿÿÿ"%"= ÿ #$ $ !" "# ) ÿ2,).(2ÿ2,..ÿ " ! "&$# " $&% 9 / ÿÿÿÿÿÿ=# "'7-! ÿÿÿÿÿ""= ÿ %' Page 97 12

012ÿ456ÿ7879 487ÿ 1 2 ÿ0 ÿ0ÿ02 ÿ2 0 ÿ ÿ7ÿÿÿÿÿÿ 17  @AB C1   C@ 22  A2 20    1 C 202ÿ ÿ 2  1Item #18.   !"#! $ $%#  +$ $$!ÿ-..+/01ÿ2+ $ $& $%!"  $&$' ) *< ÿÿÿÿÿ$$'?'  /=  ÿÿÿÿÿ$&? ÿ#  !"#  # % +$ &'ÿ1ÿ341ÿ/2 $$ $%&  $& ) *< ÿÿÿÿÿ$?% " /=  ÿÿÿÿÿ'? ÿ#'  !"#  "# % +$ &%ÿ1ÿ15ÿ/2 $$ $%&  $' ) *< ÿÿÿÿÿÿ%?% % /=  ÿÿÿÿÿ$!'? ÿ#  !"#$&  '# $' +$ $&ÿ6*61ÿ)2 $ $%%'  "! )> *< ÿÿÿÿÿ$!?!  /=  ÿÿÿÿÿ&!? ÿ#%  !"# $ '$#  +$ %'&ÿ500.0+ÿ+ $ $" $%" $ $"" )> *< ÿÿÿÿÿ$!&?$  /=  ÿÿÿÿÿ&'$? ÿ#$  !"#  $# $ +$ $$&ÿ0*7ÿ+ $ $" $%"& $ $!' )> *< ÿÿÿÿÿ$!? % /=  ÿÿÿÿÿ&? ÿ#'  !!# ' $#  +$ 'ÿ/ÿ8+*.0+ÿ/2 $$ $%  $% 8 .+ ÿÿÿÿÿ$%? $ /=  ÿÿÿÿÿ$? ÿ$#&  !!#! $ "# " +$ $'!ÿ90(:/ÿ/2 $ $&   $' ) *< ÿÿÿÿÿ$&'?! $ /=  ÿÿÿÿÿ&&? ÿ#  !!#$! " # $ +$ $$$%ÿ:01+0ÿ2+ $ $' ! $ $&'' ) *< ÿÿÿÿÿ$!'? $ /=  ÿÿÿÿÿ&'? ÿ#$  #$$ $ '# $ +$ $"ÿ24+1+ÿ+ $ $%"  $" )> 6 ÿÿÿÿÿ$!?! % /=  ÿÿÿÿÿ&?$! ÿ#&  #$  &%# $ +$ &ÿ7//(+;16ÿ*< $ $%"  $'' )> *< ÿÿÿÿÿ$'? " /=  ÿÿÿÿÿ? ÿ# () #$! & &# $* +$ $%ÿ=+/;::01ÿ);+ $ $$ $%! $ $ > *< ÿÿÿÿÿÿ!%?  /=  ÿÿÿÿÿÿ%$?$$ ÿ# Page 98 13

Item #18. ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT For the month of September 2025, the Electric Department contributed to the quality of life for all our customers. The city experienced a system peak of 127.09 megawatts, a decrease of 17.1 megawatts from last month and a 14 megawatt increase from the same month last year. There was a total of 9 outages for the month, affecting a total of 1135 customers with an average outage time of 47.46 minutes. For the month we had six fuses blow on six different circuits with causes being a limb, bad transformer, squirrel and three unknown causes. There was one instance of an underground service hit by a fencing company and two instances of feeder breakers operating with no causes found. Department personnel attended the DEMEC Annual Dinner where the department was recognized and two linemen were honored. The department was recognized for receiving the Excellence in Reliability Award from APPA which recognizes Public Power utilities in the top 25% of SAIDI. Linemen Frist Class Brian Kempista and Liam Maher were recognized for their participation in the Light up Navajo program. They traveled to Shiprock, NM to provide power to Navajo Nation member’s homes, most of whom have never had it. Project Updates: The department continues to work on FY26 projects. The team completed work on compiling information for the annual Renewable Portfolio Standards Report and submitted it to Legislature. We also completed pole testing and are developing a plan to replace the approximately 200 bad poles across the service area. Garrison Oak Substation is still progressing. The steel poles were delivered as scheduled and are slated to be installed next month. Crews also worked to install several aerial switches in the new substation. Van Sant was not dispatched by PJM for the month of September. Personnel are preparing for the scheduled outage next month where they will be accomplishing 25 maintenance procedures and testing on the unit. The department has made hiring decisions for both open positions and are waiting on start dates. FY 26 YTD Outages and Response Time: Total – 19 Average Response Time – 27 minutes (Goal – Less than 30 minutes) Statistics: 3-year average: FY Average: Average Interruption Duration Index (SAIDI) 152.55 minutes 13.37 minutes Goal – Not to exceed 100 mins System Average Interruption Frequency Index (SAIFI) 1.76 per cust .07 per cust Goal – Not to exceed 1 per customer Customer Average Interruption Duration Index (CAIDI) 86.94 minutes 187.17 minutes Page 99 14

Item #18. ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT Lost Time Accidents – Workorders Generated – Current Month – 0 Total FY – 0 Current Month – 167 Total FY – 515 FY26 Historical Peak Load 180 160 140 120 100 2022 Megawatts 2023 80 2024 60 2025 40 20 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Page 100 15

Item #18. Emergency Management and Communications The Department of Emergency Management and Communications is dedicated to protecting lives, property, and the well-being of our community through coordinated emergency preparedness, effective communication, and responsive public safety services. We oversee and support Emergency Medical Services and the Office of the Fire Marshal, ensuring rapid, professional, and compassionate response to emergencies. Through transparent public information and proactive community engagement, we strive to build trust, enhance readiness, and strengthen the City’s resilience before, during, and after any crisis. Director Kay M. Sass Deputy Director & Fire Marshal Jason A. Osika Deputy Fire Marshal’s FM2 Matthew C. Brown FM3 Phillip M. Lewis FM4 Sean P.M. Christiansen EMS Primary Contacts: Senior Regional Director of Operations Tyler Selak Dover EMS Division Chief Michael Jenkins Page 101 16

Item #18. RUN VOLUME: A total of 1223 responses by Dover EMS for the month. Of those 1223, 873 required transport, 244 received services and did not transport and 106 cancelled or refused. Sick persons was the most frequent calls, followed by MVC’s, and chest pains. Average Response Times: State of Delaware compliance requirements are that 90% of responses be below the response time guidelines. Dover EMS exceeded the 90% minimum in every category. Alpha 9.3 minutes 96.71% Low priority - Ie: non life threatening Ie: non serious illness, back pain, flu like symp- toms Bravo 6.8 minutes 94.86% Moderate Priority - Ie: minor allergic reaction, fainted now alert Charlie 6.7 minutes 99.70% Urgent - Ie: difficulty breathing, severe abdominal pain, diabetic emergency Delta 6.0 minutes 99.4% High Priority - ie: cardiac arrest, not breathing severe trauma or choking, childbirth complications Echo 6.9 minutes 100% Highest priority - Ie: cardiac arrest confirmed, not breathing at all, mass casualty, CPR in progress Omega 10.4 minutes 100% Lowest Priority - Ie: Minor nosebleed, non injury fall assist Provided services for the following community events: Pedal Away Prostate Cancer Bike Race, Stand by for DSU Football games, Stand by for DHS Football Games, Veterans Stand Down Event , First Responders Day at Holy Cross School Additional information: 20Total Surge Emergencies Surge emergences refer to situations where the demand for EMS exceeds normal capacity causing the implementation of a surge plan (Bringing on additional units) 20 Total Surge Unit Activations with Transports Dover was dispatched out of district 43 times, and transported 18 of those 43. Total calls handled by mutual aid into Dover is 20. 11.8% of the overall calls were individuals without a home. Page 102 17

Item #18. Fire Marshal’s Office—At a Glance -The Fire Marshal’s Office investigated five inci- dents during the month of September including a major fire loss on Horsepond Rd. - Staff is conducting restaurant annual fire and life safety inspections. Month Year to Date Previous Year to Date Annual Fire & Life Safety Inspections 30 117 112 Deficiencies From the Above Inspections 39 94 228 Fire Code Violations/Deficiencies/Complaints 16 52 74 C/O & Fire Equipment Acceptance Tests 36 72 27 Meetings & Walk Through 29 71 36 Fire Plan Review & DAC 12 34 27 Month Year to Date Previous Year to Date Accidental 3 totaling $3,501 8 totaling $123,702 19 totaling $386,001 Incendiary 1 totaling $200 4 totaling $2,200 2 totaling $2 Undetermined 1 totaling $100,000 2 totaling $100,500 3 totaling $502,600 Natural 0 1 totaling $1,000 0 Investigation time 16 hours 33 hours 79 hours Injuries 1 2 8 Deaths 0 0 0 Page 103 Arrest Made with DPD 0 18 0 0

Item #18. HUMAN RESOURCES SEPTEMBER 2025 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. SEPTEMBER SUMMARY: SEPTEMBER Hiring Trends FY26: MONTH NEW HIRE AMOUNT STATUS SEPTEMBER 6 6 FT SEPTEMBER Voluntary Termination/Involuntary Termination Trends FY26: VOLUNTARY 7 FT, 9 TP INVOLUNTARY 1 FT RETIREMENT 1 FT Page 104 19

Item #18. HUMAN RESOURCES SEPTEMBER EEO DATA EEO DATA 3% 2% 2% 2% 16% 75% AMERICAN INDIAN ASIAN AFRICAN AMERICAN CAUCASIAN HISPANIC OTHER RACE AMERICAN INDIAN 2% ASIAN 2% AFRICAN AMERICAN 16% CAUCASIAN 75% HISPANIC 3% OTHER RACE 2% Page 105 20

Item #18. HUMAN RESOURCES SEPTEMBER EEO DEMOGRAPHICS EEO DEMOGRAPHICS OTHER RACE 7 MINORITY 90 CAUCASIAN 298 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 OTHER RACE 7 MINORITY 90 CAUCASIAN 298 Page 106 21

Item #18. HUMAN RESOURCES SEPTEMBER GENDER REPORT Gender Report 0% 28% 72% FEMALE MALE NONBINARY MALES 72% FEMALE 28% NON-BINARY 0% Page 107 22

Item #18. HUMAN RESOURCES FULL-TIME VS. PART-TIME EE’S FULL-TIME VS. PART-TIME EE'S 450 402 395 392 401 395 397 397 389 395 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 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 committees, or council members. Page 108 23

Item #18. HUMAN RESOURCES SEPTEMBER INTERNAL EE AGE DEMOGRAPHICS AGE DEMOGRAPHICS 18-24 5% 25-34 16% 35-44 23% 45-54 23% 55-64 26% 65+ 7% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% AGE PERCENTAGE 18-24 5% 25-34 16% 35-44 23% 45-54 23% 55-64 26% 65 + 7% Page 109 24

Item #18. HUMAN RESOURCES HIRING DETAILS Position Hired: BUILDING MAINTENANCE CRAFTSPERSON, HUMAON RESOURCES COORDINATOR, COMMUNICATIONS OPERATOR, LAN ANALYST, FIELD SERVICE REP I, WATER TREATMENT PLANT OPERATOR Transferred/Promoted: Position Terminated/Resigned/Retired/Other: UTILITY MAINTANENCE MECHANIC I, LAN ANALYST, ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT, COMMUNICATIONS OPERATOR, PLAYGROUND LEADERS (9), POLICE MAJOR, POLICE CORPORAL (2), PATROLMAN FIRST CLASS, ARBORIST Terminal Leave: N/A CURRENT VACANT POSITIONS *Not used for Budgeting Purposes Page 110 25

Item #18. HUMAN RESOURCES TURNOVER STATISTICS Page 111 26

Item #18. HUMAN RESOURCES Page 112 27

Item #18. HUMAN RESOURCES Page 113 28

Item #18. HUMAN RESOURCES SEPTEMBER WORKER’S COMPENSATION DATA MONTH AUGUST-25 SEPTEMBER-25 WORKERS COMP INJURY DETAIL 7 5 WORKERS COMP COST SEPTEMBER 2025 Police $8,180.13 Electric $366.45 City Manager $5,398.61 $0.00 $1,000.00$2,000.00$3,000.00$4,000.00$5,000.00$6,000.00$7,000.00$8,000.00$9,000.00 Respectfully Submitted by H. Naomi Poole Page 114 29

Item #18. Information Technology material was not available at the time this report was completed and therefore will be included in next month’s report. Page 115 30

Reference Transactions September 2025 Item #18. Adults 813 Teens 80 Children 184 0 250 500 750 1000 1250 1500 1750 2000 Circulation Sept. '25 FYTD '26 Sept. '24 FYTD '25 City of Dover Residents 8,785 30,205 9,988 34,229 Electronic Materials 8,127 25,816 6,875 20,783 Kent County Residents 10,541 32,374 10,624 33,250 Non-County Residents 950 4,361 1,367 4,113 New Library Registrations City of Dover Residents 329 987 216 857 Kent County Residents 201 514 110 383 Non-County Residents 11 18 7 19 Registered Library Users as of 9/30/2025 Registered Library Users as of 9/30/2024 City of Dover Residents 19,755 19,769 Kent County Residents 10,234 9,274 Non-County Residents 682 703 TOTAL 30,671 29,746 Other Visitors 13,979 46,948 13,335 48,383 Meeting Room Attendance 2,834 7,828 1,808 9,831 Number of Computer Users 1,672 4,889 N/A 4,075 Number of Wireless Computer Users 1,645 4,842 1,588 5,002 Inter/Intralibrary - Loaned 37 74 Inter/Intralibrary - Borrowed 90 44 Holds Sent 2,722 645 Holds Received 1,625 1,877 TOTAL 4,474 13,854 2,640 11,961 Tech Services/Items Added 1,137 1,114 Tech Services/Items Deleted 1,303 849 Passport Services/Customers 194 649 216 712 Passport Services/Revenue $7,570 $24,975 $8,813 $28,543 Monthly Highlights ►424 attended 48 programs for adults. ►246 attended 19 program for teens. ►897 attended 28 programs for children. ► 0 volunteers. Program Spotlight Page 116 31

Item #18. Parks & Recreation Monthly Report – September 2025 PARKS & RECREATION HIGHLIGHTS Five Park Projects Dover Park Building and Spray Pad: Please visit our web page for frequent updates: https:// www.cityofdover.gov/departments/ParksRecreation/Splashpadandcommunitycenter. All Accessible Playground: Will begin construction once the building and spray pad are complete. Skate Park: Staff working with WRA on final design for bidding the project. Pitts Center: Hosted 2025 Delaware Veterans’ Stand Down event for the 9th year. Soccer Leagues: We now offer a new girls’ travel league. This league is for girls 8-10 years old only and travels to Kent County Parks & Recreation and Milford Parks & Recreation. Recreation Revenue Breakdown Outdoor Sports & Leagues Participant & Spectator Count Activity Participants Spectators Location Soccer Clinics 190 388 Schutte Park For Her Basketball 20 55 Schutte Park Healthy Kids Running 100 155 Schutte Park Senior Men’s Softball (fall) 400 150 Schutte Park September 2025 September 2024 General Recreation $930 General Recreation $707 Girls U10 Soccer League Sports $1,139 Sports $540 Leagues $3,420 Leagues $1,600 Trips $3,388 Trips $1,500 Bldg, Field Pavilion Bldg, Field Pavilion $500 $500 Stage Permits Stage Permits Camps Camps $4,620 Parks & Recreation FYTD FYTD Sept 25 Sept 24 Programs 26 25 General Recreation 186 722 115 561 Open Gym 120 161 97 192 Sports 18 24 51 56 Leagues (Inside) 1,833 6,725 2,234 7,184 Bldg, Field, Facility, 53 120 15 50 Stage permits Camps 1,700 614 1,609 Holiday Food Drive & Capital Holiday Festival Coming Soon!! Page 117 32

Item #18. Grounds Monthly Report Sept-25 Arborist Crew: - Root pruning - Remove hornet’s nests Arborist Crew - Dead wood trees on the Green Tree Work Completed Tree's Trimmed 59 Beautification Crew: Tree's Removed 9 - Take down hanging baskets Root Pruning 2 - Cleaned up flower beds and planted mums throughout the city Stumps Removed 1 - Spraying weeds and watered flower beds Trees Planted 0 - Submitted tulip order Mowing Crew: - All mowing crews cutting grass on schedule - Spraying weeds Litter Removal: - Litter route is being picked up on schedule - 449 90 gal. cans picked up - Completed parks route daily Parks Crew: - Set up stage for events - Maintain softball fields - Graded parking lot at Schutte Park Miscellaneous: - Bush hog right of way, out falls and other city locations - Spraying city parks and property Page 118 33

Item #18. Page 119 34

Item #18. City Planner’s Monthly Report Department of Planning & Inspections SEPTEMBER 2025 Planning & Inspections Highlights Some Items to Call to Your Attention Planning Office staff reviewed 52 Building Permits and 14 Certificate of Occupancy Permits. Staff also provided support to the Planning Commission (3 applications) and the Board of Adjustment (meeting held as a training session). The Historic District Commission did not meet in September due to a lack of agenda items. Three (3) vacancies remain including the Director, a Planner II and a Planner I. Due to these vacancies, the Department continues to utilize a consultant to assist staff in addressing the current workload. Construction activity continued in September with both residential and non-residential projects hav- ing Building Permits and Certificates of Occupancy issued. Residential development areas consisted of Eden Hill Farm TND, Rojan Meadows PND, a single family dwelling on College Road, Eden Hill Apartments Building, and Villages of Maple Dale. Non-residential building permits included a build- ing addition on DelTech Campus, as well as renovations for Dover Federal Credit Union, Proctor & Gamble, 309 S. Governors Avenue and Wilmington University. Certificates of Occupancy were is- sued for Calvary Baptist Church, the First Watch Restaurant at Capital Station, Books-A-Million in the Dover Commons Shopping Center, and Raising Canes Restaurant. Overall, 114 permits were issued resulting in 307 inspections. The Inspections Division consists of both Building Inspections and Permitting & Licensing. Within Building Inspections, two (2) vacancies remained for the Chief Building Inspector and a Building In- spector I in September. In order to ensure construction activity is not stalled, the Department con- tinued to utilize a contractor to assist in Building Permit/Plan reviews as well as with Building Inspec- tions as needed. Code Enforcement staff conducted Annual Housing Inspections (14 cases) as part of the Rental Dwelling Permit program. Other Code Enforcement cases focused on exterior property maintenance issues/violations (33 cases), tall grass and weeds violations (37 cases) and Dover Code of Ordinance violations (34 cases). September ended with 121 registered vacant buildings, 61 dangerous build- ings, and 7,864 active rental dwelling units. Code Enforcement had one (1) vacancy in September. (Please see the new Department of Emergency Management and Communications’ September Monthly Report for information on the Fire Marshal’s Office!) Page 120 35

Item #18. Planning & Inspections Revenue FY 2026 Revenue FY2026 Actual Estimates from (YTD) Sept Revenue Stream Budget 2025 % of Budget Business License $1,540,000 $ 1,460,503 95% Manufactured Home License $16,000 $ 10,399 65% Building Permits $500,000 $ 225,256 45% Cert. of Occupancy $9,000 $ 2,580 29% Public Occupancy $45,000 $ 2,680 6% Lodging House $28,000 $ 202 1% Plumbing/Heating/Air $110,000 $ 29,063 26% Rental Inspection Fee $750,000 $ 7,254 1% Miscellaneous $21,000 $ 6,191 29% Fire Protection Fees $100,000 $ 24,915 25% Code Enforcement Fines $80,000 $ 20,050 25% Vacant Building Reg. $50,000 $ 22,875 46% Total P&I Revenue $3,249,000 $ 1,811,968 56% 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. Conducting Meetings and Trainings in virtual formats are also offered. Meetings in September included several project informational meetings, workshops on the Draft 2025 State Strategies for Policy and Spending, and attend- ance a webinar presented by the Mid-Atlantic Planning Collaboration on “manufactured Housing in the Mid Atlantic: How do We Build More” October was designated as Community Planning Month by City Council. The month is “an opportunity to highlight the contributions of Planners” including Staff and appointed members of Planning Commission as well as the involvement of residents in determining the future of our community. 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 to confirm compliance with the Zoning Ordinance provisions. For September 2025, Planning Staff was involved with the review of 52 Building Per- mits and 14 Certificates of Occupancy that were issued for a monthly total of 66 and a year-to-date total of 651. The 2025 year-to-date tally as compared to the calendar year totals of Permits and COs is less than the totals seen in 2024 at 708 and also lower than the 2023 totals at 803. Staff also reviews new applications for Business Licenses and Rental Dwelling Permits. SEPT 2025 (FY26) TOTAL FOR FY26 New Home Permits Issued 6 27 Value of Commercial Projects $6,604,847.00 $16,414,382.00 $2,453.20 Downtown Incentives (Fees Waived) $171.20 Page 121 36

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.gov 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. The Downtown Dover Partnership is moving forward with planning for the development of priority project sites. Also, the City is involved in planning for water and sanitary sewer improvement projects for the Loockerman Street corridor. The key priority projects for the Revised Dover Mobility Center revisited the Planning Commission in September with a plan revi- sion (S-25-01/HI-25-01) and The Governors: Mixed Use Building at 120 S. Governors Avenue was also considered by the Planning Commission in September. CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES • In September 2025, Residential Building Permits were issued for five (5) Townhouse Units at Rojan Meadows PND; and a single family detached dwelling on College Road. • Temporary Certificates of Occupancy were issued to the first Eden Hill Apartments Building at 225 Ann Moore Street (S-24-01) and for a Townhouse unit on Valhalla Court in Villages of Maple Dale. Certifi- cates of Occupancy were issued for four (4) Duplex units in Eden Hill Farm TND and for a Townhouse unit on Valhalla Court in Villages of Maple Dale. • Building Permits issued in September were the Building Addition on DelTech Campus (S-25-03); renova- tions for Dover Federal Credit Union at 225 Saulsbury Rd; interior renovations at Proctor & Gamble; interior renovations of offices at 309 S. Governors Avenue; and interior renovations at Wilmington Uni- versity. • A Temporary Certificate of Occupancy was issued to the Calvary Baptist Church at 2285 Forrest Ave- nue. Certificates of Occupancy were issued for renovations First Watch Restaurant at 40 N. DuPont Highway and for a tenant fit-outs for a Chiropractor’s Office and also a Nail Salon in Capital Station; for tenant fit-out for Books-A-Million at 1047 N .DuPont Highway in the Dover Commons Shopping Center; for construction Raising Canes Restaurant at 1151 N DuPont Highway; and for renovations to a profes- sional office space in Creekstone. Page 122 37

Item #18. 2025: Welcome to Dover! Progress in Pictures—Under Construction Kent County Family Court: Progress 445 South Governors Avenue Calvery Baptist: Church 2285 Forrest Avenue Page 123 38

Item #18. 2025: Welcome to Dover! Progress in Pictures—Under Construction Eden Hill Apart- ments: 3 Buildings in Progress 1562 N. Little Creek Rd. Rojan Meadows LCC The Edge Apartments Progress Leipsic Rd Books A Million 1047 N Dupont Hwy Page 124 39

Item #18. BOARD AND COMMISSION ACTIVITY There were Meetings in September of the Boards and Commissions supported by the Planning Office. The Planning Commission met on September 15, 2025. The Board of Adjustment met on September 17, 2025 as a Training Session. The Historic District Commission did not meet on September 18, 2025. Planning Commission: The Planning Commission met on September 15, 2025. The next Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for October 15, 2025. The following applications were considered: • SB-25-02 Lands of Wyoming, LLC and Functional Properties, LLC (Ekaman Subdivision): Conceptual Subdivision Plan - The Planning Commission moved to postpone the consideration of the Conceptual Subdivision Plan to create five (5) lots and one residual lot from 2 existing parcels totaling 4.5754 acres to be known as Ekaman Subdivision until the engineering report for the Woodbrook Development Improvement Study is furnished and the community has had ample time to review and bring this action forward. The proposed subdivision is to consist of five residential lots with the residual for stormwater management area. The proposal includes the extension and addition of a cul-de-sac to the existing street right-of-way of Jefferson Terrace. The larger parcel is zoned R-10 (One Family Residence Zone), and the additional parcel is zoned R-8 (One Family Residence Zone) with both being located south of but not adjacent to Wyoming Avenue and west of Monroe Terrace. Property Address: unaddressed on Jefferson Terrace extension (part of which is referenced as 3.8904 acres of Wyoming Avenue Rear). Property Owners: Wyoming, LLC and Functional Properties, LLC. Tax Parcels: ED-05-077.17-06-02.01-000 & ED-05-077.17-06-13.00 -000. Council District 2. Waiver Requested: Percentage of Lots on a cul-de-sac. This property was reviewed in 2013-2015 as SB-13-06 Jefferson Terrace Subdivision; however, the plan was never finalized. Application for Conceptual Subdivision Plan SB-23-01C was conditionally approved by the Planning Commission in March 2023; previous waiver requests were unsuccess- ful, and the plan expired. The properties were examined again under Conceptual Subdivision Plan SB-24-01 and were denied by the Planning Commission on August 19, 2024. • S-25-01 Revised Dover Mobility Center Garage at 133 S. Governors Avenue – The Planning Commission granted conditional approve of the Revised Site Development Plan Application, Parcel Consolidation Plan, and associated Revised Architectural Review Certification for construction of a four story, multi-purpose parking garage structure to be known as the Dover Mobili- ty Center Garage to include the Revised Architectural Review Certification with the Alternative Side Yard Setbacks, the Tree Mitigation Plan, the recognition of the Revised Parking Strategy Statement and the DAC Report and its recommendations. The structure is revised to consist of 329 parking spaces, welcome and retail space, a management office, and retail and storage spaces. There have been architectural changes as designed, including the removal of the S Bradford Street garage entrance. The subject site involves a series of parcels in the block between S. Governors Avenue and S. Bradford Street north of Minor Street Alley. The properties are zoned C-2 (Central Commercial Zone) and subject to the H (Historic District Zone). The owners of record are the Downtown Dover Partnership, City of Dover, Capital City Transformation Alliance, and Main Street – Dover Inc. Property Addresses: 133 S. Governors Avenue, 139 S. Governors Avenue, 145 S. Governors Avenue, 136 S. Bradford Street, 148 S. Bradford Street, 150 S. Bradford Street, and 132 S. Bradford Street, Dover. Tax Parcels: ED-05-077.09-02-10.00 -000, ED-05-077.09-02-09.00-000, ED-05-077.09-02-08.00-000, ED-05-077.09-02-24.00-000, ED-05-077.09-02-25.00-00, ED-05-077.09-02-27.00-000, and ED-05-077.09-02-23.00-000. Council District 4. This Revised project was the subject of HI- 24-09 Revised for Historic District Commission Review and Recommendation on the Architectural Review Certification on August 21, 2025. The project is also associated with MI-24-10 Request for Alley Abandonment: Part of Alley Between S. Gov- ernors Avenue and S. Bradford Street. • S-25-11 The Governor: Mixed Use Building at 120 S Governors Avenue – The Planning Commission granted conditional ap- proval of the Site Development Plan Application, Parcel Consolidation Plan and Architectural Review Certification for the construction of a four story, 169,080 SF Mixed Use Building including a grocery, retail and restaurant spaces, a child day care, 120 apartment units, and a roof-top courtyard with site improvements of a parking lot, a courtyard, and landscaping. The main parcel contains 1.70 +/- acres. The property is zoned C-2 (Central Commercial Zone) and subject to H (Historic District Zone). The property is located on the west side of South Governors Avenue and halfway between Reed Street and West Loockerman Street. The owners of record are Downtown Dover Development Corporation c/o Downtown Dover Partnership and The City of Dover. Property Addresses: 120 S. Governors Avenue, 105 S New Street, 111 S New Street, and 115 S New Street. Dover. Tax Parcels: ED-05-077.09-01-44.00-000, ED-05-077.09-01-37.00-000, ED-05-077.09-01-42.00-000, ED-05-077.09-01-43.00 -000. Council District 4. Waiver Requests Approved: Opaque Barrier – Fence Component and Tree Mitigation Plan. Accept- ed: Parking Strategy Statement. This project was the subject of HI-25-02 for Historic District Commission Review and Recom- mendation on the Architectural Review Certification on July 17, 2025. Historic District Commission: The Historic District did not meet on September 18, 2025. The next Historic District Commission meeting is scheduled for October 16, 2025. Board of Adjustment: The Board of Adjustment met on September 17, 2025. The meeting was held as a training session. The next Board of Adjustment meeting is scheduled for October 15, 2025. Page 125 40

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM Item #18. CDBG FY25 Projects The Department of Housing and Urban Development approved the 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan and the 2025 Action Plan for the City of Dover. Grant funds have been released to the City and projects are under- way. • 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. Three families have purchased homes. One family is mortgage ready. • Central Delaware Housing Collaborative Renovations Costs CDBG funds will be used for interior renovations for a women’s homeless shelter. • Central Delaware Housing Collaborative Operations Costs CDBG funds will be used to provide operations costs for a women’s shelter. • Milford Housing Homeowner Rehabilitation/Emergency Home Repair Programs 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 homeowners. Two (2) owner occupied homes have been rehabbed, and three (3) homes received emergency home repairs. • People’s Community Center Operations Costs CDBG funds will be used to provide operations costs for a homeless shelter for men. • People’s Community Center Renovations Costs CDBG funds will be used to renovate an existing portion of the building to a resource and case manage- ment center to provide social services to homeless men. • Central Delaware Habitat for Humanity CDBG funds will be used for the construction of an affordable housing unit in the Downtown Develop- ment District area. American Rescue Act (ARPA) Funding A little over $1.8 million or 87% of funds have been spent on Round 1 of ARPA funding year to date. Dover Housing Authority, Murphey School, Reading Assist and Peoples Church have completed their projects. ARPA Round 2 funding for a little under $500,000 was awarded to subgrantees in April 2023. Projects are currently underway. Eighty-three percent (83%) of funds have been drawn down for Round 2 with Murphey School, People’s Community Center, John Wesley AME Church, and Neighbor- Good Partners completing their projects. Page 126 41

Item #18. CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITY Dangerous Buildings, Vacant Buildings, Demolitions  Vacant Buildings currently registered - 121  Dangerous Buildings – 63  Active Rental Dwellings – 7,864 units Page 127 42

Building Inspections & Licensing Summary Item #18. July 2024— July 2025– Current June 2026 Sept FY’25 June 2025 PERMITTING AND LICENSING Permits Issued SEPT (2025) SEPT (2024) FY 26 FYTD 26 FY25 FYTD 25 Administrative Permit 3 9 3 6 Building Addition/Renovation Permits 29 92 24 90 Building Permits 11 56 23 80 Demolition Permits 0 3 4 12 Fence Permits 14 49 18 56 Fire Prevention Permits 5 28 11 23 Mechanical Permits 19 119 51 131 Plumbing Permits 19 129 15 73 Sign Permits 12 31 12 33 Swimming Pool Permits 1 3 1 4 Wireless Communications Facilities 1 3 3 0 Subtotal 522 508 Business Licenses 152 1583 144 1564 Merchant Licenses 34 274 37 267 Contractor Licenses 104 1062 113 1067 Subtotal 2919 2898 Lodging House Licenses 1 1 1 2 Public Occupancy 22 48 25 51 Rental Dwelling 25 56 26 141 Subtotal 105 194 Manufactured Homes 32 228 48 202 BUILDING INSPECTIONS Inspections SEPT (2025) SEPT (2024) FY 26 FYTD 26 FY25 FYTD 25 Building (Inspections/CBI/Site Meetings) 178 710 412 999 Plumbing/Mechanical 122 573 522 1212 Certificate of Occupancy 7 32 12 42 Page 128 43

Item #18. Page 129 44

Item #18. Page 130 45

Item #18. Page 131 46

Item #18. Page 132 47

Item #18. CITY OF DOVER DEPARTMENT OF WATER & WASTEWATER MONTHLY REPORT Sep-25 Inflow & Infiltration Costs This chart indicates the amount of money the City is spending on treating $200,000.00 ground and / or rain water through Kent County. This cost is being offset by the Ground Water Inflow Adjustment rate passed on to the customers. April 2025 and July 2025 had a large amout of rainfall, causing a $150,000.00 significant I & I deficit. Some months have an inverted cost due to the timing of our report and the timing of the Kent County Bill. $100,000.00 $50,000.00 $- Sep-24 Oct-24 Nov-24 Dec-24 Jan-25 Feb-25 Mar-25 Apr-25 May-25 Jun-25 Jul-25 Aug-25 Sep-25 $(50,000.00) $(100,000.00) I & I Cost Water & Wastewater Repairs 8 Water mains and services are typically repaired at a higher rate when drastic change in temperature 7 occurs. This freeze and thaw cycle expands and contracts the soil, causing cracks in the water line. 6 November 2024 and January 2025 had large fluctuations of temperature, causing a large volume 5 of repairs. 4 3 2 1 0 Sep-24 Oct-24 Nov-24 Dec-24 Jan-25 Feb-25 Mar-25 Apr-25 May-25 Jun-25 Jul-25 Aug-25 Sep-25 Water Mains Repaired Water Services Repaired Wastewater Mains Repaired Wastewater Laterals Repaired Page 133 48

Item #18. CITY OF DOVER DEPARTMENT OF WATER & WASTEWATER MONTHLY REPORT Sep-25 Number of Brown Water Complaints 9 This chart indicates the number of complaints the Department receives. 8 February and March 2025 were high due to flushing being scheduled in April 7 2025. 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Sep-24 Oct-24 Nov-24 Dec-24 Jan-25 Feb-25 Mar-25 Apr-25 May-25 Jun-25 Jul-25 Aug-25 Sep-25 Number of Brown Water Complaints Linear (Number of Brown Water Complaints) Department Spotlight - September The Department of Water & Wastewater tracks the average water production and peak daily production every month. This graph shows the peaks are generally in the summer months. Page 134 49

Item #19. Page 135

Item #19. Finance Department Monthly Report September 2025 This page intentionally left blank PagePage 2 136

Item #19. Finance Department Monthly Report September 2025 CITY OF DOVER ACTIVITY REPORTS September 2025 FY25 YTD FY26 YTD BANK TRENDS Number of Deposits Made (Hand, ACH & Wire, Lockbox) 1,815 1,166 Total Amount of All Deposits $ 77,312,108 $ 35,784,375 Other Activity Number of Pay Periods 7 6 Number of Direct Deposits Issued 2,756 2,520 Number of Pension Checks Issued 984 740 Total Pension Benefits Paid - Defined Benefit Plan $ 1,791,851 $ 1,529,484 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE Number of Check Vouchers 1,457 896 Number of EFT Vouchers 851 458 Vouchers Dollar Amount Disbursed $ 30,968,132 $ 19,250,317 FY25 YTD Wages FY26 YTD Wages $85,414 $123,706 $16,554 $25,801 $189,543 $38,306 $120,719 $41,735 $171,484 $175,063 $635,680 $625,125 $770,014 $728,248 $5,567,114 $5,781,562 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 3 137

Item #19. Finance Department Monthly Report September 2025 City of Dover General Fund Summary Fiscal Year to Date September 2025 Revenues Original Budget Actual % Property Taxes $ 17,200,000 $ 17,086,118 99% Transfer Taxes 2,400,000 498,202 21% Program Revenues 10,320,100 3,933,130 38% Utility Transfers 12,000,000 3,000,000 25% Grants 1,821,500 1,693,012 93% Interfund Services 7,938,700 1,559,828 20% All Other 1 1,900,000 389,760 21% $ 53,580,300 $ 28,160,049 53% Expenditures Original Budget Actual % Program Expenses $ 37,803,800 $ 8,513,075 23% Interfund Services 13,654,000 3,079,268 23% Debt Service 625,200 157,606 25% Capital Project Transfers 5,511,200 1,377,800 25% All Other 2 2,147,800 252,298 12% $ 59,742,000 $ 13,380,048 22% 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 4 138

Item #19. Finance Department Monthly Report September 2025 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 Taxes Transfer Taxes Program Revenues Utility Transfers Grants Interfund Services All Other 1 Original Budget Actual General Fund Expenditures $40,000,000 $35,000,000 $30,000,000 $25,000,000 $20,000,000 $15,000,000 $10,000,000 $5,000,000 $- Program Expenses Interfund Services Debt Service Capital Project Transfers All Other 2 Original Budget Actual PagePage 5 139

Item #19. Finance Department Monthly Report September 2025 City of Dover Water Fund Summary Fiscal Year to Date September 2025 Revenues Original Budget Actual % Customer Sales $ 7,568,500 $ 2,063,155 27% Impact Fees 250,000 109,488 44% Rents 464,000 478,686 103% Miscellaneous 1 215,400 137,287 61% $ 8,497,900 $ 2,788,617 33% Expenditures Original Budget Actual % Program Expenses $ 4,469,100 $ 959,533 21% Interfund Services 750,900 282,350 38% Debt Service 543,000 134,262 25% Capital Project Transfers 1,280,600 320,150 25% Electric I&E Fund Transfer 25,000 - 0% General Fund Transfer 1,000,000 250,000 25% All Other 2 30,000 5,890 20% $ 8,098,600 $ 1,952,186 24% 1 Includes Penalties, Income from Sale of Assets, Miscellaneous Income, and Reconnect Fees. 2 Includes Bank & CC Fees. PagePage 6 140

Item #19. Finance Department Monthly Report September 2025 Water Revenues $8,000,000 $7,000,000 $6,000,000 $5,000,000 $4,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,000,000 $- Customer Sales Impact Fees Rents Miscellaneous 1 Original Budget Actual Water Expenditures $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 Interfund Services Debt Service Capital Project Transfers Electric I&E Fund Transfer General Fund Transfer All Other 2 Original Budget Actual Page 7 Page 141

Item #19. Finance Department Monthly Report September 2025 City of Dover Wastewater Fund Summary Fiscal Year to Date September 2025 Revenues Original Budget Actual % Customer Sales $ 12,276,500 $ 2,315,898 19% Impact Fees 235,000 91,588 39% Miscellaneous 1 200,200 52,810 26% $ 12,711,700 $ 2,460,296 19% Expenditures Original Budget Actual % Program Expenses $ 2,044,300 $ 449,986 22% Kent County Treatment Fee 5,822,500 1,029,877 18% Interfund Services 935,200 216,093 23% Debt Service 644,000 74,710 12% Capital Project Transfers 2,694,900 673,725 25% Electric I&E Transfer 25,000 - 0% General Fund Transfer 1,000,000 250,000 25% All Other 2 11,000 2,204 20% $ 13,176,900 $ 2,696,595 20% 1 Includes Interest Income, Penalties, Loss on Disposal, and Miscellaneous Income. 2 Includes Bank & CC Fees. PagePage 8 142

Item #19. Finance Department Monthly Report September 2025 Wastewater Revenues $14,000,000 $12,000,000 $10,000,000 $8,000,000 $6,000,000 $4,000,000 $2,000,000 $- Customer Sales Impact Fees Miscellaneous 1 Original Budget Actual Wastewater Expenditures $7,000,000 $6,000,000 $5,000,000 $4,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,000,000 $- Program Expenses Kent County Treatment Interfund Services Debt Service Capital Project Electric I&E Transfer General Fund Transfer All Other 2 Fee Transfers Original Budget Actual Page 9 Page 143

Item #19. Finance Department Monthly Report September 2025 City of Dover Electric Fund Summary Fiscal Year to Date September 2025 Revenues Original Budget Actual % Customer Sales $ 103,145,400 $ 27,768,699 27% All Other 1 3,045,000 1,070,233 35% $ 106,190,400 $ 28,838,932 27% Expenditures Original Budget Actual % Power Supply & Generation $ 82,354,500 $ 18,481,274 22% Electric Operating Div. Exp. 11,276,300 2,443,239 22% Interfund Services 5,123,800 1,061,385 21% Debt Service 1,376,300 350,800 25% Capital Project Transfers 10,538,300 2,634,575 0% General Fund Transfer 10,000,000 2,500,000 25% All Other 2 2,503,500 551,491 22% $ 123,172,700 $ 28,022,765 23% 1 Includes Rental Revenue, Miscellaneous Service Revenue, Interest Earnings, Investment Management Fee New Service Fees, Sale of Assets, Trf from Uncollectible Reserves, General Service Billing, Revenue from 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 Rev. Budget Actual Sales to Customers MWh (excl. Street Light MWh) 764,148 210,278 Sales per MWh $133.22 $129.97 Purchased/Generated MWh 770,241- 213,410- All In MWh Supply & Generation $106.86 $86.60 Page Page 10 144

Item #19. Finance Department Monthly Report September 2025 Electric Fund - Revenues Millions $- $10 $20 $30 $40 $50 $60 $70 $80 $90 $100 $110 $120 Original Budget Actual Customer Sales All Other 1 Electric Fund - Expenditures $90,000,000 $85,000,000 $80,000,000 $75,000,000 $70,000,000 $65,000,000 $60,000,000 $55,000,000 $50,000,000 $45,000,000 $40,000,000 $35,000,000 $30,000,000 $25,000,000 $20,000,000 $15,000,000 $10,000,000 $5,000,000 $- Power Supply & Electric Operating Capital Project General Fund Interfund Services Debt Service All Other 2 Generation Div. Exp. Transfers Transfer Original Budget $82,354,500 11,276,300 5,123,800 1,376,300 10,538,300 10,000,000 2,503,500 Actual $18,481,274 2,443,239 1,061,385 350,800 2,634,575 2,500,000 551,491 Original Budget Actual Page Page 11 145

Item #19. Finance Department Monthly Report September 2025 City of Dover Division Expense Summary (General Fund) Fiscal Year to Date September 2025 Original Budget Actual % General Fund Divisions % of Budget City Clerk $ 492,900 $ 101,311 21% Council 276,600 63,812 23% Mayor Fire 1,133,800 262,939 23% Human Resources Grounds 2,047,300 522,562 26% Customer Services Library 2,378,800 572,004 24% Fleet Maintenance Recreation 1,653,300 410,121 25% Procurement & Inventory Life Safety 1,664,100 125,048 8% Code Enforcement 1,143,700 152,978 13% Engineering Planning 1,079,800 144,653 13% Facilities Management Public Inspections 769,100 119,145 15% Pub. Services Administration Police 24,762,300 5,638,513 23% Finance Police Extra Duty 910,700 276,128 30% Information Technology Streets 899,800 193,723 21% Sanitation - 377,622 0% City Manager Stormwater 1,104,900 179,977 16% Stormwater City Manager 1,485,300 401,601 27% Sanitation Information Technology 1,045,700 225,817 22% Streets Finance 1,039,800 198,779 19% Police Extra Duty Pub. Services Administration 743,500 183,299 25% Facilities Management 807,900 111,906 14% Police Engineering 303,500 60,224 20% Public Inspections Procurement & Inventory 1,012,700 231,809 23% Planning Fleet Maintenance 1,139,800 260,865 23% Code Enforcement Customer Services 1,515,900 354,510 23% Life Safety Human Resources 529,900 83,352 16% Recreation Mayor 316,700 75,564 24% $ 50,257,800 $ 11,328,262 23% Library Grounds Fire Council City Clerk 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% Page Page 12 146

Finance Department Monthly Report September 2025 Item #19. City of Dover Utilities Expenditure Summary Fiscal Year to Date September 2025 Water Divison Original Budget Actual % Engineering & Inspection $ 416,600 $ 95,784 23% Water Department 971,000 207,245 21% Water Treatment Plant 3,081,500 656,504 21% $ 4,469,100 $ 959,533 21% Wastewater Divison Original Budget Actual % Engineering & Inspection $ 519,900 $ 92,462 18% Wastewater Department 1,524,400 357,524 23% $ 2,044,300 $ 449,986 22% Electric Division Original Budget Actual % Transmission/Distribution $ 5,743,600 $ 1,268,878 22% Electrical Engineering 2,052,000 455,449 22% Administration 1,751,900 330,076 19% Meter Reading 569,400 121,971 21% Systems Operations 1,159,400 266,864 23% $ 11,276,300 $ 2,443,239 22% Page 147 Page 13

Finance Department Monthly Report September 2025 Item #19. Water Division % of Budget Water Treatment Plant Water Department Engineering & Inspection 20% 21% 21% 22% 22% 23% 23% 24% Wastewater Division % of Budget Wastewater Department Engineering & Inspection 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% Electric Division % of Budget Systems Operations Meter Reading Administration Electrical Engineering Transmission/Distribution 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% Page 148 Page 14

Finance Department Monthly Report September 2025 Item #19. City of Dover Capital Outlay Summary (All Funds) Fiscal Year to Date September 2025 General Fund Original Budget Actual % Fire $ 569,500 $ 118,985 21% Code Enforcement 135,000 - 0% Police 1,176,400 650,095 55% Streets 2,870,000 213,615 7% Sanitation - 670,994 0% Stormwater 3,124,000 24,953 1% Grounds 85,000 - 0% Recreation 330,000 222,165 67% Purchasing 517,000 13,625 3% Information Technology 110,700 24,505 13% Facilities Management 474,000 - 0% Fleet Maintenance 44,100 28,513 0% General Fund Capital Projects $ 9,435,700 $ 1,967,450 21% Water Fund Water $ 3,098,600 $ 550,455 19% Water Treatment Plant 5,682,000 7,520 0% Water Fund Capital Projects $ 8,780,600 $ 557,975 6% Wastewater Fund Wastewater $ 2,702,100 $ 613,715 23% Wastewater Fund Capital Projects $ 2,702,100 $ 613,715 23% Electric Fund Electric Generation $ 460,000 $ 27,039 6% Transmission/Distribution 2,400,000 156,368 7% Electrical Engineering 5,964,000 430,944 5% Metering 50,800 - 0% ERP System 1,803,500 30,250 2% Electric Administration 60,000 - 0% Electric Fund Capital Projects $ 10,738,300 $ 644,600 5% TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS $ 31,656,700 $ 3,783,740 11% Page 149 Page 15

Finance Department Monthly Report September 2025 Item #19. Capital Outlay - All Divisions $7,000,000 $6,000,000 $5,000,000 $4,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,000,000 $- Original Budget Actual Capital Outlay - By Fund $12,000,000 $10,738,300 $10,000,000 $9,435,700 $8,780,600 $8,000,000 $6,000,000 $4,000,000 $2,702,100 $1,967,450 $2,000,000 $557,975 $613,715 $644,600 $- Original Budget Actual General Fund Capital Projects Water Fund Capital Projects Wastewater Fund Electric Fund Capital Projects Page 150 Page 16

Item #20. DOVER FIRE DEPARTMENT September 2025 FIRE CHIEFS REPORT Page 151

Item #20. To: Mayor and City Council From: David Carey, Fire Chief Date: September 11, 2025 Subject: September 2025 Fire Chief’s Report The following is the monthly report of Dover Fire Department activities for September: Events Several Officers and Firefighters assisted with 9/11 ceremonies throughout the city. Their efforts in honoring this solemn day were greatly appreciated. Training and Driver Opportunities During October, Driver Training classes began for new drivers, and refresher sessions were held for current drivers on all fire engines and ladder trucks. New Driver Qualifications Jachob Osika has qualified on Brush 1 and the Utility Vehicles. Major Incidents – September 2025 • MVC with Entrapment – Leipsic Road • Building Fire – Horsepond Road • MVC with Entrapment – Division / New Street Stipend and Live-In Program Updates Live-In Program We currently have 8 live-in firefighters, with 4 at each location. 2025 Stipend Program – Totals to Date Page 152

Item #20. The Stipend Program continues to perform strongly. In September, 47 firefighters participated. We are actively collecting feedback, identifying improvement areas, and making necessary adjustments. Month Total ($) Members June $19,106.00 41 July $21,188.10 41 August $25,476.80 46 September $25,450.00 47 Total Expenditure to Date: $ 91,220.90 Personnel Activities Event: Hours: • Meetings 112 • Training 157 • Duty crews 5,625.7 • Incident 3,550 Total: 9,444.7 Hours 149 calls with an average attendance of 23.83 personnel per call Respectfully submitted, David Carey Fire Chief Page 153

Item #20. Page 154

Item #20. Page 155

Item #21. 1 Page 156

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 R. ROBBINS Deputy Chief of Police ROBERT E. ROSWELL PAUL D. KUNTZI KEVIN A. STREADWICK November 10, 2025 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 September: COMPLAINTS/EVENTS YTD Totals compiled through September numbered 35,803. This represents a decrease of 618 from the 36,421 reported over the same period in 2024. 40,000 36,421 35,803 30,478 32,014 29,638 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS Burglary: 9 cases reported, 6 cases cleared and 0 cases were cleared from previous months. Robbery: 2 cases reported, 2 cases cleared and 0 cases was cleared from previous months. Sex Assault: 7 cases reported, 5 cases cleared and 0 cases were cleared from previous months. Homicide: 0 cases reported, 0 cases cleared and 0 cases cleared from previous months. There were 8 Non-Criminal Death Investigations, 8 cases cleared and 0 cases cleared from previous months. 2 Page 157

DRUG, VICE, & ORGANIZED CRIME / STREET CRIMES UNIT ENFORCEMENT Item #21. Marijuana: 0 grams seized Cocaine: 23 grams seized Ecstasy: 0 doses seized Prescription Pills: 0 doses seized Heroin: .54 grams seized Methamphetamine: 0 grams seized Fentanyl: 0 grams seized Other Rx Drugs: 0 grams/doses seized Drug Proceeds: $0 seized FIREARM SEIZURES/INSIDE CITY LIMITS 15 10 5 3 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 CI DVOC/STREET CRIMES PATROL SEU HANDGUN RIFLE SHOTGUN Firearms: 5 Handguns TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT YTD Citation Totals compiled through September numbered 5,976. This represents an increase of 2,348 from the 3,628 reported over the same period in 2024. 7,000 5,976 6,000 5,631 5,569 5,000 4,542 4,000 3,628 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 TRAFFIC CRASHES: YTD = 1.435 3 Page 158

911 CENTER ACTIVITY Item #21. Total compiled during September numbered 7,979 calls. This represents a decrease of 21 from the 8,000 reported during the same period in 2024. 8,100 8,054 8,000 7,979 8,000 7,900 7,800 7,700 7,600 7,521 7,500 7,474 7,400 7,300 7,200 7,100 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 CITY ORDINANCE SUMMONS YTD Totals compiled through September numbered 3,496. This represents an increase of 1,510 from the 1,986 reported over the same period in 2024. 4,000 3,496 3,500 2,938 2,852 3,000 2,500 1,986 2,000 1,613 1,446 1,500 822 774 1,000 703 550 500 0 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 ISSUED 2,938 2,852 1,613 1,986 3,496 PAID 703 550 822 774 1,446 4 Page 159

COMMUNITY POLICING Item #21. 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 September:  Assisted Patrol Units during major incidents, high 911 call volume and/or low staffing  Community Response Vehicle: Event at the Murphy School  Liaison with Sussex Green property manager regarding drugs and gangs  Addressed an image of a person potentially exposing himself at City Hall  Assisted the Motor unit with a Funeral Escort  Assisted School Resource Officer with a student issue – Parkway Academy  Supported the Veterans-oriented event at Schutte Park  Assisted Animal Control with a problem in the 200 block of N. Kirkwood  Attended Medal Ceremony event Special Olympics [K-9 Roy]  Attended First Responder event at Holy Cross [K-9 Roy]  Attended 9/11 Memorial event at Mission BBQ [K-9 Roy]  Liaison with New Castle County PD regarding future collaborations [PAL]  Liaison with Dover YMCA regarding future collaborations [PAL]  Follow-up w/representatives of the DHA – off hours security access  Follow-up w/bus stop issue for students of Early College High School  Continued Follow-up with DART/Dover Liquor Warehouse- bus stop complaint  Follow-up with a juvenile issue on N. Caroline Place  Liaison with DSU regarding a mentorship program and volunteers for [PAL] related events  Contacted owner - 40 S Governors - nuisance issues - meeting scheduled - investigation  Contacted Fire Marshal Re: large party at the Dover Gym.  Continued to obtain authorization to enforce trespassing and conduct checks for same  Continued efforts regarding trespassing complaint on South Governors: 1 arrest  Participated in the Law Enforcement Torch Run State Committee meeting  Follow-up on a traffic matter connected to Dover High School  Meeting with Dover Middle School – Begin activities - 21st Century Program [PAL]  Participated in the monthly meetings with the various property managers  Conducted property checks of problem areas from community complaints  Participated in the Delaware Technical Community College fair  Participated in First Day of School - [K-9 Roy] – [PAL]  Follow up: Property Management of 30 S. New Street  Participated in the Prayer Breakfast at Delaware State University  Supported the Delaware State University 5K Race  Visited students at Reilly Brown Elementary [K-9 Roy]  Planning for Coffee with a Cop, FEDEX security assessment, Veteran’s Day display, Trunk or Treat, Easter event, Hometown Holiday, Faith & Blue softball event, Operation Gobble, Dover High Lights On After School event, & CPR training  Training Event: Collision Reconstruction  Follow up with Tri-County Realty: Trespassing issues – S. Governors Blvd.  Spoke with property owner of 117 W. Reed regarding homeless individuals in the area 5 Page 160

 The Behavioral Health Unit (BHU) responded to and/or assisted with 67 notable Calls for Item #21. Service (CFS). Of those 67 CFS, the following occurred: o 27 involved transports to Correctional Facilities, the Dover Police Department, Medical/Mental Health Facilities, Courthouses, and Public Transportation. o 28 involved Mental Health contacts and 12 involved Substance Abuse contacts, while 5 CFS involved a combination of both. o 47 involved other circumstances and/or CFS types. o 83 direct field contacts occurred during the 67 complaints involving Mental Health, Substance Abuse, and/or Other Circumstances. o PFC Shepherd was temporarily reassigned to Patrol from August 25, 2025 – September 04, 2025 due to staffing shortages, and 21 of the 67 complaints occurred during this temporary transfer.  BHU Meetings/Events/Community Engagement/Projects/Training: o Most Notable: Adult female nuisance defendant was contacted in September after numerous previous incidents. She was processed on several charges after victimizing numerous residents downtown and the Dover Fire Department. She was issued a No Contact Order with the Corporate Limits of the City of Dover and has 25 Charges Pending. o PFC Shepherd performed two successful Lethal Violence Protective Order hearings at Superior Court preventing dangerous individuals from owning, possessing, and/or purchasing firearms for at least one year. o PFC Shepherd and PFC Marucci pursued a stolen vehicle that was involved in a Burglary. The vehicle and suspect were successfully apprehended without incident and turned over to Detective Barrows. o PFC Shepherd and Clinician Heath performed an educational presentation at the STRIVE Program through the Kent County Community School. o The Behavioral Health Unit and Community Policing Unit participated in the Senator Blunt-Rochester Third Annual Constituent Resource Fair at Delaware Technical and Community College. o The Behavioral Health Unit continued to meet with different State, Local, and Private Entities to improve access to effective care in the City of Dover. o BHU continued to assist all Units within the Department with Behavioral Health PROGRAMS AND INITIATIVES The Planning and Training team conducted another advertised Assessment Day for potential Recruit Police Officers on September 7th. The high volatility in the law enforcement market and the continued limited candidate pool continues to present staffing challenges. Candidates who made it through the testing phase were advanced to the formal background investigation phase. Results are expected in October. Three (3) Candidates that had tested for Recruit Officer in the early summer made it through the screening and earned interviews with the Chief on September 16th. All three of them, including one of our Cadets, were offered positions and will begin preparations for the January session of the Police Academy. Session 9 of the Dover Municipal Police Academy was completed and the graduation ceremony was held on the evening of September 19th. The four (4) Dover Recruit Officers were sworn in by Mayor Christiansen earlier that same day. We would like to welcome 6 Page 161

Patrolman Zachary Lewis, Patrolman Daniel Jackson, Patrolwoman Kayden DeAllie, and Item #21. Patrolman Kaden Carney to the Dover PD family. They are all currently in the Field Training Program and should be ready for independent duty in January. The 2025 Citizens Police Academy kicked off on September 10th and will run through to early November. Students will receive instruction and orientation to all facets of the Dover Police Department. They will experience operational activities connected to patrol, investigations, and special operations. They will learn about the administrative and training challenges that are a part of 21st Century policing. The final major event of our 100th Anniversary celebration was the Gala held at Bally’s on September 12th. Several hundred current and former officers were joined by invited guests to experience an evening of stories and laughter that remembered a century of service to Dover. The 100th Anniversary Committee did a spectacular job preparing all of the events in 2025 but the Gala clearly stood out as the marque event that it was intended to be. We now move on to the next 100 years of protecting and serving the Capitol City of the First State. 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 7 Page 162

FIRST READINGItem #23. City of Dover PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2025-18 1 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN 2 COUNCIL MET: 3 4 That Chapter 2 – Administration, Article V – Finance, be amended by inserting the text indicated in 5 bold, blue font and deleting the text indicated in red strikeout as follows: 6 7 Sec. 2-421. – Bond financing approval. 8 9 Whenever approval of the jurisdiction where real property is situated is required as a condition 10 of bond financing for the acquisition, operation, or renovation of real property in the city by any state 11 or federal law prior to the approval and issuance of such bonds, no such approval shall be complete 12 until approval is sought and granted by the city, and agreed upon and acted upon at the discretion of 13 the council, even though approval may have been granted by the county. 14 15 Sec. 2-422. – Tax increment financing, purpose, and findings. 16 17 (a) The city council of the City of Dover has determined that a need exists within the city for 18 improvements and reinvestment throughout the city. Such improvements will enhance the 19 taxable base of the city, directly and indirectly, encourage the development and redevelopment 20 of commercial and residential areas of the city, increase commercial activity, increase 21 employment, and benefit the general health and welfare of residents; and 22 23 (b) The city council on February 14, 2017, passed Resolution #2017-02 supporting changes to the 24 Delaware Code to enable Dover and Kent County to utilize the provisions of the TIF and 25 Special District code provisions; and 26 27 (c) 22 Delaware Code, Section 1703 provides "In addition to whatever other powers it may have, 28 and notwithstanding any limitation by law, any municipality may borrow money by issuing 29 and selling bonds, at any time and from time to time, for the purpose of financing the 30 development of an industrial, commercial or residential area."; and 31 32 (d) Delaware Code was amended to authorize the City of Dover to use the provisions of 22 33 Delaware Code, Chapter 17, Municipal Tax Increment Financing Act, including specific Dover 34 provisions in 22 Del. C, Section 1716; and 35 36 (e) Tax increment financing (TIF) is a financing method that allows the use of future tax revenues 37 generated by economic development projects to help pay for the project; allows for the issuance 38 of revenue bonds for such purposes, such bonds being tax-exempt and not a pledge of good P.O. Box 475 ❖ Dover, Delaware ❖19903 Page 163 Community Excellence Through Quality Service

Ordinance #2025-18 Amending Chapter 2 - Administration, Article V – Finance, Section 2-427 – Vehicle Item #23. Billable Rates Page 2 39 faith or credit of the city; and by capturing the tax revenue increment between the original 40 assessed value and the value resulting from the project; and 41 42 (f) Due to the condition, age, and design of buildings and infrastructure, configuration and size of 43 parcels, competition from commercial activities throughout the city, and other factors, the costs 44 and complexities of development, redevelopment, and reinvestment tend to limit investment; 45 and 46 47 (g) Tax increment financing is frequently used by local governments to enable funding of certain 48 development and infrastructure projects but the availability of alternative financing options for 49 these projects might not occur otherwise. 50 51 Sec. 2-423. – Authorization to consider issuance of tax increment financing (TIF) district bonds. 52 53 (a) Before issuing bonds under the Municipal Tax Increment Financing Act, the city must 54 designate by resolution, an area as a TIF District, obtain from the city assessor an assessment 55 of the original assessed value in the district, create a special fund for the purpose of receiving 56 the tax revenue increment, and comply with all other provisions of the Municipal Tax 57 Increment Financing Act. 58 59 (b) By enactment of this Ord. No. 2022-22 the city council indicates its intention to issue bonds, 60 notes, or similar instruments in one or more series from time to time for projects and amounts 61 to be determined in the future, prior to the bond offering, for the purposes set forth in the 62 resolution and as allowed under Municipal Tax Increment Financing Act. 63 64 (c) "Council shall have the power by Resolution to establish terms of the bonding and financial 65 arrangement and enter a cooperating agreement with other taxing entities such as State, 66 County, and school districts." 67 68 Sec. 2-424. Effective date. 69 70 This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon final passage by the city council of the City 71 of Dover. Passed on December 12, 2022. 72 73 Sec. 2-425. Sale and disposition of real property. 74 75 (a) Authorized. Except as otherwise provided and upon approval of the city council, the city 76 manager is hereby authorized to sell or dispose of excess property. 77 78 (b) Determination of excess status. The city manager, upon determining that a city owned parcel 79 of land is excess in nature and that the disposal of such land would be beneficial to the City of 80 Dover, will request, through the legislative, finance, and administration committee, that city 81 council consider disposal of such land. 82 83 (c) Costs of conveyance. Unless otherwise specified by the city council, all fees and costs, legal or 84 otherwise, associated with the sale and conveyance of all excess lands shall be paid by the 85 purchaser. P.O. Box 475 ❖ Dover, Delaware ❖19903 Page 164 Community Excellence Through Quality Service

Ordinance #2025-18 Amending Chapter 2 - Administration, Article V – Finance, Section 2-427 – Vehicle Item #23. Billable Rates Page 3 86 87 (d) Standard method of disposition. 88 89 (1) The legislative, finance, and administration committee, upon receiving a request to dispose 90 of excess real property, shall, prior to making a recommendation to city council, request 91 all pertinent information including, but not limited to, the following: 92 93 a. Determination that subject parcel is not required by any other city department. 94 95 b. Written explanation of why subject parcel is now surplus. 96 97 c. Determination of whether a zoning change would enhance the sale value of subject 98 parcel and recommend said change if warranted. 99 100 d. Determination if the parcel's exact location and size is known and, if not, 101 recommend whether said parcel should be surveyed by the city prior to any sale 102 attempts. 103 104 (2) City council, after receiving a positive recommendation from the legislative, finance, and 105 administration committee to dispose of a surplus parcel of land, shall, as part of its 106 deliberations: 107 108 a. Determine if disposal of the parcel is in the city's best interests. 109 110 b. Determine if disposal by sale, gift, or some other means would best serve the city's 111 interests. 112 113 c. Determine if the city planner should be requested to initiate rezoning procedures. 114 115 d. Publicize the pertinent information concerning the surplus parcel and its 116 availability for purchase to the general public at least once a week for two weeks 117 in a local newspaper. 118 119 e. Make public, and a part of the record, all written correspondence received and, after 120 the publicizing requirements of subsection (2)d. are met, hold a public hearing to 121 receive any other citizen input. 122 123 (3) City council, after voting to proceed with the sale of surplus land, shall determine: 124 125 a. If an unbiased appraisal is needed to establish a minimum acceptable price. 126 127 b. Whether to sell the parcel by public auction or by sealed bid, and what the minimum 128 acceptable offer will be. 129 130 c. The degree and scope of advertising, with a minimum of exposure being 131 advertisement once a week for two weeks in a newspaper of general circulation 132 within the county. P.O. Box 475 ❖ Dover, Delaware ❖19903 Page 165 Community Excellence Through Quality Service

Ordinance #2025-18 Amending Chapter 2 - Administration, Article V – Finance, Section 2-427 – Vehicle Item #23. Billable Rates Page 4 133 134 d. Whether the circumstances of and surrounding a particular sale may be such that 135 the best interests of the city would be served by listing the property for sale with a 136 licensed real estate agent. 137 138 (4) City staff shall, with city council's direction: 139 140 a. Arrange for advertisement of the sale. 141 142 b. Draft the sale bill setting out a description of the parcel to be sold, time, date, and 143 place of sale or bid opening, the terms and conditions of sale, and the city's 144 reservation of acceptance or rejection of any or all bids received at the time of sale 145 or bid opening. 146 147 c. Order and distribute a sufficient number of sale bills for posting and distribution in 148 the county courthouse, at the site, and in the general area of the parcel. 149 150 d. Obtain the services of a professional auctioneer if said sale is to be a public auction. 151 152 e. Conduct the sale and submit the results to city council. 153 154 f. Obtain the services of a licensed real estate agent if the sale is to be brokered. 155 156 (5) City council, after confirming the sale, shall: 157 158 a. Request the city solicitor to prepare a deed for execution and to arrange for final 159 settlement with the purchaser, at which time the city will deliver the deed, the 160 purchaser will pay all balances due, and the city solicitor will record said deed in 161 the Recorder of Deeds Office for Kent County. 162 163 (e) Exceptions to standard method of disposition. 164 165 (1) Exception A—Sale to an abutting owner. When, in the opinion of city council, a public 166 sale would be detrimental to the lands of an abutter, and/or that a public sale would place 167 the abutter at undue risk; or that the combination of abutter's land and city's land would be 168 substantially greater in value than that of the sum of the parcels considered individually, 169 city council may direct the city assessor to have prepared one or more unbiased fee 170 appraisals of the parcel. Thereafter, the subject land will be offered for sale to the said 171 abutter at the appraisal price, plus the appraisal fees, plus the legal costs. In the event the 172 offer is not accepted, a public sale may be ordered. 173 174 Examples of detrimental affect might be when the surplus city parcel lies between an 175 abutting property and the street and development of the parcel would obstruct visibility of 176 the abutter's property, or when the surplus parcel is zoned multi-family and abuts a single- 177 family parcel. 178 179 (2) Exception B—Trade of lands. Trade of lands may be approved when it is shown beyond P.O. Box 475 ❖ Dover, Delaware ❖19903 Page 166 Community Excellence Through Quality Service

Ordinance #2025-18 Amending Chapter 2 - Administration, Article V – Finance, Section 2-427 – Vehicle Item #23. Billable Rates Page 5 180 doubt that such a trade will be equal to or better than the lands to be traded either on a 181 "square foot for square foot" measure and/or on a "dollar for dollar" measure. 182 183 (3) Exception C—Conveyance of odd shaped and/or unbuildable parcels. City acquisitions for 184 roads, utility usages, etc. may, after such usage is accomplished, leave a small strip of land 185 that is odd shaped and unbuildable. City council may approve the conveyance of this strip 186 of land to an abutting property owner on request of said owner. The price for these lands 187 shall be at the same cost basis as that paid by the city. If conveyance is made in excess of 188 two years after the date of city acquisition, then the consideration shall either be based on 189 a price established by an unbiased fee appraisal made on the basis of the value added to the 190 abutting property by the acquisition of said lands, or on the city's cost basis for the parcel 191 adjusted for inflation, whichever city council shall select. All fees, legal or otherwise, 192 associated with the conveyance are to be paid by the purchaser. 193 194 (4) Exception D—Sale of small or irregular shaped lot to an abutting owner. If any excess 195 parcel of land is too small or irregular in shape to be of any value to anyone other than an 196 abutting owner, it may be sold to such owner at either its fee appraised fair market value, 197 or at its fair market value as established by the city's assessment records, whichever city 198 council shall select. The costs of the appraisal and all legal costs shall be paid by the owner 199 requesting the conveyance. 200 201 (5) Exception E—Donation of land to non-profit organizations. If, in the opinion of city 202 council, the donation of a parcel of excess land to a non-profit organization would be in the 203 best interest of the city, council then reserves unto itself the right to make such donation. 204 205 Sec. 2-426. – Credit card processing fees. 206 207 A credit/debit card processing fee, as provided for in Appendix F—Fees and Fines, shall be 208 imposed for any tax, fee, fine, summons, utility bill, or any other payment made with a credit, debit, 209 or charge card accepted by the City of Dover. 210 211 Sections 2-427 – 2-500. Reserved. 212 213 Sec. 2-427. – New vehicle billable rates. 214 215 At times, the City of Dover provides services that are deemed billable. When equipment 216 is used for said billable event, the city shall utilize the most recent published schedule of 217 equipment rates provided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). This 218 schedule will be calculated on an hourly basis and will not include any labor or material costs 219 for the service. If the city utilizes a piece of equipment that is not included in the FEMA schedule 220 of equipment rates, city staff will utilize industry standards for the hourly rate. 221 222 Sections 2-428 – 2-500. Reserved. 223 224 225 ADOPTED: * 226 P.O. Box 475 ❖ Dover, Delaware ❖19903 Page 167 Community Excellence Through Quality Service

Ordinance #2025-18 Amending Chapter 2 - Administration, Article V – Finance, Section 2-427 – Vehicle Item #23. Billable Rates Page 6 227 SYNOPSIS 228 This ordinance provides a standardized hourly rate for billable equipment that is used for a service. 229 This could include repairing infrastructure and billing an insurance company. The current rates have 230 not been evaluated in over ten (10) years and are outdated. Having the schedule of rates tied to 231 FEMA will provide an equitable and fair hourly rate for city equipment. 232 (SPONSORS: ARNDT, NEIL, ROCHA) 233 234 235 236 Actions History 237 11/10/2025 - Scheduled for First Reading - City Council 238 10/28/2025 - Introduction - Council Committee of the Whole/Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee P.O. Box 475 ❖ Dover, Delaware ❖19903 Page 168 Community Excellence Through Quality Service

Item #24. City of Dover PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2025-20 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: That Chapter 106 – Traffic and Vehicles, Article I – In General, be amended by adding Sec. 106- 18 – Strictly Enforced by inserting the text indicated in bold, blue font and deleting the text indicated in red strikeout as follows: Sec. 106-18. – Strictly Enforced (a) Residential district speed limits shall be consistent with Title 21, Chapter 41, § 4169 and be strictly enforced. (b) The City Manager shall cause proper signage to announcing strict enforcement in residential neighborhoods to be placed in accordance with state law. (c) Penalties. Whoever violates this section shall be fined as provided for in Appendix F – Fees and Fines. Secs. 106-18 19– 106-50. – Reserved. BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED: That Appendix F – Fees and Fines, be amended by inserting the text indicated in bold, blue font as follows: Chapter 106. – Traffic and Vehicles Chapter 106. Traffic and Vehicles Fees and Fines Article I. In General Fines not paid within 14 days of the day the fine was issued, including the day the fine was issued, shall be automatically doubled in amount. Sec. 106-7. Obedience to state law; violation of any provision of 21 A fine of not less Del. C. § 101 et seq. (except Sec. 106-7(1)—Handicapped parking and than $25.00, nor Sec. 106-7(2)—Fire lanes) more than $1,000.00 Subsec. (1) Handicapped parking Minimum fine, as defined in 21 Del. C. § 4183, at the time the violation occurs Subsec. (2) Fire lanes Minimum fines, as defined in 21 Del. C. Page 169

Item #24. § 7001(a), at the time the violation occurs Sec. 106-14. Off-road motor vehicle regulations Subsec. (d) Penalties A minimum fine of $25.00 and a maximum fine of $100.00 Sec. 106-15. Failure to stop for a red traffic signal; traffic light signal violation monitoring program; penalties Subsec. (b)(3) Traffic light signal violation monitoring program; civil or administrative assessment Failure to comply with a traffic light signal $75.00 If not paid within 14 days, an additional assessment shall be $10.00 added to the original assessment Additional assessment shall be increased if the assessment is not $20.00 paid within 45 days Additional assessment shall be increased if the assessment is not $30.00 paid within 90 days Court costs or similar administrative fees may also be assessed if Maximum $30.00 the owner requests a hearing to contest the violation, and is ultimately found to be in violation or fails to pay or contest the violation in a timely manner Sec. 106-16. Violations; except as otherwise provided Subsec. (a)(1) Moving offense Minimum of $10.00 Subsec. (a)(2) Nonmoving offense Minimum of $15.00 Subsec. (a)(3) Parking violation $20.00 for each offense, if the fine is paid within 72 hours from the date the offense is recorded in time, the fine shall be $15.00 Sec. 106-18. Strictly Enforced ADOPTED: * SYNOPSIS This Ordinance shall take effect on the first day of July after passage and approval. (SPONSORS: * and *) Page 170

Item #24. Action History 11/10/2025 – Scheduled for First Reading – City Council 10/25/2025 - Introduction – Council Committee of the Whole/ Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee - Page 171