Transcript: Regular Council Meeting

Fred A. Neil

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 at a public hearing is prohibited during the open forum, as an opportunity will be provided during the consideration of that item. Citizen comments are limited to 3 minutes. Council is prohibited from taking action since they're not in official session. However, they may schedule such items as a regular agenda item and act upon it in the future. Madam Clerk, do we have a list of of these persons who have signed up?

City Clerk

We did. First is Ms. Aliesha Martin? Come up to the podium.

City Clerk

Did you sign up to speak?

Aliesha Martin

Yes, ma'am. Okay.

Unknown Speaker

Go to work.

Public Commenter

So now's my three minutes?

Fred A. Neil

Correct.

Fred A. Neil

May we have your name and address, please, at podium so we can hear you and be recorded?

Public Commenter

Oh, gosh. I didn't, I was waiting for people to introduce the proposal, but you driving down the road, just mind your business, need to get to work, need to get home, need to go pick up a pizza, whatever. And out comes a dog in the road. It's too late for you to do anything. How's that dog doing right now?

Aliesha Martin

Good evening. My name is Aliesha Martin.

Aliesha Martin

Would you like me to spell it for you?

Fred A. Neil

No, we can... we can take care of it. The address would be helpful.

City Clerk

We have it on the paper.

Aliesha Martin

From Bear, Delaware. I just moved away from here. I lived here for 40 years.

Public Commenter

Or you ride down the road, and a ball comes out. You're going to, you either going to slam on your brakes, or a number of things could happen.

Public Commenter

Reason why I drove all the way down here today, sorry, is because of the importance of pedestrian safety. And from what I can understand, the city of Dover is doing everything in its power, almost, to keep everyone safe. Unfortunately, there are individuals who don't seem to understand the law of physics. If you stand out in the roadway, and you're not a car, there's a good chance the car is going to win, should there be an impact. Okay? In my opinion, all that the city of Dover, all that Mr. Boggerty, Senator Boggerty, and David Anderson, and like-minded people who literally care about the people in this city and their safety, it's not like

Public Commenter

Anybody's trying to quiet your freedom of speech, or anything like that. It's just

Public Commenter

a matter of stand- being in the right place.

Public Commenter

It's not what you say, or what you have to say.

Public Commenter

It's a matter of standing where you're seen.

Public Commenter

Or whatever it is you want to do.

Public Commenter

You can't do it- cannot be done on public roadways, and why should it?

Public Commenter

As far as I know, that's all this issue is is about.

Public Commenter

Pedestrian safety.

Public Commenter

That's it. I don't think it needs to get twisted and turned into other agendas that can be addressed at another time.

Public Commenter

Not saying that everyone has valid points, but

Public Commenter

based on what I can tell,

Public Commenter

everybody from our mental health professionals and our police department,

Public Commenter

everybody's doing everything they can to work together to help all of these individuals already.

Public Commenter

Thank you for your time.

Fred A. Neil

Thank you for coming. Madam Clerk.

City Clerk

Ryan Halpern.

Ryan Halpern

Good evening, everybody.

Ryan Halpern

Not a huge fan of coming up here speaking, but I take- I think it takes this ordinance, 2025-21, for me to get up here.

Ryan Halpern

Before I begin,

Public Commenter

Uh, respect uh, everybody. Um, sitting up here as public servants you guys take a beating, uh, since I've been attending these uh meetings lately, but uh, I appreciate uh, you serving the city.

Public Commenter

Um, I have deep compassion for every person in need, but I have no compassion for the rings and operations that exploit vulnerable people by placing them in dangerous locations. What we're seeing in our medians is not safe, not humane, and not sustainable.

Public Commenter

At a previous meeting, someone said, "People choose to stay in traffic because they are hungry and willing to accept the risk." I cannot accept that. Hunger should never require a person to stand inches from traffic when alternatives exist and they can seek monetary help or donations from the generosity of our community in far less dangerous places.

Public Commenter

And even if they're willing to accept that risk, they do not have that right to impose it on every driver passing them: families, children, elderly, people who played no part in their situation.

Public Commenter

Here's how I see it. If this ordinance saves even one life, supporting it is worth it. And if we turn a blind eye to what's happening in the medians, then what is the purpose of having jaywalking laws, seatbelt laws, bike helmet laws? Those laws exist to prevent avoidable tragedies before they happen. This should be no different.

Public Commenter

While some choose not to obey these laws, what would the result be if everyone chose to disobey them?

Public Commenter

Delaware law leaves cities with very few tools to address this issue. This ordinance is one of the only lawful actions the city can take.

Public Commenter 1

to improve the safety and reduce risk. We are one swerve away from a tragedy. A driver trying to avoid someone in the median could kill themselves, pedestrian, or someone in another vehicle. And if that tragedy happens, the city of Dover will find itself asking whether it used every tool available to prevent it. This ordinance gives our officers the authority they currently lack to intervene, move people out of harm's way, and guide them towards services before a life is lost. I refuse to stay silent out of discomfort while lives hang in the balance. I ask you to act now before Dover finds itself grieving a third tragedy we all saw coming. Thank you.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

Thank you. Madam Clerk.

City Clerk

Jeanie Anderson.

Jeanie Anderson

Hello, my name is Jeanie Anderson and I want to say something to the homeless people that are here right now. I'm sorry. I feel like you're being exploited in a chess game like pawns. You are loved. You are seen. You are cared about. There are people up here on this council right now that I know for a fact, the IRT program the very first day, that was an eight or nine-day program, it was cleared out for you, to help you because you are cared about. Not homeless. 1.6 million dollars of services was given out to you because you were cared about and you were thought of first. We have, you can look that up, IRT Dover Delaware. There are people on this council right now that do care about you and they are working hard. We have some good people up here that do

Public Commenter

care about you. We have Open Doors Ministry. Google that, please. You are not a pawn in a chess game right now. I want you to please look that up. You We are literally doing chili cook-offs for you. We are doing everything that we can to help you. We are not embarrassed by you. We do not want to see you swept under the rug. This is This is you're not being told the truth, okay?

Public Commenter

Um, we have given out hundreds of backpacks and sleeping bags. We have given Open Doors Ministry, Google that right now, please. Also, Google the IRT comes to Dover, Delaware. There are people, Donyale Hall was on that, she helped coordinate it. Fred Neil, the council president, also helped with getting out the media publicity. David Anderson brought that here. Other people have come out here, and they have worked with the homeless. But we're being told that we're embarrassed by you, we are not embarrassed by you.

Public Commenter

This is a safety issue. There is a homeless person right here that is sitting in the median strip and they could have got hit by a car. We care about these people. This is a safety issue. I myself have been sitting in my car at a light at ALDI's, and I had a stranger approach my door and is banging on my window trying to get me to put my window down. This is a safety issue. And I'm sorry to everybody that's being told wrongly that they're not cared about, because you are cared about, you are loved. We are working on this, and I know for a fact, all you got to do is Google a lot of these people up here: Donyale Hall, David Anderson, Pastor Boggerty, also Brian Lewis, Rocha. These people have done a lot for the community to help with homeless people, and they keep getting attacked wrongly. Just Google this. And like I said, nobody's trying to sweep you under the rug, nobody's trying to take away your rights...

Public Commenter

to speak. You are loved, you are cared about, and I urge you to please Google these things because it is there, and it's also, if you Google this, you'll also see it on TV. You guys are cared about, and I'm so sorry that that you're being brought here and being told that people don't care about you because you are loved, and I'm so sorry. Thank you.

Robin R. Christiansen

Thank you. Madam Clerk, our next speaker?

City Clerk

Mr. William Faust, Jr.

William Faust Jr.

William Faust, Dover, Delaware. I've been to these council meetings for two years. Let's talk facts. Two years ago, the chief of police said we had approximately 40 uh encampments for homeless. No one on this council did much of anything to correct the situation. Two, let's talk facts: How many police reports have been written of someone complaining citizen or a merchant? How many emails, how many, for the two years, how many emails, how many calls to City Hall about the past two years about the median strip and panhandling? Let's talk facts: Where are this information? It's by computer you should be able to get it. Uh I think it was Ms. Mauck said uh Wilmington had put up fences on the median strip to prevent jaywalking and people uh begging for uh money. It saves lives. Let's be prudent. Let's put up fences to protect the people. This way we're not taking resources from our police department to shoo people away. A fence on the median strip will save lives. My question is this: if this council

Public Commenter

approves this ordinance and it gets overturned by a lawsuit, who's going to reimburse the citizens for this foolishness? Seriously. Everyone's saying we're rushing to make a decision. Where's the evidence? How many people have died? How many people have uh been arrested? How many serious car accidents have been caused? Where are the facts? I'm not against uh helping the poor or panhandlers. Some people need help, have to be forced to have have help. But let's show the statistics. Show the facts. Just saying, "Oh, it's election year and someone's trying to get votes" is wrong. Show me the proof that this situation's occurred. How many people from Loockerman merchants have filed police reports? How many people have called City Hall? This should all be available and be able to be told like this. Can we hear that tonight? Do we have these statistics? If not, you cannot vote on this bill. You have not done your homework. Show us the proof. Show us the evidence. Two years is not asking too much. This homeless situation didn't pop up overnight. It's not going to be corrected overnight. And criminal activities, putting a sign underneath of strictly enforced, the criminals are not going to listen to it, they're going to laugh at it. The citizens that pay their taxes and do the right thing are going to do the best thing. If you do not clean the uh element from what would be like the prostitution, the drugs, uh people homeless, it's only going to bring more criminal activity into our state, I mean into our city, and it's going to spread farther.

Public Commenter

I've seen homeless people in my area of town now, near Pete's, time when I go have lunch, people begging for food. Two years— years ago I didn't see that. Thank you.

City Clerk

Your time's up.

Fred A. Neil

Thank you. Thank you for coming. Madam Clerk?

City Clerk

Mr. David Lewis.

David Lewis

Thank you. David Lewis, 17 Oakmont, Dover, Delaware. I'm a lifelong Doverite, born and raised on New Street and Governors Avenue. I've seen good, I've seen the bad. We started out several years ago with some laws trying to be passed on panhandling at Wawas, 7-Elevens, all these businesses. And what we've done, we pushed that, we pushed the panhandlers off Loockerman Street to the intersections. That's where they had to go, there's nowhere else, but we pushed them out of the city of Dover, out of the doorways of Wawa, which is justified. They should, you know, panhandlers shouldn't be, as you go out of the store, being hustled and harassed. But what are we going to do for these people? Because this problem, if we push it off the intersection, where is it going to go? Where are they going to go next? Now that's my question. We need to do as as a group, as a as a whole, to help the people, the people of Dover, panhandlers. That's what you all are up here for, is to do that. You know, a lot of them, I guarantee you, all of them aren't homeless, all of them aren't poor, but they are—

Public Commenter

myself. I know personally a couple that come right out of incarceration this morning, right on the street here in December, 15- 16-degree nights with not a penny in their pocket, not an ID to try to help them to get any help, not knowing where to get help. And that's the other thing I think we could do in Dover is centralize a help center where you put the state, the city, the churches, the the the the organizations that want to help people. I took some guys through Dover, it took me two days to try to get somebody a place to stay and some food because they'd just come out of prison with nothing. Everybody shopped me around, go Catholic Charities, go down here Williams Service Center, go here. Everybody wanted to help, but everybody sent you somewhere else. An open place of something where we can go and get some help, whether it's mental health, addiction help, you know, whatever it is. For these people, no, that can be done. You can't run them around forever and not give them help. You can't push them out of one side and make sure, well, we don't want them on this side. And that's all we're doing. That's all this ordi-, you know, this this new law would do. Where are you going to push them next? You know? Where are they going to go next? I don't, I've had and seen, I mean, I go through Dover twice a day, going to where I work at at senior center in Camden. Governors Avenue, the first block Governors Avenue is a hell of a lot more dangerous than it is out on the highway.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

Thank you, sir.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

Madam Clerk, our next speaker.

Robin R. Christiansen

Christopher Beardsley.

Christopher Beardsley

First, I'd like to say that the only tragedy that this community is facing is that we have a body that is not willing--

Robin R. Christiansen

How about where you live, sir?

Christopher Beardsley

Sure. I live in Townsend, Delaware.

Christopher Beardsley

The only tragedy that this that we're experiencing right now is that a body is not prioritizing housing for the people.

Christopher Beardsley

My name is Christopher Beardsley, and I'm a candidate for US Senate, speaking against Ordinance 2025-21. Last time I spoke here, I expressed the cruelty and ineffectiveness of this ordinance.

Christopher Beardsley

And while this ordinance passed committee, I applaud the five city council members who voted no, which included Mr. Boggerty, Mr. Lewis, Ms. Hall, Ms. Arndt, and Dr. Sudler.

Christopher Beardsley

I continue to implore these same council members to vote no again tonight.

Christopher Beardsley

To Mr. Anderson, when I first heard you speak, you pontificated under your own self-aggrandized sense of constitutional vigilism.

Christopher Beardsley

Sir, no one has time for that.

Christopher Beardsley

The people's needs are urgent, and your platitudes cannot keep the people of Dover from homelessness, from continuous rent increases or economic hardship.

Christopher Beardsley

Going forward, Mr. Anderson, that is what I suggest you focus your energies on.

Christopher Beardsley

Because it is about creating the economic conditions of people to thrive, not to have punitive measures on those who are trying to exist.

Christopher Beardsley

This is about alleviating the economic burdens that people are facing by implementing rent rent stabilization, direct rental assistance, and tenant protections.

Christopher Beardsley

All of us are already feeling cost burdens and in making sure our families have a roof over their head.

Christopher Beardsley

No one should have the wasted

Public Speaker

their time, confronting those who are prioritising the needs of the constituents. If this body does not put housing first, it is putting housing last. I again urge all council members to vote no on this ordinance. Thank you.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

Thank you. Madam Clerk.

City Clerk

Pastor Sheila Lomax.

Pastor Sheila Lomax

Good evening, everyone.

Pastor Sheila Lomax

Can I read something from Pastor Leroy? He's working and he asked me to read this for him.

Pastor Sheila Lomax

He says, "It is disheartening to see so many individuals without shelter while numerous buildings remain vacant. I believe it is crucial for our city leaders to meet the needs of the homeless and to actively seek solutions, rather than merely pushing the issue aside. As representatives of the community, I urge you to remember that the teaching of the Bible, which reminds us to care for the poor, considers the implications of any policies you make pass. They could one day affect you or your loved ones. I sincerely hope you reflect on this matter

Pastor

and take mean- meaningful actions to support those in need. And I myself uh I just want to say that um I know that uh they it's sad that things like this happen, but I think that we need to just figure out how how we can solve that problem, because for a personal issue, I had I have a daughter, and she's well off now, but she was homeless. And she didn't want to come home. She wanted to figure it out on her own, and she had three kids. And she had to let two go. Uh the two boys stayed with one of her friends, and she kept her daughter with her at in a shelter. But she had to fight for herself, and she worked hard to get herself out of that situation. And maybe if—and I keep saying it, that we figure it out. It's empty buildings here. It's something that that we can do to to help somebody. And the word of God says we are our brothers and sisters' keepers, so I'm not mad with a soul. I just want all of us to come together and figure out instead of fine—why fine them? They ain't got no money nowhere! So, you know, do something that's going to help, and still keep the people safe. You know? So that's all I have to say, and God love you, and I love you, too.

Fred A. Neil

Thank you, Pastor.

Fred A. Neil

Madam Clerk.

City Clerk

Miss Belinda Mayne.

Belinda Mayne

Belinda Mayne, Dover, Delaware. And of course I'm here again to speak at, for not only the less fortunate, but I'm speaking to all council members, not just the five last time who voted in the same direction I was voting in as we're not punishing people that can't, already punishing themselves. We need to help them. There are plenty of buildings, as pastor had said. There are plenty of abandoned buildings. We can have a community day, gather up, see what buildings are useful to rehabilitate and help the homeless and room them. There's ways of doing things. If you want to find people, like I said, we would have to take Anderson and Boggerty's, you know, food gatherings that they have, charge them for each and every meal that they give out to the homeless. Because you want to know what? That's exactly what you're doing to everyone who's driving by who is trying to give them money to do something. Panhandling, standing in the middle of the street, I understand is a safety issue, but you're not directing them off. You're not giving them the idea of, okay, this isn't safe. What you're saying is, oh, you're punishing yourself, let's punish you even more, so let's slap you with this, let's slap you with a a fine, let's slap you with a warning, let's slap you with this. They're going to keep going back to the same place, and they're still going to put themselves in more and more debt than the people that are in prison that come out that have nothing. We need to help them. We need to find a way in agreements with everyone on council

Public Commenter

And not just vote for this ordinance to go, "Okay, let's punish those who are already being punished." We need to help the punished.

Public Commenter

And like I said, you guys are God-fearing people. So am I. God gives us what we need, but God did not give them this issue that they cannot deal with.

Public Commenter

This is people in families. This is people that have lost. This is people that have done things wrong that are trying to correct themselves, and all we're doing is slapping them down.

Public Commenter

The homeless people, you say you give out, um, what do you call them? Sleeping bags. Do you give them tents so they can build their own little community? No, you guys kick them out of there. You guys kick them out of any little community area that they try to get out of people's way.

Public Commenter

They might not know better, and some of them do, but they need help. They're not going to ask for it because that's pushing their pride down just a little bit.

Public Commenter

So we need to push our pride and say, "You want to know what? You do need help, and this is what we're willing to do for you."

Public Commenter

And as Mr. Lewis back there said, we need to centralize an area of where everybody can be helped.

Public Commenter

Not just one service here, one halfway across town, one over here, and then you go there and say, "Oh, well, we can't help you, but you need to go across town, and maybe that—maybe those people over there can help you."

Public Commenter

How about the community and council get together?

Public Commenter

Because you want to know what, council? You do do a great job. I'm going to give you a round of applause for that. You do.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

Thank you, young lady.

Public Commenter

But you just don't give enough to help.

Public Commenter

Thank you.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

Thank you. Thank you.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

Madam Clerk.

City Clerk

Mr. Gerald Martin?

City Clerk

No? Gerald Martin?

City Clerk

Martin? Okay. Gerald Martin.

City Clerk

Next is NOI? That's what is written.

City Clerk

Name and address.

Gerald Martin

In the name of Allah, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful. I bear witness there is no God but Allah, and I bear witness that Muhammad is his messenger. I greet everybody in the universal words of peace, As-Salaam-Alaikum, which means peace be unto you. Uh, I like I just like to say first of all I agree with everything that everybody said to support their ideal and their views about this ordinance. To me, I know that when I see someone out there on that corner, and I have said this several times, I give you money today, I ain't going to give you money tomorrow. But I do give them money, water, whatever I can do, because I think it's the right thing to do from human heart. The flip side of this is that we worry about a ordinance and the people that's out there, but we don't worry about two blocks away from the Mayor, Irish Mike's, where black people fighting and killing each other. There's no ordinance for that. And it boggles my mind when I see somebody put that on social media, black women fighting, black men killing each other, and there's no outcry two blocks from the Mayor's office, or three blocks from the police office. Then I think like, hmm, like Arsenio Hall...

Public Commenter

Mhm. You got the police chief picture all around talking about this dissatisfaction of his conduct. What kind of issues are we really worried about? Right down here, fighting and killing. Irish Mike's, not none of them black people Irish. But they fight and kill each other constantly Wednesday through Sunday, two doors right down from you. It's not even an outcry. But you worried about if somebody want to give a couple dollars to the homeless or some water or some food. Then it was reported to me that City Councilman Brother Roy Sudler and City Councilman Brother Anderson, this y'all district. Y'all letting all that go down, but you worried about somebody come up there ask for some water or something. Salvation Army ask for water and food and money everywhere. Y'all don't say nothing about that. You got to figure out the purpose and the real purpose of what y'all doing. You trying to defer the people over here somewhere else, but Jesus said, "Feed the homeless. Feed the poor. Give them water if they thirsty." But don't be hypocritical about one thing, and then try to pretend you over here for another thing. You need to worry about Irish Mike's and all that killing down there, and ain't nobody standing up. Ain't nobody—well, we going to get y'all out of these seats if y'all don't function in the capacity that y'all supposed to function in. We going to create a new force. If you ain't doing your job, get on out of the way and let somebody else do the job. For real. Peace.

City Clerk

Tyler Mock

City Clerk

Al Nur 35

City Clerk

Okay.

City Clerk

John Davis

John Davis

Good evening, Council. My name is John Davis, I live at 4 Stoney Drive, Dover. Um, I'm speaking in favor of the ordinance, and I'm doing it for a very simple fact, and that is I think it's common sense. I uh drive up and down Forest Avenue several times a day. I see this uh problem every day, and it concerns me for two reasons: first and most importantly, because of the lives of the individuals that are on uh especially Forest Avenue at the corner of Forest Avenue and Salisbury Road. Um, those particular medians are about 18 inches wide, they're doubled. They're no wider than this podium. Um, they're standing there, um, especially at rush hour. There's people coming around off of Salisbury Road onto Forest Avenue making left-hand turns, and all it takes is for one person to slip in either rainy or snowy conditions and fall, or or just be partially in the road. And unfortunately, some people pulling around Salisbury Road at that particular time of day trying to get home, they might be not paying as much attention as

Fred A. Neil

Thank you. Madam Clerk.

Public Commenter

they should be in terms of er safety, pedestrians, but it's a reality. Um, beginning a week ago, there was an individual on that particular corner in a wheelchair. And what concerns me about that is there's no way, if you're wheelchair-bound, there's no way you can avoid somebody who is making a mistake with their vehicle. Um, it concerns me also for the fact that now that this problem has been exposed, everybody on council is well aware of what we're talking about, that this city is potential lawsuit if we do not act and we do not act safely. Uh, I support uh, I'm not going to repeat a whole lot of items that uh Mr. Halpern said because I thought he said them extremely well. I support that particular ordinance. I'm concerned about the safety of the individuals and the financial liability of our city. Thank you.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

Thank you. Madam Clerk.

City Clerk

Ms. Wanda Smack.

Wanda Smack

I've been getting um text messages from people that are online who are being ignored that wish to make public comment.

City Staff

They've been added to the list.

Wanda Smack

So I'm going to go ahead and say what I got to say right now, just wanted to bring that to the attention. My name is Wanda Smack. I'm a constituent here in the city of Dover. I live off White Oak, okay? I just want to say a couple of statements that have already been stated on this floor, and I just want to say thank you to the five

Public Commenter

who voted no, um, back on November the 25th. Ms. Arndt, she stated that she has spoken to folks in her district and in her neighborhood, and she read this following statement that was just amazing: "While I share that very real safety concerns about pedestrians standing in the narrow medians and heavy traffic areas, this ordinance has the potential to create more problems than it solves. It also exposes the city to potential litigation without delivering meaningful improvements to public safety. Thank you." And then we had uh Councilman at Large, Mr. Boggerty. He stated that while he supports the safety intent of the ordinance, he cannot support issuing fines to individuals who are panhandling, emphasizing that the moral judgment over need, not their role. And then I just want to also state some couple other things. There's a bunch of lawsuits that have been taken against other cities who tried to pass ordinances like this that were shut down and they were sued. Couple are Street versus uh Schuetzle, Cutting versus the City of Portland, Reed versus the Town of Gilbert, Norton versus the City of Springfield, and there's so many more. And this is just a reminder as a resident and also a volunteer with the homes campaign, if this ordinance does go forward, I hate to say this, they will be suing, and we do not need that as taxpayers.

Public Commenter

There is a better way that we can do this. And I also like to let Councilwoman Tricia Arndt and Donyale Hall know that two times a day I have been going out to the medians. Chief Johnson, you can ask speak with some of your officers. They have helped me. And then I have been moving people off the median, not that I think that it's my job, but if you're leaning and you look like you're on drugs, it is a safety issue. And I have been moving them off. I have been giving you my word. All right, thank you.

Public Commenter

I can't say that for other people who sit on this council. We hear about all the stories, all the complaints, but what are you doing? How do you know that person is homeless? As someone has stated earlier, it's not a look. Homeless comes in all different looks, fashions. It could be couch surfing. It could be all kinds of ways. It could be you staying with your mother with you and your two kids. So let's get that right. Let's look at what homelessness is and stop thinking that these people behind you, as someone stated earlier, is homeless. And I was one of those people that was pointed at. I am not unsheltered, but I am an advocate for them. Thank you.

Speaker 1

One thing that has not really been discussed that we continue to need to address is that baseline hierarchy of needs is we're still dealing with a crisis of affordability nationally and at the state level and here in the city of Dover. We are continuing to deal with a situation where, you can check, uh, Spotlight Delaware just made an article about it, where 500 more Delawareans are at risk of experiencing homelessness within the next six months. We're dealing with a situation where food is unaffordable. We're dealing with a situation where housing is unaffordable, healthcare is unaffordable. There needs to be a focus on continuing to try to make this a livable city. We are talking so much about feeding the homeless, which is amazing, we should always continue to do that, but we need to address the other concerns. As it has been pointed out, there are so many abandoned buildings here that we could set up, we need to set up open wound care places, that there are so many places that could be set up to meet the needs of those suffering from addiction, but we're missing a critical component, that many of the places that could address that cannot take care of those who are already suffering from open wounds. That is a discrepancy that we need to address. Seeing if we can go about setting up these open wound care facilities, continuing to, uh, promote the use of Narcan, continuing to promote Narcan distributions to not just the police, but to residents as well, that we continue to understand that each and every one of us is responsible to each other because we're all part of this community. While I may not live here, I still work here, I still engage with this place, I still invest in it, because the city of Dover is where I...

City Clerk

Reginald Daniel.

Reginald Bernard Daniel II

Good evening, my name is Reginald Bernard Daniel II. I live in Townsend, Delaware, but I am a community health worker and a community engagement specialist working with Eden Parkers. There's been a lot that has been discussed about the importance of public safety with addressing the medians, addressing the moral and financial concerns of continuing to criminalize homelessness,

Public Commenter

got my education. The City of Dover is where I come to eat. The City of Dover is where I come to pray. The City of Dover is my home just as much as Townsend is my home. And the people in here are each my brother and sister alike. We need to continue to address that need that we need to care for them and love these people who have not been given the mercy and the charity that is owed to them. We're continuing to punish people who are reaching out in the most desperate of situations. We need to address those baseline hierarchy of needs. We need to address the drug addiction, not just through Narcan, that's just a temporary solution that stops the death, by addressing these open wound care facilities and finding reasonable alternatives to drug use so that they can start those steps towards long-term care and again, the acute nature of affordable.

Robin R. Christiansen

Thank you. Thank you very much. And next speaker, Madam Clerk.

City Clerk

Douglas Hall.

Douglas Hall

Good evening, everyone. Um, I was coming here for a while and kind of about these same situations. I'm here for two different things tonight. Um, the homeless problem, it is a problem, okay? And there's also the addiction issue. I've been talking about it for months. I stopped coming here because it fell on deaf ears. I was supposed to get calls from people, never got them. Um, one of our biggest problems is you guys are allowing people to just come in and buy up everything. And you're forcing people out into hotels. Well, now guess what? The hotels are up for sale. Cuz those hotel owners drain all the money out of the city to put homeless people in them or families in them, and now they're going to sell them. So who's gonna who's gonna who

Public Commenter

For all these people who go listen to hotels now, those people can be put out of that hotel for being $60 short after paying already $2,500 for the month. And you guys allow it.

Public Commenter

But as a landlord, I got to abide by certain laws that the hotels don't. You guys have helped create the problem, you need to help fix it.

Public Commenter

One of the other issues is, it's more personal. I have a nephew who is an addict. I called your department for help.

Public Commenter

Your officers, I caught him smoking crack in a vehicle. Called them. They pulled up on it, he had the stuff, he didn't look impaired.

Public Commenter

He drove out of the city four minutes away, Delaware State Police pulls him over, and boom, he's got a DUI. So whoever's training your officers is not training them correctly.

Public Commenter

Four minutes later he just magically become dr- uh DUI. It's because they didn't want to do their freaking job. They put me in handcuffs for speaking up because I wouldn't let your officer disrespect me.

Public Commenter

The other incident I had, I had a- I had a little fender bender with your- one of your officers a couple months ago. Go to- I was told I couldn't see a video, couldn't do anything until I got to court. I took responsibility way before instead of taking three days off of work.

Public Commenter

I asked for body cam footage, couldn't get it. I'm not allowed to have it. But the DOJ says you and you, Mayor Christiansen, are dirty on December 5th. So make it make sense. But we can't get we can't get video of accidents and body cam footage of when your officers are in the wrong. Stop attacking the homeless and hold yourselves accountable. Because you guys are going to get voted out of here, I promise you. Every one of you is going to get voted out of here. You need to resign.

Public Commenter

Mind you, two years ago I got in a fender bender, gentleman hit me, your officer didn't show up to work to help to help me for court.

Public Commenter

So you guys want to grab the homeless, charge me 50 bucks for handing money, I'll write you my check now cause I'm going to give them food. I'm going to do whatever I want to do. It's a free country.

Public Commenter

You want to make money? Tell your officers to show up to court when they write tickets. That's revenue for the city. We're paying you guys there to do absolutely nothing. And your officer that hit my vehicle, you know what he said to me? He didn't give a fuck cuz it wasn't his.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

Madam Clerk.

City Clerk

I'm sorry, it's I think it's Adam W? Is that is that is it Adam?

Adem W.

Uh, Adem.

City Clerk

Adem? Sorry.

Adem W.

Yeah.

Adem W.

Hello, I'm Adem W. Um, I'm speaking against Ordinance 20-

Roy Sudler, Jr.

Your address?

Adem W.

-25 uh 21. And I'm in uh...

City Clerk

He has his address on here.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

Okay. Thank you.

Adem W.

So, I believe everybody's here minds here are already set, but I just want to address kind of what I'm seeing happening in this room. Um, we've got these Cruella de Vil looking types here who came out of the woodwork to talk about how we should be fining and criminalizing the homeless, and telling people coming here to speak their own mind that they shouldn't speak for what they believe, that people believe in them, they just want to fine them for being homeless. And what what's actually happening here is, you know, as people have been saying, the homeless have been being pushed place to place, you know, now there's only Christina Park left. So, I I...

Public Commenter

You know, you guys are all welcome in Wilmington. But why is there this indifference? I feel like we need to look at what's happening here, see how the city council is not serving us. It's putting these, trying to sneak these ordinances in to serve an agenda of the state to serve this freaking prison industrial complex, trying to take away from people who don't even have much to give.

Public Commenter

Meanwhile, they brought in these people talking about, "Oh, it's a it's a safety issue," who don't even want to think past the moment of the intersection where they feel that slight discomfort driving by. They don't, they're not capable of it. It's too much for them.

Public Commenter

And you know, I think we need to like pay attention to these kind of situations so maybe maybe our thought process, maybe the like ideas that have been drilled into us can be challenged a little bit so that maybe we can think to act for each other instead of for the profit machine, for the prison industrial complex. So, I just wanted to come here and say that you fining people for being on the median is not going to change anything about the homelessness situation in Delaware. It's not going to change anything about the safety in Delaware or Dover because, one, you're just pushing people to Wilmington, and, two, um if you uh fine somebody, that's not going to, I mean, I guess you can arrest them. I guess that's the whole

Public Commenter

well intention, but that's not really going to uh improve the frequent situation in Dover uh materially. So, thank you for giving me this time. I really hope you guys vote vote against this ordinance and do something for the people of Dover, for the people of Delaware as a whole cuz what you guys do here is going to affect me, too.

Fred A. Neil

Thank you. Our next uh speaker, Madam Clerk.

City Clerk

Okay. The next name, I can see the first name, it's Robert, but the last name, it looks like it starts with a T, but I it's not legible. Robert? Nope. Okay, then we're going to go online. Brandon Fletcher?

Brandon Fletcher

Hello, can you hear me?

City Clerk

Yes.

Fred A. Neil

Yes.

Brandon Fletcher

Good evening, council members. My name is Brandon Fletcher, and I live in uh Wilmington. I am here to oppose Ordinance 2025-21, which would fine our neighbors for asking for help at roadsides and ticket community members who try to help them. First, I want to thank the five city council members who voted no at the last Committee of the uh the Whole meeting in November. Um your vote um is important, it showed compassion, common sense, and and real leadership, and we appreciate you for standing up for our community. Um this ordinance claims to be about traffic safety, but in reality, all it does is just attempt to criminalize homelessness rather than forcing the city to actually address it. Fining people who have no money does not stop homelessness,

Public Commenter

It's a waste of taxpayer money to have Dover police officers issuing tickets that cannot be paid, instead of allowing them to focus on real public safety issues that exist in the city of Dover. It's especially concerning that this ordinance would punish people simply for trying to help others. Banning acts of kindness is cruel and and does not reflect the values of the state of Delaware. I encourage the City Council to focus on policies that are grounded in reality and fact, not fear. Homelessness is a complex issue. It's a um a messy issue, um and scare-based solutions do not work. The real solution is for Dover City Council to work with the state and the county to invest in affordable housing and supportive resources as has been mentioned this entire night. I also urge the mayor, Christiansen, to use his role on the the um the Interagency Council for Ending Homelessness um to work collaboratively with City Council on real evidence-based solutions that actually help people regain stability. Uh also this this ordinance is unconstitutional. Um you will be sued. The First Amendment protects peaceful requests for charity in public spaces, and panhandling is protected speech. Cities across the country have lost costly lawsuits over similar ordinances. Those resources could be spent helping connect people to housing. Dover should not open itself up to unnecessary litigation. Ordinance 25-21 is a cruel, ineffective, and legally risky ordinance. Dover should not fine

Public Commenter

and arrest people for being poor, I respectfully urge City Council to reject Councilman Anderson's Ordinance 2025-21. Thank you for your time and service.

Fred A. Neil

Thank you.

Fred A. Neil

Madam Clerk?

City Clerk

We're we're still online. Carrie Kirby?

Carrie Kirby

Hi, this is Carrie Kirby. Can you hear me?

Fred A. Neil

Yes. Yes. Yes.

Carrie Kirby

Hi, I'm from Wilmington, Delaware. As I said, my name is Carrie Kirby. I'm speaking tonight in opposition of Ordinance 2025-21. I'm a community health worker out of Wilmington. I work for one of the three Medicaid MCOs. Every day I have people asking me where can they go to stay. I ask them, are they safe? Do they have food to eat? I get answers of no. Dover is one of the cities where there is a lack of housing, both permanent and temporary, for people who are currently unhoused. It's a problem when I have clients who have medical needs in Dover and I'm telling them they have options to stay in Wilmington, Delaware. City Council can spend more time and effort on proposals that could house these folks with medical issues, and I really appreciate if you would rethink any decision to support this ordinance. Please take into consideration that there is already a lack of affordable housing, a lack of residential housing, a lack of nursing homes for people who need them in your city and in this state as a whole, and we could really use more creative and thoughtful considerations for housing, especially for people with intense medical needs

Public Commenter

Whether it's behavioral health, addiction, whether it's physical health need. I encourage you again to vote no on Ordinance 2025-21, and thank you to Councilmembers Boggerty, Lewis, Hall, Arndt, and Dr. Roy Sudler. Thank you.

City Clerk

Ms. Cheyenne Miller?

Fred A. Neil

Is she back? Is she on?

City Clerk

She's not on.

Fred A. Neil

Okay.

City Clerk

Michelle Paul.

Michelle Paul

Good evening, City Council. Um, this Ordinance 2025-21, uh, it has a lot—it will do a lot more harm for this city than actual good. If you look at what you want to accomplish as a community, or what we want as a community to accomplish, uh, two-thirds of our issues are individuals that are suffering from opioid addiction. The other third, um, of the individuals that you see in these medians are actual homeless people that are there, but I certainly believe with that having been said, safety is 100% an issue. Um, we do know that safety is 100% an issue. And so, for that reason, the individuals that are occupying the medians do not need to be in the median, but we have a Title 21 law that will be able to address those issues and—

Public Commenter

medians. Even with speaking to, um, Chief Johnson on some of those ordinances under, uh, some of the laws and the codes that are listed under Title 21 can be utilized outside of the worded ordinance. What we do when we actually use ordinances, ordinances actually diminish the actual consequences for the actual individual. So you're giving them a fine that you know that they can't pay. Once you give them a fine that you know they can't pay, then the city has to utilize funding to even go after those individuals that we know can't pay. So it's unnecessary funding from the city that's going to be spent. Then you have a, the potential lawsuits that this ordinance will create, where you can actually use the laws that you have on the books to actually keep the city safe and start getting some of- Some of these people need to be forced into treatment. Those two-thirds that are opioid addicted, those individuals, this ordinance will take away that ability to get those individuals that need to be ushered into treatment and be ordered into treatment by a judge. They will never see a judge. We need to actually make this to where the people that need help can get the help that they need. So does forcing people into treatment make sense? Yes, it does. It's either, because they won't be on the medians, they won't be on the street, they won't be anywhere if you're burying them in a body bag. And Narcan is not effective for some of these individuals, and that's why you see the death toll the way it is in the city of Dover. We have a real problem, and this ordinance-

Ms. Paul

is not going to do any good, it's going to create more harm. If you are saying that you want to do something about this problem, then don't pass the ordinance and utilize the law. Chief Johnson, you have officers that are out there, they need to utilize the codes that they the laws that they can, because

City Clerk

Ms. Paul, that's three minutes.

Robin R. Christiansen

Thank you very much, Ms. Paul. I thought you you were our our signed-up valedictorian this today, but we'll check to see if there's anybody else who would like to speak. We have a hand all the way in the back raised first, and we have three people back there, and one up here. So in that order, we can.

Chris Holstein

I appreciate this opportunity to be able to speak for a second.

Robin R. Christiansen

Yes. Uh give your name and address.

Chris Holstein

Chris Holstein, and 239 Calvary Drive, Dover, Delaware, zip code 19901, so I'm no longer homeless. Um part of the issue with people that's homeless is discrimination from um you know, the job sites if they go to put in a job application, because no one really wants to give someone a chance that's out there and get, you know, off the streets like that. But, um, and lastly, I can't remember her name, she is right. I mean, fining people that's homeless and handing out, it just creates a bigger problem. And sending them to jail doesn't really help neither, especially with the new um fentanyl-tranq mix, because, I mean, they're dying from withdrawals, too, not just overdoses. They should be put into a treatment facility, yes, but, um, where do they go after the treatment facility?

Public Commenter

they're homeless. That's why I came up with the program that I came up with to also help them, but it's not just for people coming out of addiction, people coming out of being homeless. It's for people coming out of orphanages, jails, anybody that can end up using it. The steps that I came up with, that's all over my Facebook and everything like that. I mean, completely, my program is owned by me due to served on fed federal laws and also due to me having my personal paperwork in family court. So, really no one can run it to anyone but me, legally in all rights. Whenever I get a new Social Security number, I do plan on using the money to go towards my program, and I would really appreciate the city's help if, you know, finished putting it together. I have fought about policies and everything like that. It's something that I've taken very seriously, something that I'm passionate about, and everyone that's seen it, heard about it, and know know that that's going to work. Right? So, I would just appreciate it if once I get a new Social Security number if I can come talk to whoever in the city that I've got to talk to to get this up and running properly. I was trying to get my ex-father-in-law, Walter Nelson, Sr., to give me a hand with it, but instead he tried stealing it. I started coming up with this since like 2018. So, the Nelsons have absolutely nothing to do with it at all. Like, this is all 100% my work. I just wanted to clear that up.

Robin R. Christiansen

Thank you very much. Thank you for coming. Now, the young lady all the way in the back who had her hand up.

City Clerk

Miss Denny.

Robin R. Christiansen

The young lady back there. Yes, here she comes.

City Clerk

Miss Joan Denney.

Joan Denney

Good evening. I'm Joan Denney, resident of Dover. Um, and just for full disclosure, I'm also a member of the Planning Commission here for the city of Dover. And, um,

Joan Denney

I think the ordinance is a good attempt, but I do think uh it needs a little time back at the drawing board. Um,

Joan Denney

I have spent many years of my life, well, in the field of medicine, managing medical practices. At one time, I almost I also managed the town of Camden.

Joan Denney

And I have, from time to time, worked for or more often volunteered for Catholic Charities, and where, um, I often did crisis alleviation, but the purpose was, you know, we also there's also LIHEAP, which was a heating, utility assistance program, in the summer it was air conditioning. So, I have a lot of experience with with poverty. And, um, and I agree with the comments tonight about, I think you can't, well, it's it's I suppose you could if you wanted to, but I don't see that it's appropriate to try and fine people who already are down and out. And I think the most important thing that needs to be said, or we all need to be reminded of, is this is like, um, Co-

Public Commenter

homelessness, addictions, these are both physiological and psychological anomalies. And you can't, it's like, or it's like gambling or any other type of addiction. You can't just say, stop it, stop it now. Um, the one thing about the attempt of the ordinance is um trying to get them off of these dangerous spots, standing on these little pieces of concrete at intersections. And I really just came because I had an experience. Um, maybe six weeks or so ago, I had dropped my granddaughter off at at uh Dover High School for after-school activities. And as I was headed down back and I was pulled up in front of the Walgreens going to make a left-hand turn on to Forest, or not Forest, Walker. And as I'm sitting there at the light, all of a sudden, sirens yeah coming, City of Dover Police, State Police, paramedics, ambulance, and they're all merging over to come behind me. So immediately, I'm thinking, get over. And there happened to be a uh a person, a human being, because they are human beings, standing there with his sign. And and I rolled my window down and said, you have to move. I have to get over. I mean, I'm trying to let

Council President

Hey, that's three minutes.

Unknown Speaker

it's time for you to go get more app than by else.

Fred A. Neil

Yes, ma'am.

Unknown Speaker

Thank you. That's right. Thank you.

Fred A. Neil

Yes, sir.

James Hutchison

Good evening.

Fred A. Neil

Good evening.

James Hutchison

I'm James Hutchison. I've lived in this city for a lifetime. I've had 25 years with the police department, retired chief of police, 10 years as the mayor of the City of Dover. There's two issues here tonight. First, the homeless. And it is a very serious problem in the State of Delaware, period. This city, the county, and the state needs to enter into a partnership to address the issue. This issue is a lot bigger than the City of Dover. And when I look at what's taking place in this city, it is a shame. Now let's talk about the ordinance that you're considering tonight. And I would hope that each and every one of you, when you vote, you vote to support it. Public safety in this issue is every one of your responsibility. I ride up and down the City of Dover every day. I see people, unfortunately, that are out there standing in the median. I see people who are having withdrawals. I've watched tractor and trailers riding up and down the road.

Pete

fire department responding to alarms, paramedics responding to alarms, the police department. Public safety is your responsibility. I don't know how anyone could vote no against this ordinance. It is your responsibility. Now, the homeless, that's also your responsibility. But it's far bigger than us alone. You got to reach out and look forward to a partnership. The state of Delaware used to address the issues and concerns in this city. And I am extremely disappointed in the state, in the attorney general's office. Mr. President, your letter was excellent,

Robin R. Christiansen

Thank you, sir.

Pete

and you outlined the concerns and I deeply appreciate that. But I'm asking all of you tonight to do the right thing and vote to support this. And then, a second part to all those that are homeless. My heart goes out to all of them. And we can help and do something about it. But it's got to be in a partnership. And it's got to be with the state of Delaware. So I urge all of you tonight when you vote to support this. Because I have seen too many times it's only a matter of when and somebody's going to get killed. We don't need to wait for that to happen. Thank you very much.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

Yes sir, name and address.

Matthew Hartzel

Good evening, Council. Good evening, Dr. Sudler. My name's Matthew Hartzel. I came down here this evening, found out about the meeting at 4:45 p.m. from Joseph Medford. I said, "I'm on my way." He's on the Opioid Use Disorder Task Force Committee, and I've started coming to meetings since then.

Matthew Hartzel

I, uh, live in Hockessin. 1848 Brackenville Road, Hockessin, Delaware 19707. My dad worked for General Motors 30 years in Boxwood, he was a foreman for trim. I started struggling with mental health and substance abuse at the age of 13. God saved me at the age of 35. So 22 years I struggled with mental health and substance abuse.

Robin R. Christiansen

Thank you, Pete.

Unknown Speaker

Uh Mr. Mayor.

Robin R. Christiansen

We have this gentleman right here.

City Clerk

We don't have his name. He needs to give his name.

Matthew Hartzel

Was married to my daughter's mom for three years. After that, I got into a first relationship with a woman did opioids, heroin, and drank. From the age of five to nine, my daughter, who's going to be 16 February 20th, had to endure that. I've been clean and sober off of illegal drugs and substance abuse, or alcohol, for six years, two months. Two days before I went in into Bowling Green Brandywine 28-day rehab, I met my late fiancée. She was with me 20—for five years, two months.

Matthew Hartzel

She had nine months when I had five months off drugs and alcohol. She struggled with heroin, excuse my language, but I call it the shit on the streets. And she lived in Wilmington, I lived in Hockessin, comfortable life. She lived in Hockessin, had to struggle. She made it to nine months when I had five months clean and sober. She was on methadone, medical-assisted treatment. She sprung back February of 2020. She got pregnant at the age of 37 after being with a guy before me for 14 years. At the end, they struggled and used—

Public Commenter

15 to 19. 37, she got pregnant and had a miscarriage. That sent her back out. She struggled and was homeless on the streets before I met her. An older, elderly gentleman let her stay in a place with no electricity. When she went back out, she went to uh May 2023, I just found out about a month ago, this medetomidine was produced in Washington state put into the streets. So our own government is putting the stuff in the streets that's killing these people. And May 23, summer of 2023, she went into Banyan Treatment Center down here in Milford, struggled to went back in June in summer of 2024. December 1st of last year, I told my dad, if her brothers and I can't get her help, she's not going to make it till New Year's. December to December 19th, she from the end of last week of November to the end of December, or December 19th, she went in and out of the hospital. Went to Christiana. Dr. McClure, who's an addictions medical specialist, addiction medicine specialist, was when I first had heard about medetomidine. This is a slow sleeper. It's not even an opiate that's killing them no more. It's 200 times about 200 times stronger than fentanyl, and it's similar to xylazine, but this stuff is strong enough to knock out a rhinoceros. It's a slow killer, and this stuff is deteriorating into people's arms and in their melter nose in less than a year and a half. December 19th of 2024, 6 days before Christmas, her 72-year-old father got a call to the hospital with her two younger twin brothers. She was either going to be a vegetable on life support the rest of her life or pull the plug. He had to pull the plug.

Robin R. Christiansen

declare the

Speaker 1

It's not the drugs, it's the alcohol. That's killing us.

Robin R. Christiansen

Open Forum closed.

Speaker 2

That's not our problem.

Robin R. Christiansen

And we will start the reg- the regular meeting at 7:30.

Speaker 3

Is that a friend of yours?

Speaker 3

Isn't that a friend of yours?

Robin R. Christiansen

Thank you, sir. Sorry to have to cut you off at this time, but thank you very much. And now the

Pastor

I will fear no evil,

Pastor

for you are with me.

Pastor

Your rod and your staff,

Pastor

they comfort me.

Pastor

You prepare a table before me in the presence of my enemies.

Pastor

You anoint my head with oil.

Pastor

My cup runs over.

Pastor

Surely,

Pastor

goodness and mercy shall pursue me all the days of my life.

Pastor

And yes, I will dwell in the house of the Lord forever.

Pastor

Gracious God, in this season of light,

Pastor

even as the days shorten

Pastor

and the nights lengthen,

Pastor

we pray

Pastor

for the time that the days will lengthen,

Pastor

not only in terms of the particular hemisphere

Pastor

that we are in and we know that when the spring comes, the days will lengthen,

Chaplain

And Lord, we need some daylight in our souls. We need some daylight to lift it in our spirits.

Chaplain

For it seems like in so many ways, the night wants to overcome the darkness.

Chaplain

But we are told, yes, in unforgettable song, if we could just light one little candle, it will disperse the darkness.

Chaplain

We struggle as human beings with the challenges of life, and sometimes they seem so overwhelming. Sometimes it seems like we cannot overcome them.

Chaplain

But, oh God, we have the promise that if we trust in you, if we make good, ethical, and moral stands, that we will overcome.

Chaplain

...work so together that the day will lifted in everybody's life. And we ask it for your name's sake. Amen.

Chaplain

Every mountain will be brought down, every valley uplifted, the crooked will be made straight, the rough places plain, and yes, your glory will be seen, and all flesh will see it together.

Robin R. Christiansen

Amen. The Pledge of Allegiance will be led by Councilwoman Arndt.

Tricia K. Arndt

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Chaplain

Guide us, Mayor, Council, guide us, staff, guide us, community, that we will work

Robin R. Christiansen

Play ball.

Robin R. Christiansen

You have before you this evening's agenda, and I'll entertain a motion for its adoption.

David L. Anderson

So moved to adopt the agenda as presented.

Tricia K. Arndt

Second.

Robin R. Christiansen

It's been moved and seconded. Is there any questions?

Robin R. Christiansen

All in favor, please say aye.

Council Members

Aye.

Robin R. Christiansen

Any opposed? No opposition, it is passed. You now have before you the consent agenda. Uh, that this these items are on the consent agenda, which are considered routine, non-controversial, and will be acted upon by single roll call vote of the council. There will be no separate discussion on these items, unless a member of council so request, in which case the matter shall be removed from the consent agenda, and considered as a separate item. What is the pleasure of the council?

Fred A. Neil

Uh, any questions on the motion? We'll have a roll call vote. Madam Clerk.

City Clerk

Ms. Hall?

Donyale M. Hall

Yes.

City Clerk

Mr. Boggerty?

Andre M. Boggerty

Yes.

City Clerk

Mr. Anderson?

David L. Anderson

Yes.

City Clerk

Dr. Pillsbury?

Julia M. Pillsbury

Yes.

City Clerk

Mrs. Arndt?

Tricia K. Arndt

Yes.

City Clerk

Mr. Rocha?

Gerald L. Rocha, Sr.

Yes.

City Clerk

Dr. Sudler?

Roy Sudler, Jr.

Yes.

City Clerk

Council Pres-- sorry. Councilman Lewis?

Brian E. Lewis

Yes.

City Clerk

Council President Neil?

Fred A. Neil

Yes.

City Clerk

9-0.

Tricia K. Arndt

I move to adopt the consent agenda.

Gerald L. Rocha, Sr.

Rocha seconds.

Robin R. Christiansen

Moved and seconded. We will now have a roll call—

City Clerk

Where's Joe? Where's Joe?

Fred A. Neil

Okay. What do we have here?

City Clerk

These are still consent. We're on to this item, okay? Joe was back there.

Fred A. Neil

Okay. Infrastructure modernization project. Joe Simmons. Uh, IT Director Mr. Simmons, will you please brief the members on this item?

City Clerk

He is not there.

Fred A. Neil

-25, and that a public hearing will be set for March the 9th, 2025 at 6:30 p.m. Copies of all proposed ordinances are available at the entrance of the Council Chambers or can be obtained from the City Clerk's office. Ordinance number 2025-23 is for property located at 7 Nixon Lane, consisting of 41,526 uh square feet, uh plus or minus acres, owned by Lupe N. Fuller. The property is currently zoned RS-1, residential single-family zone, Kent County zoning classification, and the proposed zoning is R-8, one-family resident zone, City of Dover zoning classification. Ordinance 2025-24 is for property located at 1624 North Little Creek Road, consisting of 5.12 acres, plus or minus, and two unaddressed parcels of 3.15 acres and 0.48 or 48 .48 acres owned by United World Express, LLC. These properties are currently zoned IL, limited industrial zone, and RMH, which is residential manufactured home zone, Kent County classification, and proposed zoning for all parcels of IPM, industrial park manufacturing zone, and subject to the AEOZ, Airport Environs Overlay Zone, and the APZ II, accidental potential zone 2, City of Dover

City Clerk

We'll move to the next item.

Fred A. Neil

We'll move to the next item on the agenda, which is the first reading referral, annexation, rezoning request, a proposal ordinances 2025-23 and 2025-24. They're recommended for referral to the Utility Committee on January the 27th, 2026, Planning Commission on February 17th, 202-

Fred A. Neil

zoning classifications. I will entertain a motion for the referral as recommended.

Tricia K. Arndt

I move for the referral as recommended.

Gerald L. Rocha, Sr.

Rocha seconds.

Fred A. Neil

It's been moved and it's been seconded. Anyone have any questions?

Fred A. Neil

All right. We'll have, um... now refer to Madam Clerk Bennett... Oh, uh, we need a voice vote. No questions on it? All in favor please say aye.

Council Members

Aye.

Fred A. Neil

Any opposed? None opposed. And now refer to Madam Clerk Bennett for the introduction of the proposed ordinances in according to section 1-9 of the Dover Code.

Bennett

Ordinance 2025-23, amending the zoning ordinance and zoning map of the City of Dover by changing the zoning designation of property located at 7 Nixon Lane, and Ordinance 2025-24, amending the zoning ordinance and zoning map of the City of Dover, changing the zoning designation of the property located at 1624 North Little Creek Road and two unaddressed parcels. This constitutes the first reading. The final readings are scheduled to take place on March 9th, 2026.

Robin R. Christiansen

www.cityofdover.com under government, or by contacting the city clerk's office at 302-736-7008 or cityclerk@dover.de.us. Mr. Nowak, you've been waiting a while. Can you would you please brief us on this?

Fred A. Neil

We now have the first reading of proposed ordinance 2025-17, amending chapter 98, streets, sidewalks, storm sewers, and other public places, article 1, in general, and appendix F. Final action by council will take place during this second reading of the ordinance on January 12th, 2026. The ordinance is available at the entrance of the chambers or on the city's website at www...

Mark Nowak

Mark Nowak, Public Works Director. According to the city's MS4 permit, there's verbiage in there that says we need to strengthen the stormwater ordinance. So we did this with some with an addition and some proposed changes. What we did is we kind of consolidated things so everything's in one spot, so it's easy to find. We also went ahead and created a more detailed list for non-stormwater discharges. We also added a section in chapter 98 to address sump pumps, and we shortened the time for which a penalty can be imposed from 10 days to just 24 hours. In a synopsis, that's basically what we did.

City Staff

So it came through, uh, with our new permit from the state. It wasn't my decision.

Brian E. Lewis

So it was mandated by the state?

City Staff

Correct.

Brian E. Lewis

Okay. Um, that answered my question then. No further questions, thank you.

Fred A. Neil

Councilman Lewis. And Sud- Sudler.

Robin R. Christiansen

Any questions or talk Council? Lewis.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

Uh thank you, uh Council President Neil, for recognizing me. Uh just one question in regards to the 10 days, um, and now 24 hours. That seems sort of, uh, a little strong. So yeah.

Brian E. Lewis

Mr. Nowak, what's your justification on this ordinance, and does it have to do with the fact that you thought it may have been too lax?

Mark Nowak

It was the state, so our NPDES permit houses the MS4 permit

City Staff

So, yeah, the reason we did that is because, um, the city can be fined no less than $1,000, no more than $10,000 a day when there's an illicit discharge regardless of who's doing the illicit discharge. So, um, typically we don't find out the day it happens. We will find, you know, it could be five days, a week, whatever. So we're going to find out it happens, and if we give them another 10 days after we know about it, we are subject to fines from the state.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

Okay. Okay, so what would be the, um, amount fine if they exceeded the 24 hours?

Eddie Kopp

Good evening, Eddie Kopp, Chief Code Enforcement Officer for the City of Dover.

Eddie Kopp

Uh, to answer your question, the first offense will be $250.

City Staff

And so in the, um, the state basically says in our permit that it would be no less than $1,000 and no more than $10,000 a day.

Eddie Kopp

The second offense will be $500, and the third offense will be $1,000.

Eddie Kopp

The reason why these aren't uh aligned with normal code enforcement fines is we're talking about serious impacts for the City of Dover. So if we waited the 10 days, and they fined us $10,000 a day, they could that break could eventually bankrupt us.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

So that that would be transferred to, uh, the one who's actually, um, not in compliance, the violators?

City Staff

Um, that, Eddie... Eddie might be able to explain this a little better, our member of code enforcement.

Eddie Kopp

Um, and just to speak on why this is it might seem harsh, but we did have an incident um with a contractor who was putting arsenic into stormwater, and they were hiding it. So they knew what was happening. They've covered it up. It was pretty interesting, but they knew what they were doing. Most people who are

Roy Sudler, Jr.

All right, thank you.

Eddie Kopp

discharging illicitly into stormwater know that they're discharging illicitly into the stormwater. So that's why these fines seemed a little elevated, but it's to protect us overall as a city.

Brian E. Lewis

Makes sense to me. Thank you, Eddie.

Eddie Kopp

Thank you, Councilman.

Fred A. Neil

Any additional questions?

Fred A. Neil

What is the pleasure of

City Clerk

No, no. There's nothing. No.

City Clerk

So, no further. You'll defer to me.

Fred A. Neil

Uh, refer to Madam Clerk then for the introduction of the ordinances with Section 1-9 into the Dover Code. Madam Clerk.

City Clerk

Ordinance 2025-17, amending Chapter 98, Streets, Sidewalks, Storms, Sewers, and Other Public Places, Article 1, in General, appending South. This constitutes the first reading. The final reading is scheduled to take place on January 12th, 2026.

Unknown Speaker

Yes.

Fred A. Neil

We next have the first reading of proposed Ordinance 2023-21, amending Chapter 106 - Traffic and Vehicles, Article III - Stopping, Standing, and Parking, by adding Section 106-139 - Pedestrian Safety. Final action by the City Council will be taken during the second reading on January 12, 2024. The ordinance is available at the entrance of the City Council or 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. Now, all written correspondence that has been made on this uh on this ordinance will be uh included as uh as public uh with the meeting minutes uh as a matter of record. So if you have sent something or said something, it will be in that document, in the minute document. Um, Mr. Anderson, will you brief us on this item?

David L. Anderson

Thank you, Mr. President. Uh this ordinance is uh an ordinance designed to uh increase uh pedestrian safety by getting people into safer locations uh because it's become a phenomenon where uh as we can all see, we don't need to uh do surveys, you see in your daily life uh that um

David L. Anderson

medians and intersections, and even uh uh people getting into the roads, is become a a major problem. And it is causing issues with people driving. We've gotten a number of complaints where people have even been in accidents trying to avoid people, or or and we, of course, know that people get injured. And uh it's uh it's time to do something about that. And this is uh uh an ordinance that I would say is uh uh definitely well drafted. It is uh I want to thank our city solicitor for that part as well as the uh the staff and members of Council. Uh it is uh drafted well enough where it is uh uh becoming a model. So I I believe that this uh that there have been concerns that were raised that have been addressed, uh such as uh for people concerned about uh people in need getting a fine. Under this ordinance, no one has to ever get a fine because it mandates that the uh first offense is a written warning with zero fine. So anyone who has uh any intentions or needs help, uh that opportunity would be made available to them, uh that if the only reason somebody would get fined is if they kept uh intentionally and persistently violating the law. And people who do that should be held accountable for insistent persistent violations of the law that

David L. Anderson

that endangers us, themselves and other people.

David L. Anderson

The ordinance uh also has uh uh petitions in it which will uh which are essentially designed to compliment uh the state law that is to be really enforced and doesn't apply to all areas of the city.

David L. Anderson

And there are areas of the city that is the state law doesn't apply to, and the state laws, we heard from testimony from our our chief and others, is um confusing whether it applies to this area. And if it's confusing, such that the Attorney General of the state of Delaware uh doesn't want to enforce it, then then it is uh and in fact, the Attorney General proposes a law a lot like ours,

David L. Anderson

the uh then how are citizens supposed to abide by it?

David L. Anderson

We have a responsibility to make sure that we have laws that are clear, that are enforceable, and that everyone can understand. And that's what this ordinance does.

David L. Anderson

I want to thank uh the staff for their work on this, thank members of the committee, and thank members of council. And I want to thank the members of the public for uh their input, which has been uh quite heartening and uh and endorsement by uh some very prominent organizations that have come down recently, including the Kent-Sussex Leadership Alliance. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I yield.

Fred A. Neil

Yes, I'd uh like to get uh uh interested in

Fred A. Neil

and a number of people who challenged this in terms of the legal aspect of it, but I'd like to have our city solicitor talk about the legal aspect of this particular ordinance, if you would, uh Mr. Solicitor.

City Solicitor

Thank you. As some of the commenters have mentioned, and and Mr. Anderson has mentioned, there have been legal challenges to ordinances, pedestrian safety ordinances on on First Amendment grounds. So I thought it would be helpful to articulate what the the legal standard is when when council members are expressing their votes. Under under court guidance, the city, in enacting an ordinance like this, must show that the ordinance is narrowly tailored to achieving significant government interests. So here the interest would be pedestrian safety. So the city must show that the ordinance is narrowly tailored to achieving the significant government interest of pedestrian safety, and that the ordinance leaves open ample alternative channels of communication on First Amendment grounds. So if you are in favor of the ordinance, you will be finding that the ordinance is narrowly tailored to achieve to achieve the goal of pedestrian safety, and that the ordinance leaves open ample alternative channels of communication. If you are voting against the ordinance, you will be finding that the ordinance is not narrowly tailored to achieve the goal of pedestrian safety, and that or that there are not alternative grounds for First Amendment expression by pedestrians.

Andre M. Boggerty

And my question is, and we've heard a lot tonight in regards to um the point of we already have state statutes that address or that can address this concern. Would you um agree or disagree with that?

City Attorney

Like like any other lawyer, um I want to take a middle ground. There is a statute, um there is a state statute that um addresses solicitation. Um the ACLU has sued the state of Delaware um to challenge the constitutionality of that statute, and there was an agreement that that lawsuit was settled uh by the agreement of the Attorney General's Office not to enforce that uh statute. So, uh yes and no. Yes, there is a state statute, but the Attorney General has um settled a lawsuit by agreeing not to enforce it.

Fred A. Neil

Dr. Sudler.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

Thank you, Council President, for recognizing me. Um, I can do sort of um tailor this question towards the uh solicitor.

Andre M. Boggerty

Okay, fair. So now let me narrow the scope of my question. Um is there already a statue that addresses individuals on the median? Individuals on the median um obstructing the view of traffic or potentially creating a distraction. Is there something already on the on the state statute that addresses that specifically? Not not the solicit- not soliciting or panhandling, but the action of being on the median and obstructing the view of traffic or potential distraction um issues? Do you know of any, and if and if not, that's okay, I'm just asking.

City Attorney

Not not that I'm aware of.

Andre M. Boggerty

Thank you. I yield.

Fred A. Neil

Councilwoman Hall.

Donyale M. Hall

Thank you for recognizing me, Council President. Um,

Donyale M. Hall

To the City Solicitor, you and I had a conversation regarding the possibility of exploring signage, and my direct question to you stemmed from the fact that reading the statute and the Department of Transportation's rules and guidelines specifically outlines where it is and is not permissible to stand. And for the purpose of this meeting, I wanted to put forward a motion that we would identify where those places are permissible to stand and not stand according to the provisions under the state statute. Could you elaborate a little bit on what you told me regarding that? Thank you.

City Solicitor

Sure. It's a privileged communication, but if you waive the privilege, I can, I can talk, I can tell people what we talked about.

Donyale M. Hall

I waive.

City Solicitor

Uh, well...

Roy Sudler, Jr.

Uh, point of order.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

Uh, unfortunately, uh, the privilege belongs to all of council,

Female Speaker

at this time to allow Council to have a discussion to weigh in.

Donyale M. Hall

The city.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

and all of Council would have to waive it, is that correct?

Male Speaker

Nobody seconds.

City Solicitor

That is correct. My client is the city and my client is not one particular person in the city.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

Do we need a roll call or Roll call. May we have a roll call?

Roy Sudler, Jr.

If we, uh, we could, uh, I mean we, we could executive session...

City Clerk

Yes.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

Discussion?

Fred A. Neil

Yes.

David L. Anderson

Mr. President, and before members vote, I'd just like to caution them that we have an easy mechanism where we can go into executive session for for 3 to 5 minutes, uh

Roy Sudler, Jr.

...and discuss, uh, and discuss the, uh, privileged communication.

City Solicitor

Or, or a motion could be made, um, and Council could vote on whether or not to, uh, waive the privilege and so allow me to speak about what, Ms. Hall has spoken of.

Public Commenters

Why hide? Why? Why hide? You work for us! What happened to government for the people? Clean up government!

Donyale M. Hall

I move that we, uh, waive, uh...

David L. Anderson

Point of order, because uh waiving uh privileged communications just uh has the potential basically to allow The reason why it's privileged is because there's liability potential if that information is uh misplaced. So, uh we want to think and very carefully think whether or not we want to waive something that we haven't heard. If we know what is being said, then we If we know what is being said ahead of time, then we can waive that communication. Like if something were

Fred A. Neil

If you do not, basically, hold it and let us do our job, I will clear the room. Thank you. Mr. Lewis, please continue.

Brian E. Lewis

Thank you. The importance of a of communication privilege communication being known by us what we're waiving is the fact that if we have it ahead of time, we can waive it and have it in public because we know the scope of it. Um, you know, I just have a principle issue of waiving privileged communication that I have no idea what the scope is, and we can go in executive session for 3-5 minutes and find out what it is.

Fred A. Neil

Motion withdrawn. Second withdrawn?

Brian E. Lewis

Second withdrawn.

Fred A. Neil

Okay. Please ask.

Donyale M. Hall

Could you um explain to Council where it is permissible to uh post a sign, um and if so, um I believe uh what I'm looking for specifically would be areas where it is permissible for people to exercise their right to ask for charity and where it is not permiss-

Fred A. Neil

Point of order. It is not your turn to speak.

Fred A. Neil

Point of order. I want to let you know we are having a discussion at this time. We listened to you.

David L. Anderson

That was an alternative suggestion.

City Solicitor

Maybe in the same way that Dr. Sudler asked a question of the City Solicitor in the open in the meeting, maybe Ms. Hall could just ask me the question in the same way that other council members have asked for legal questions during the course. So if Ms. Hall would prefer to we could just go do that and you could just ask the question directly and I can answer it.

Donyale M. Hall

There's a motion on the floor.

Fred A. Neil

There is a motion on the floor.

Donyale M. Hall

visible to uh be able to do that, um uh would there be signage and language that could state um those things under Title 21 where it is and is not permissible to stand by law?

Donyale M. Hall

I withdraw my motion to the waiver of...

Legal Counsel

So so I think my my belief had to do with the legal standard that we just articulated. The two things about whether or not the whether or not the ordinance is narrowly tailored and whether or not there are alternatives available. If if the ordinance applied to certain intersections that were found to be by the city to be the most dangerous, um and that there were other intersections where um the ordinance would not apply, um I think in my view that would support the conclusion that it was narrowly tailored and that there were alternatives available.

Donyale M. Hall

And so my understanding also further states that um there's a specific type of sign and I looked up the ordinance and it says the the sign's primary message must clearly state the prohibited activities and the relevant law to ensure enforceability. A simple, direct message is most effective for quick comprehension by drivers and it could identify therefore Title 21 as a part of that language. Is that correct?

Tricia K. Arndt

Since we're asking the solicitor questions, I have one. Could you define which which statute is the Attorney General's office not enforcing? Is it loitering under Title 11 or is it under Title 21?

Nicholas Rodriguez

I believe it's 21 Delaware Code 4147.

Legal Counsel

A sign could identify Title 21 and and could be specific. But it's really up to the city whether it wants to put a sign there.

Tricia K. Arndt

So, pedestrians soliciting rides or businesses, I think is... Okay. But but not 1321, loitering under Title 11?

Donyale M. Hall

Thank you. That that concludes my my question.

Nicholas Rodriguez

That's a criminal statute, but I'm not I'm not entirely sure, but I thought my belief is it's 4147.

Fred A. Neil

Any additional questions from members?

Fred A. Neil

Yes, uh Councilwoman Arndt.

Tricia K. Arndt

And then there's also under Title 11, there's 1315, public intoxication. That might be another another opportunity, if officers see activity on the median where folks are impaired, that statute would apply, that they could then move folks off the median if they were on drugs or alcohol. Correct?

Nicholas Rodriguez

Correct. That's correct.

Tricia K. Arndt

Thank you. I yield.

Andre M. Boggerty

we had one individual that was killed in a wheelchair on 13. And that that, you know, when I saw this individual trying to balance on the pitch of the median, it's not safe. And none of the Nothing that I heard tonight has changed my mind about that. That person is not going That person We're going to hear something about that down the road if we don't address that. And with that, I yield.

Fred A. Neil

Any other questions? Uh yes, Councilman Rocha.

Gerald L. Rocha, Sr.

Yeah. Um, thank you, Council President. Um, just to piggyback off of Councilwoman Arndt's point, I don't know where that the wheelchair fits in on that. Um, you know, that was to me the driving force for me to support this ordinance is because of witnessing the wheelchair on the median on uh the corner of Forest and Saulsbury Road. I uh You know, I know we

Fred A. Neil

Any other questions?

City Clerk

Mr. Lewis has his hand.

Fred A. Neil

Yes, council- Councilman Sudler? Brian Lewis. Councilman Lewis.

City Clerk

And then Sudler.

Brian E. Lewis

So this is for the city solicitor, based on uh his statement in response to Ms. Marks' question. Um so there are other means that can be utilized under state code with respect to intoxication and, and so on. Is that correct?

Nicholas Rodriguez

You know, I I would like to consult with the chief. I think I My recollection is when the Attorney General's office agreed not to enforce the solicitation ordinance, it's not inconceivable it was an agreement not to enforce that um statute as well. Uh I'm I'm going to look it up as we speak.

Brian E. Lewis

So my concern is, Mr. Solicitor, is if the Attorney General's office uh is refusing to enforce it, uh I mean, she's our chief law enforcement officer. Um how do you feel about uh our local police enforcing this uh if in fact this ordinance passes? I mean, we have our chief law enforcement officer um directing uh all departments in the state of Delaware not to enforce loitering and other offenses?

Nicholas Rodriguez

Sure. So so my recollection is that that lawsuit related to the solicitation

Nicholas Rodriguez

and loitering, um uh and that was more approaching vehicles and The language of uh 41-47 had mostly to do with approaching vehicles, soliciting things, asking for rides, things like that. And gentleman, the language of 21 uh 43-47

Brian E. Lewis

Well, Mr. Solicitor, aren't they all safety issues?

Nicholas Rodriguez

I I think it's a multiple Yeah, I think there are multiple issues uh with the solicitation and and seeking rides.

Brian E. Lewis

I don't know, if I was in a court of law, I think I'd rest my case at this point. Um but uh I do have a statement that I'd like to read into the record, uh Mr. Neil.

Fred A. Neil

Yes, sir.

Brian E. Lewis

I kindly took silence over this uh this code uh other than uh or this proposed ordinance, other than uh asking uh questions to our police chief. But uh over the weekend, I've done some research, and uh I uh went in depth and actually uh even spoke to uh an acquaintance who is a uh US District Court judge, uh and I wrote a statement out that I'd like to read into the record as I just so indicated. Uh while safety is undoubtedly important, it must be achieved within the framework of individual freedom and limited government interventions to ensure a thriving and vibrant society. We must remember sacrificing too much freedom in the name of safety can lead down a perilous path. To maintain a just and prosperous society, it is essential to cherish and uphold the principle of individual liberty. Courts have consistently determined that the act of asking for money in public space

Brian E. Lewis

constitutes a form of speech protected by the First Amendment. Let's face it, folks. Um, you know, we all know that this ordinance originated, okay, by panhandling in the city. Okay? It wasn't originated by the fire department out there soliciting for funds for the fire department, or um school children uh working fundraisers and holding car wash signs. Are they not safety issues, too? How come we're not addressing those? Okay?

Brian E. Lewis

Uh let me further read on. "This protection extends beyond political or artistic expression to include solicitation for immediate personal financial assistance. The U.S. Supreme Court has affirmed that soliciting charitable contributions is a protected form of speech. The lower courts have broadly applied this principle to individual panhandling. Therefore, any government attempt to prohibit this activity is viewed as restriction on speech. A law that fails any part of this three-part test is likely to be found unconstitutional. A city cannot ban panhandling simply because some people find it annoying or because officials want to improve the city's image," Mr. Mayor. "Courts have found that this government's interest in, for example, preventing nuisance is not compelling enough to justify a content-based ban on panhandling. Any ordinance that singles out the act of begging or prohibition while allowing other forms of public address or solicitation will likely be invalidated." Now the public brought up some um some very interesting topics uh at our

Brian E. Lewis

last meeting and tonight's meeting. And I wrote a couple of them down. And one of them, is it a fair, is it fair to restrict the speech of those in need, number one? Number two, again, okay, I know we can't uh discriminate against panhandling, but again, I think this ordinance originated from that, in my opinion. Do panhandling bans address the problem or do they simply push out of sight? And the last and final um statement that was brought up by many people that were in attendance at the last meeting and tonight's meeting is, should the City of Dover focus more on providing resources like housing, mental health services, and job training instead of penalizing those on the medians? I think those things um are very valid and I thank the public for bringing those up. And that's all I have. Well, with that, thank you and good night.

Fred A. Neil

Yes. Dr. Sudler.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

Thank you, Mr. President, and Council President Neil, and all. Um,

Andre M. Boggerty

...how we achieve getting individuals off the median is where we separate support for this, for me. So, I can't support the ordinance. Although I support the core issue of getting individuals off the medians, I cannot support the ordinance based on fines and fees. Thank you.

Fred A. Neil

Councilman Rocha.

Gerald L. Rocha, Sr.

I agree with the statements that Councilman Lewis and and Dr.- Councilman Dr. Sudler have said, but that still doesn't apply to a wheelchair in the median. I don't I don't understand, I haven't had I just don't understand, or help me to understand, why solicitation can't take place on the sidewalk. I just don't understand, like the solicitation itself, the act of solicitation, I don't have a problem with that. I don't understand why it can't take place on the sidewalk instead of a strip median. When when it was over by DelTech, that median's a little bit different. Now that it's occurring on what is not even really a median, it's just something that DelDOT puts there to separate the traffic or whatever, I I just am not convinced that we can't address the safety portion of the ordinance and still have the solicitations take place, but in a safer spot other than in the middle of the road. I I haven't heard anybody...

Gerald L. Rocha, Sr.

come up to the microphone tonight, or in the last two months we've been talking about this, and give me something concrete to change my mind so that we can take care of the safety of those individuals so that they don't get hurt trying to do this. I just, you know.

Audience Member

How about traffic safety when they're in the streets?

Fred A. Neil

Hush. Okay, is there any further member of Council? Uh Councilman Anderson.

David L. Anderson

Thank you, Mr. President. Um, I do want to uh piggyback off of what uh Councilman Rocha said and just point out uh this ordinance shall not apply to sidewalks, private property, or other pedestrian walkways or within a vehicular and not within a vehicular lane of traffic. Uh, it is not intending to infringe on anybody's freedom of speech, not only it's not the intent, it explicitly ensures that doesn't happen. And it's uh, and with uh that type of ordinance, contrary to assertions that have been made, uh, courts have upheld it, even at the appellate level. In fact, there was the Salt, uh, I think the Salt Lake uh City, Utah case where that went up to the U.S. Supreme Court, and an ordinance just like this, 2020, and it was upheld. There's also been issues in New York where similar things have been upheld. They've been upheld in Albuquerque—

Gerald L. Rocha, Sr.

que, New Mexico. They've been upheld. Roanoke, Virginia. Uh, you know, it's, uh, you know, that's why we didn't, uh, sit around and had, and, and draft an ordinance that we thought sounded good. That's why it's been legally vetted and, and improved in committee. Um, anyway, this is not a debate on the ordinance, I just wanted to clarify questions that had have been made because this is just first reading. Uh, we have a chance to debate and discuss it on the second reading. I yield, Mr. President.

Fred A. Neil

Councilwoman Hall.

Donyale M. Hall

Thank you for recognizing me. Um, to my fell- fellow Councilman Rocha, I just wanted to say that a lot of the people that I've spoken to don't even realize that standing in the median is even a prohibited activity. And because there is no signage that tells specifically that you cannot, um, conduct yourself in this manner, they feel comfortable doing that. And that was why I brought up the fact that it it would be a very easy fix for us to now take this opportunity to identify that it is not permissible to have your your wheelchair, and I'm I'm looking at at the the color picture that's on all of our desks right now. If there was a sign right there, that man could not have his wheelchair there. Could not. And so that's a very easy fix is to identify you cannot have your wheelchair here on this spot. However, across the street on the corner, it is permissible. That's something that the the highway department can absorb the cost. I've looked at the fact that those signs are indeed permissible in that manner, in that fashion, in those

Donyale M. Hall

locations, and that there's a particular sign design. And it would just be up to us to determine what that language said and put it in place, and then we could move on from this moment knowing that it is an enforceable action that if someone rides up to that intersection and discovers that there's someone who's violating that ordinance, so or not the ordinance, but the state law, state statute, they could then make a phone call to the police department and say, you know, there's a person that I'm concerned about sitting here, and then an officer could respond. And at that time, at their discretion, they could give that warning and also give an opportunity, you know, that we could actually do some things here to provide resources, maybe even for you know, that officer that's encountering that person to say, here here's here's where you can go to find this resource. And that gives us a compassionate solution, and it also gives us a mechanism to be able to operate in enforcing what's already on the books. Public will know. Thank you.

Fred A. Neil

Yeah. Yes, uh, Councilman Rocha.

Gerald L. Rocha, Sr.

Permission to dialogue.

Fred A. Neil

Dialogue is—is permitted.

Gerald L. Rocha, Sr.

Thank you. Thank you. So, based on what you just said, what what statute are you leaning on that's enforceable by... are you still referring to the state statute?

Donyale M. Hall

I am. If you can give me a second, I I pulled up some of them to show you where... There are different sections of Title 21 that pertain to different measures. The part of Title 21 that I'm referring to specifically outlines what piece of signage can go where, and it is completely permissible for us to put a sign in the median that would, um—

Donyale M. Hall

...provides safety instructions specifically toward pedestrians.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

So, from what I heard from the solicitor that that statute points more towards solicitation, where does the safety factor come into play? Cuz, you know, I'm not against the solicitation—

Donyale M. Hall

Give me a moment. No, no, no, give me a moment. I can I can definitely find that for you if you give me just a second.

Brian E. Lewis

Councilwoman Hall, I have them on my phone, can I bring them over to you?

Donyale M. Hall

Go ahead. If you have it, I I yield and you can read it, because I had it on mine as well.

Brian E. Lewis

Make sure these are the right ones. Thank you. There's another two down here.

Brian E. Lewis

To make it easier, these are the two down here.

Donyale M. Hall

Yes. Thank you. I'm going to yield so that Councilman Lewis can read those to you. I have them, but I didn't want to prolong the time. Thank you.

Fred A. Neil

Councilman Lewis, the floor is yours.

Brian E. Lewis

All right. Thank you. Under Title 21, and this is 4146, pedestrians in roadways obstructing traffic, 4146(a) states a pedestrian cannot stand in a roadway if it interferes with traffic flow. And then (b), a pedestrian cannot walk along or stand on the roadway when a sidewalk is available. And then if you go under Title 21 4177(b), obstruction of driver's view: a person cannot be positioned in a way that blocks or interferes with a driver's clear view of the roadway. Title 21 4144 states pedestrians right-of-way on sidewalks and safety zones...

Brian E. Lewis

areas. Um so that's what I googled and uh just found. I don't know if they're the statute you were referring to,

Council Member

They are, thank you.

Brian E. Lewis

Title 21, which we currently have that the police department can and should be enforced. Thank you.

Gerald L. Rocha, Sr.

And since I still have the floor, I'd like to redirect to uh Chief Johnson to address what was just read, if you could please.

Thomas Johnson, Jr.

Mr. Rocha, this is, continues to be a complex issue for us to reconcile on the law enforcement side. And again, I know what the statutes say in plain ink, and as I've tried to state to Council on previous sessions, our activities are also guided by the interpretation of that law, both by the DOJ in regards to what they will support uh as far as charging documents, and then also what the judges condition us to recognize as their interpretation of what's in and what's out. So, uh I'm, to a certain extent, I'm going to have to defer on some of the things that I just heard read out loud because I'm going to have to speak to some traffic uh supervisors that have been in the courts recently hearing these cases to see, or I'm sorry, being involved in these cases to see what the outcome is coming in the courts. The only thing I can offer for Council's consumption right now is there still appears to be a gap, and the gap um is visible to me in draft legislation that's pending in the legislature this spring where there's a very specific section related

Thomas Johnson

to pedestrians in median strips that is going to be a part of the package of sections that will be addressed to address the ACLU lawsuit and uh for lack of a better term a replacement bill for all of the sections that the DOJ has instructed the police department not to not to address or not to enforce in Delaware at the current time. Um I know it's not a complete answer to your question, and I know you were looking for something a little bit more definitive, um but it's just not that um straightforward. Um so I'll take all the sections that were said out loud, and I'll put that uh information uh in front of the folks that can tell me better. But I do know that there still appears to be a gap because the issue of pedestrians in the median um is still considered an unresolved point in the law in Delaware that potentially, and it doesn't mean it's going to make the final cut, but potentially will be addressed in the legislature this spring.

City Solicitor

they said they would not enforce. Ms. Arndt asked a question about whether Title 11, um, uh, was also part of that agreement. Uh, the Chief was kind enough to call to my attention the announcement made by the Attorney General when that settlement was reached, and there is a Title 11 statute that addresses loitering. Um, that, um, was part of the agreement where the Attorney General's Office agreed not to enforce either loitering or solicitation.

Brian E. Lewis

So the portions of section uh um the code for 21, everything that was read is basically for the solicitor, that was what you were referring to that the Attorney General said that they would not enforce?

Thomas Johnson

So so what the Attorney General said they would not enforce is 21 Delaware Code 4147. I have it I have it in front of me, and it's entitled pedestrians soliciting rides or business. That's one of the statutes

Andre M. Boggerty

So, to be clear, the points of the statute that refer to the safety that was just read by Councilman Lewis, that should be enforceable, I would think, Chief. And I know you said you have to go back and talk with your traffic individuals, your officers, but if that's the case, do we need this statute to to to to make the same point? And then our statute does have fines, so what is what are the repercussions? How how is the enforcement of, from a traffic standpoint, if you were going to lean on the state statute, what are the repercussions that, like how is that enforced, basically, through that statute?

Thomas Johnson

difference have subjective elements in them, and that's the part that is hard for me in a situation like this to articulate how things turn out in court, which turns around and governs our future actions with enforcement. Judges and magistrates don't like you bringing stuff back to them over and over again after they've kind of showed you through their rulings what they want to see and what they don't want to see. So, with that in mind, I'm going to get you a better answer. The other part of your question, as I've stated before in previous council sessions, we're always going to take the path that involves the least amount of punitive action. The whole goal is to gain compliance. The fact that there's a warning put into the language of this potential ordinance, I'm glad it's there, but we'd have done that anyway. You're really not trying to see how many tickets you can write. Nobody gets Officer of the Year by seeing how many times they can go out on a median strip and get the same guy day after day who is in an at-risk situation. We're just trying to get compliance with the law. So the idea that there's going to be a boatload of citations written, I would direct council's attention to any other low-level offense in the entire array of ordinances that the city has that are available to us now. We are not generating a boatload of ordinance violations because they typically don't solve the problem. But what they do do is give us the legal authority to ask somebody to step out of harm's way in no uncertain terms. Just like we were if we were in the parks or

Thomas Johnson

I'm going to get a better answer for you after this meeting as to exactly what the DOJ is willing to support and what they won't. I will also let you know that some of the language in the statutes that aren't reflected in the letter that the Solicitor just read-

Thomas Johnson

ordinance and doing something to maintain the good order of the parks. The general provisions section uh of the code, um there's still a a a city ordinance related to aggressive panhandling. Still kind of a subjective section, but at least it allows us some standing to take some action if we get a 911 call or we observe someone violating personal space while they're panhandling, and that would be anywhere that they would be standing, sitting, or or otherwise be lawfully present, if not for the aggressive panhandling. Uh if you were to look into our record, you will not see a ton of city ordinance violations related to behavior. The The vast majority of them are probably parking tickets. Uh those are status offenses related to cars. When it comes to people, um we explore other strategies, but the ordinance gives us the authority to act.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

And right now with uh the statutes that were just stated, our officers can't use those statutes to usher individuals off the median now?

Thomas Johnson

It's the The officer would have to articulate

Roy Sudler, Jr.

give them a warning situation.

Thomas Johnson

Yeah, we we could absolutely uh provide a warning to anybody for any state statute. The The idea eventually comes down to the people that comply, nobody in this room will ever hear from because they we asked them to do something, they followed through, the thing's over and done with. The question comes is when someone says, "No. I have the right to do this," or "I have the right to do that." And then, we wind up in that zone of, "Okay, Officer, y- do your duty, and do what's necessary

Thomas Johnson

to do your duty, these situations, particularly if you have someone that's compromised by mental health or an untoward substance, alcohol or anything else, and they decide to become defiant. Um, and then it leads to things and places that we don't want to go as police officers unless we have to. And that's why the whole idea of knowing before you start that whatever action that you take, or the reason that you take it, will hold up in a court of law later on when it's being examined by reasonable people who are trying to figure out how we got here because somebody's injured, or something else, uh, unfortunate occurred.

Andre M. Boggerty

And that wouldn't be an opportunity for the Behavioral Health Unit to to be called upon in that case, in that instance?

Thomas Johnson

Yeah, you've identified one of our primary strategies when we come across somebody in adverse situations, whether it be in the median or anywhere else for that matter. Uh, I think you'll find most of our working patrol officers, especially when those guys are on duty, are going to get them involved, um, pretty quick if there's an opportunity, um, to to guide them into someplace that doesn't have anything to do with a charging document.

Thomas Johnson

But there are occasions where we come across folks, particularly folks that we come across regularly, that either politely or not so politely, uh, decline services, and then that leaves us only with accountability assuming that we have a law that we can enforce. That's the only other mechanism that we have to address the issue if they don't, uh, want to accept services or accept our guidance to a safer place or a better situation.

Fred A. Neil

use the state statute to issue warnings about pedestrians in in the median, particularly the wheelchair, our officers, would they be able to do that?

Thomas Johnson

Yes, they'll have to articulate the statute if it if it was ever challenged. The farther away you get from the actual intersection but still on the median, the less I suspect it'll be interpreted that there's that obstruction because the obstruction has to do with the process of turning or preparing to turn when you're talking about intersections. The mode of transportation, whether someone's on foot, in a wheelchair, on a scooter, that the the device or the the mechanism of transportation really doesn't matter. It's the mere fact that you're there. So there's very limited difference, at least in the eyes of the law, how you're getting around. So if it's your own two feet or if it's the wheelchair that you have, if you're out in the median strip and particularly in close proximity to intersections, which I mentioned in a in a previous council session was my biggest area of concern, our serious injuries and our fatalities typically occur on higher speed roadways, particularly limited access highways, and complex, complicated intersections where drivers are trying to navigate multiple travel lanes and multiple driver movements. So if you can keep those areas clear of distraction, obstruction, or any other thing that's going to make it even harder to do, that is the police department's interest in this ordinance.

Andre M. Boggerty

So, if this ordinance didn't exist, this proposed ordinance didn't exist, and yet we still would like to--

Andre M. Boggerty

So then my last question, and then I'll I'll yield to to Dr. Sudler. What does the local ordinance do? How does that help you to to do what we're requesting versus the state statute? Like what differences are in your mind are going to enhance or diminish your ability to rectify and keep those people safe?

Thomas Johnson

That's twofold. The the first one is elements of the current of the ordinance that sits before you is a a bridge, if you will, until the state takes action, um, one way or another, to whatever degree that the state chooses to, but can't see into the future as to what that might be. But in case they don't act, that would at least leave us with a local law to allow us to to keep that area clear so people aren't in in harm's way. The other piece, and I know this is something that's um obviously met with uh conflicting points of view, if we use state statutes to address the behavior, it creates a statewide record. And that's um, when people have multiple low-level offenses on their on their record if someone was to do a search, people interpret that the way the way they will. Um, it's a little bit easier to use a lower-level offense um that doesn't appear um on as many database searches for someone's future considerations. And as long as we had at least some semblance of lawful

Unknown Male Speaker

and an ordinance does that for us. Um, it allows us to save someone from having exposure to um state level charges and state level consequences.

Unknown Male Speaker 2

For background checks, you're suggesting?

Unknown Male Speaker

That could That could be part of it, sir.

Unknown Male Speaker 2

Thank you. I I yield.

Fred A. Neil

Thank you. Dr. Sudler?

Tricia K. Arndt

Chris Boggerty had his hand up first.

Fred A. Neil

Okay, come back We'll come back to you. Andre?

Roy Sudler, Jr.

Thank you. Thank you.

Andre M. Boggerty

Thank you for yielding. Um, just guidance and if depending upon the answer, a path forward, much like the loitering or or ordinance, I hate to bring up old wounds, was pretty much rendered moot by the decision of the state at one point. Um, is it Would it be wise to take a lesson from that and hold this in in abeyance until the state makes a decision if they're if we move forward with with this and all the robust discussion and you know, not that we we get elected to get insulted and that's okay, but um but um but with all the robust decision, everything that we would have to enact um and only until March cuz this doesn't wouldn't come back on the agenda until when?

Tricia K. Arndt

January 12th. January 12th.

Andre M. Boggerty

...considering a a pedestrian safety ordinance to to to rework 41-47.

Fred A. Neil

Sometime in March, correct?

Andre M. Boggerty

Well, whenever it is, there's a rework. I won't hold them to a time, but there's a rework. That rework could either strongly give the, you know, give the give a state um ordinance um to increase the the munici- municipalities' strength to enforce and/or render this moot like it did loitering. So my path forward recommendation is enforce what we have now at the best that we can with the full understanding that individuals like wheelbarrows, I think common sense prevails if if that's a safety risk, we can the police can can work that, but in the meantime, maybe if we hold this in abeyance until the state makes a decision, maybe we just, you know, just lean upon that for guidance in in in the path forward. I mean, just a recommendation. I'm still outside the fees and fine fines, I'm not supporting fees and fines and increased the opportunity for debtor's court and all of those things that that will do. Um I'm still going to stick to my decision, but I understand the necessity um for safety. And uh so that that this is not me swaying, this is just me staying. And until we have a clear answer from the state, maybe abeyance is is the best path forward. I don't know.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

I concur. I think that we need to see what the state statutes are going to come up with uh with their revision or revisiting. But I sort of have uh I'm sort of confused a little bit. Um I'm hearing that we, you know, we do have statutes, state statutes that can address the issue. And then, at the same time, there are there are gaps, and I think the gap is in the knowledge and information uh that we're being given uh or maybe that we can receive additional information and knowledge um in real time um on the floor so our constituents can also understand uh the information that we're receiving and how we have to vote. Uh so my our real question is for the City Solicitor. Uh do you think do you think that with everything being said, the statutes that were read by Councilman Lewis and the dialogue, uh do you think it may be a good idea for us to also to bring in DelDOT, it being that uh highway uh say they do a lot with highway safety, and I'm sure that they're probably um having a lot of conversation with state legislators so they're drafting this pedestrian safety? Uh do you think it might be beneficial for us to possibly have a representative from the DelDOT division to come and sort of give us their overview on the median and what they see coming um down the line uh, which can help us to make our help us in our final decision on whether or not we uh want to either move forward with this ordinance or support the ordinance or not support the ordinance? Do you-

Fred A. Neil

Councilman Sudler.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

Uh thank you, Council President. Uh thank you for recognizing me. Um...

Roy Sudler, Jr.

That might be a good idea.

Nicholas Rodriguez

Uh, I'll say this. Here's Here's one of the things that the courts really look at is the pre-enactment information that council gets. So, the more pre-enactment information that's gathered, um, the courts look favorably upon. So that if there's statistical information about fatalities or injuries, um, that that the council has gathered, that's helpful to the court. Um, if there's other information, so, so pre-enactment information, um, the more you get, the more helpful it is.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

Well, thank you. I was just thinking about MPO and their safety analysis. So, and just in general, so, you know, with, um, the advice they do have provided, rendered, you know, I would like to make a motion that we have the city solicitor to, um, contact DelDOT and have a representative to, uh, present to council, and I believe the appropriate, um, the appropriate, uh, uh, uh, committee would be the Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee, being it's a safety issue, to to, uh, have that feedback either, um, reviewed and expressed by the city solicitor and/or have a representative from DelDOT to come in to present, uh, to to us, whichever is most feasible, uh, to to that committee, uh, their feedback in regards to medians and and the, uh, future legislation that

Roy Sudler, Jr.

they may or may not have participated in drafting.

Donyale M. Hall

Hall second.

Fred A. Neil

It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion?

Tricia K. Arndt

Neil, this is Arndt.

Fred A. Neil

Yes, Councilwoman Arndt.

Tricia K. Arndt

Thank you. Just from my experience, a a state agency, a representative from a state agency is not going to comment on the agency's perspective on potential legislation. When legislation is drafted, there is a process that um departments are sought out for comment, but I don't think it would be appropriate to ask those questions at this time. There is significant pedestrian safety data. There's datasets. We can ask specific questions and get that information, or we can dig online and get it ourselves. Um, the MPO had provided some resources uh for that type of information. Um so my my train of thought is that it would not be appropriate to have a DelDOT representative come to speak on this issue specific to safety in the median, I feel.

Fred A. Neil

Councilman Sudler.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

Uh thank you for recognizing me, Councilman Neil. Um, I was I I respect your opinion, um, but I was think I would like to hear from DelDOT. I'd rather them deny, ask the question and they deny, then then not ask it and they were able to provide. Um, I know you do work for DelDOT and I'm sure you have plenty of knowledge and and all due respect to your knowledge, but I you have not because you ask not, I think. If we ask them and they say no, that's just fine. If they need to just email us...

Andre M. Boggerty

go down to um you know how they may look at individuals on the median and maybe where we'd have to draft maybe the size of the median make it significant, you know, just their feedback being that they are DelDOT. And sometimes, you know, when you look online, not everyone interprets what they're reading or comprehend what they're reading, um, the same way everyone else does. But typically when you hear something it's pretty much, you know, well that's better, so just for the sake of, you know, if they don't, if they can't really give us any information on that or their feedback or review, how do you feel about that? I'd rather ask than than not ask, but I appreciate you bringing forth, um, your concern. Thank you.

Fred A. Neil

Councilman Rocha.

Gerald L. Rocha, Sr.

Yeah. So, um, thank you, uh, Councilwoman Hall, for enlightening on that part of the statute that you pointed out, and Councilman Lewis, because that, to me, that brings a whole different perspective. And I know I had heard members of the audience that came up and stated it like that. But, you know, we do try to listen to staff recommendations, um, and weigh it. You know what I mean? That's what I try to do anyway. Um, and if my if my if I'm looking at our staff and if our staff is is advocating for this, try to respect the fact that that's being what the ask is for. The the the bottom line though is

Gerald L. Rocha, Sr.

what mechanisms do we need and if the if they're already in place, then they're already in place. Then we we have to challenge our staff or our officers, you know, and I'm trying to now find out, you know, state statute or this ordinance to accomplish the job, right? And what is it? Now it sounds to me like I'm I'm hearing that we can use the state statute that's already in place. So now I just need, you know, I'm I'm leaning towards listening to what Dr. Sudler is saying, and also listening to what Councilman Boggerty is saying, do we need more time before we just I I think I might need to hear more uh and weigh more on this before I sign off on this uh this this The chief still has to go back and do some homework, ask his uh safety officers, traffic safety officers. So at this point right now, uh I think the evidence is pretty clear to me uh and I'm not saying that we just toss this this ordinance out, Councilman Anderson, I'm not say suggesting that. But I think that there that uh we need more answers. Number one, if this the state statute is sufficient, how do we get the state statute implemented for us so that the safety of these individ-

Roy Sudler, Jr.

individuals can be taken care of because from my standpoint, it's all about the safety of the individual. I don't want to stop any panhandlers from panhandling or soliciting money. I don't have a problem with that. I give money, too, when I see deem appropriate. But standing in the median is an unsafe act. And based on my experiences with unsafe acts in the military, safety is first. And I don't need statistics to tell me that. Safety is number one. Just like when I wasn't in agreement of the homeless shelter 500 feet from a school because of the safety of our children. Doesn't matter opinions does not matter. It's about safety. Now, the question is, is the state statute or a local ordinance what we need to to to to solve the issue? And I think we still need to go and do some more research to verify. If that takes till March, I'm okay with that. In the meantime, it sounds to me like whatever is on the books right now on the state statute level, our officers can figure out a way, you know, maybe non-punitively, but lean on that statute to usher them off and get them to a safe place. I think that's there. But I I do I am in

Roy Sudler, Jr.

trying now to see that there is more research needed. And if there's a gap, have it more clearly defined before we move this statute forward. With that, I yield.

Fred A. Neil

Chief Johnson.

Thomas Johnson

Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. Rocha, just wanted to inform you, I'm trying as quickly as I can to get the clarity that you're looking for. I don't think I've got it on every section, but the- as it relates to the section for obstructed view and pedestrian obstructing the view of the driver, um, my supervisory tree is letting me know, uh, of course by- by way of text, so it's a limited exchange, um, but the challenge to that section for what we're talking about this evening is the courts want to see a victim. A driver needs to be available to testify that their view was obstructed by the pedestrian, and without that cooperating witness, like- as I mentioned earlier, it's one of those subjective sections that sometimes needs the- the person who's affected by it to testify in court in relation to the offense. So, um, now it's a little bit more clear to me as to why that continues to be a challenge for us to use that. I got to be candid, it's not a section that I've ever had personal occasion to enforce in Delaware, which is why I had to ask. Um, but that particular section about the pedestrian being the visual obstruction to a driver requires the driver to testify that they were a visual obstruction, which means we have to catch the motorist that we think might have been blocked, or we need to hang on to them if they called 911 and complained about that.

Thomas Johnson

that specific issue and get their consent that they would testify in a court proceeding.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

Councilman Neil, may I have a dialogue with the Chief? Council President, thank you. So, what what would we be able to use to usher them off of the median, uh, for their own safety and not just obstruction?

Thomas Johnson

And and, Sir, that comes back to that, I guess, probably the root question here is the the subjective nature of whether they're safe or not safe in a median. It's not 100% addressed by the law right now under the current situation with the ACLU suit and the the concessions that the DOJ made. And as I alluded to before, I have no idea if the draft that I saw is what's going to make it to the floor in the assembly. But I do know that there is a specific section in the replacement law that's under consideration that specifically addresses medians and folks standing on them, because that's not clearly available to us in any other section of either Title 11 or Title 21, because if there was, it wouldn't need to be in the replacement bill. And it it's if it if it turns it back into a status offense, you're there or you're not, what the impact is on other people is no longer necessary for a court uh appearance.

Fred A. Neil

individuals and families since 2004. I would not trust the uh state legislature doing anything of a positive nature for the next two to three or four years. That's how they operate. They don't move with alacrity. They don't have the sense of this. My question is repeat offenders. If you had to use or rely upon the state law, would you be able What would you do to the repeat offenders? Because under your quality of life program that you set up, behavioral uh unit, we have asked repeat offenders for help, offered help, and they have refused. What happens in this incident, which one of these statutes, the state statute or this statute, gives you more ability to offer assistance and to take to remove that individual?

Fred A. Neil

One comment. Um, I have been working for affordable housing for low and fixed income

Thomas Johnson

Council President, I'm not sure either a local ordinance or a state statute would have too much utility for a repeat offender from the very nature of the of the experience that we have now. Um multiple charging documents, they have um the associated fines, fees, and costs depending on whether it's a local law or a state law. Court appearances will occur over and over and over again. Sometimes someone might go into warrant, sometimes they might not. But I'm not sure, honestly, especially on something coming out of Title 21, um that there's much of anything that the courts would ever be able to effectively do um for repeat offenders because

Thomas Johnson

There is a, um, a philosophy, if you will, about what is worthy of of being incarcerated and what isn't, and in recent years, low-level offenses are not, um, being sent for that kind of accountability. And when you don't have the ability to, uh, pay, um, kind of leads you in that hamster wheel situation where it just, it cycles over and over again, sir.

Fred A. Neil

Thank you. We have a motion on the floor. Yes, uh, Councilman Sudler.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

I think my final remarks is, you know, um, when these individuals who we, uh, are trying to help, compassion care, right? Um, when we usher them off or they get a lot of fines, how will that, will that sort of impede upon them in the future, like once once they have, um, hurdled over their challenges and obstacles in life and and become a little bit more productive citizen to the point where, you know, they want to do some, you know, some, some, maybe get better housing or maybe get credit or maybe do anything that, you know, looks at their debts, like someone brought up earlier, I think we have to keep in mind that that could impede upon them progressing in life, which could also have them to relapse. So, I think that that's the compassion component of governing our our, um, you know, all right, the governing component of governing our constituents and our, um, municipalities and how we do things. We have to have some type of compassion there. So, I just wanted to bring That just came to my mind. I just wanted to say that, what was on my mind. Thank you.

Fred A. Neil

We... Yes.

City Staff

I just, um, Dr. Sudler, for your um in in furtherance of that point that you just made, um I would suggest to you that if a pending case is at the local level, we have more discretion and more control over the outcomes that you're talking about as opposed to something that's formally on file in the state system. Um so, it hadn't occurred to me until you just said what you said that that might be a reason that I hadn't thought of before to allow us to have a local ability to address it with a local ordinance that we have more control over uh than a state statute that we do not once it's put into the system. Thank you.

Fred A. Neil

Councilman Rocha.

Gerald L. Rocha, Sr.

Thank you, uh, Council President. Uh, Chief, one one more question. Um, can you explain what the state statute is in Title 21 in reference to jaywalking, and is there any part of the jaywalking law that can be used in this instance?

Thomas Johnson

in a place that isn't neatly covered by the other sections, I believe. One of the sections that was mentioned was walking along a highway. The inference there is the highway is the actual road surface. So if you're very good at staying on the median strip, by technical definition, you're not on the highway. And and this is why I've been it's just there's so much nuance into all these sections, sir, that it's not like we don't want to do this. If we if we thought we had standing to use what was already available to us, we'd be doing it. We're just trying to follow the very specific letter of the law either as it's written or as we're trained to understand it by the system itself.

Thomas Johnson

I think I have it. It's it's uh 21 Delaware Code 4143 requires pedestrians to cross at crosswalks. It's entitled "Crossing at other than crosswalks."

City Staff

And And to extend on that, the idea that jaywalking is designed to address mid-block crossing of the street. Um the issue that we're addressing here is individuals that did that do not complete the act of crossing the street and maintain a position

Andre M. Boggerty

Understood. Um and and this ordinance gives you the authority to do what you think you needed to do to protect the safety of the pedestrians?

Thomas Johnson

Sir, as I mentioned during Council Committee of the Whole, that is 100% our entire focus. Our focus is the safety component. I'm only interested in stopping injuries. I'm only interested in stopping motor vehicle collisions related to these persistent conditions. Beyond that, we also have the obligation to stand for the protected activities including First Amendment protected activities. So this is in our view this is not about panhandling. It's about whoever we would come and find in the middle of the roadway. And that includes somebody wearing a football jersey,

Thomas Johnson

holding out a bucket because they're they're trying to raise funds for the club or whatever it is that they're doing. Um, it doesn't matter what uh we perceived them to be. If it's a person and they're where they're not supposed to be, that's our only interest.

Gerald L. Rocha, Sr.

Thank you, Chief. Uh at this time I I I yield.

Fred A. Neil

Councilman Rocha. Pardon me, Dr. Sudler, Councilperson. What, I did that I did that twice today.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

That's okay. You're not you didn't, Dr. You're all right.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

Um, before um I ask this question or ask this individual to to approach the podium, I'm only seeking additional knowledge um and additional dialogue from an individual that, you know, has played multiple roles uh um from mayor to chief to council person. So just seeking knowledge, not not um trying to diminish any information that was provided. So um at this point, I would like to hear from former Mayor Hutchison just to give us of of some view. He's been sitting here and he has a lot of knowledge in all domains uh a viewpoint of um what we may need to look at um from his expertise and knowledge. Just reach him back into his archives of knowledge, if you don't mind.

Robin R. Christiansen

Public safety is the number one issue here.

Robin R. Christiansen

This ordinance will allow the City of Dover Police Department to address the issue,

Robin R. Christiansen

and it also gives them total flexibility as how they handle it.

Carleton E. Hutchison

First, thank you very much.

Fred A. Neil

Welcome back.

Carleton E. Hutchison

Um, I think it's very important to listen to what the Chief just said. The local ordinance gives the City of Dover, the police department, a lot of flexibility. State law goes up to the next level. When I and I I listened to all the questions and your concerns to re-

Robin R. Christiansen

So I think in the interest of public safety, and this, and I mean, I have seen,

Robin R. Christiansen

I travel that route every single day,

Robin R. Christiansen

and there's not a day that I'm not concerned about public safety.

Robin R. Christiansen

Something is going to happen,

Robin R. Christiansen

and I would rather see this council accept the responsibility of passing an ordinance that gives flexibility to the chief and the Dover Police Department.

Robin R. Christiansen

Because if not, we're going to have a fatality. And that's sad.

Robin R. Christiansen

Do you know how many times signs at the intersection at Route 8 and Saulsbury Road has been knocked down? They're down more than they're up.

Robin R. Christiansen

And that's where they're standing.

Robin R. Christiansen

I urge you to reconsider strongly in passing this ordinance.

Robin R. Christiansen

It's not the fine you're looking for, it's public safety you're looking for.

Robin R. Christiansen

And they do, this gives the police chief and the department the flexibility to address the issue.

Robin R. Christiansen

And I certainly prefer to deal with city ordinance over dealing with the state, because you have control.

Public Commenter

control that. We control it, not the state. So I urge you to reconsider and strongly enforce this. I I mean when I say to you, I see people every day. And these are people God I I mean, I feel bad for them. These are people who have mental health issues, who have drug addiction, alcoholism, in so many minor ways. So I I value what all of you have said tonight, but I would hope that you would reconsider, give the chief and the department and the mayor the opportunity to be able to address this publication, because this is a public safety issue, and I urge you to pass it. Thank you.

Fred A. Neil

Thank you.

Fred A. Neil

Yeah. Okay, you still have a motion on the floor.

Fred A. Neil

Are you calling that motion, or—

Roy Sudler, Jr.

No, I haven't called it. Whenever you whenever you're—

Fred A. Neil

You want to call it?

Roy Sudler, Jr.

Um, let's see, what was that again? Oh, oh yeah, yes.

City Clerk

I have that the you wanted the solicitor contact DelDOT and have DelDOT representatives come before Council to answer questions or address concerns regarding medians.

Fred A. Neil

I'm going to comment on it. I don't... I think we can do that without asking the solicitor to do that. Uh I think we have a good friend that is involved with the MPO who could make that request uh to do so. Uh I think it's valid. I don't think it has to do directly with this, but I will ask the mayor...

Fred A. Neil

Mayor.

Robin R. Christiansen

I would do so.

Fred A. Neil

He will do so. It's done.

City Clerk

Do you want me to do a roll call?

Roy Sudler, Jr.

The reason why I prefer and now we do have a motion, so we do have to vote. But the reason why I prefer that the city solicitor is because it's dealing with legal legal matters that could that could potentially lead to legal matters if we make a decision that, you know, that's not, you know, that has legal ramifications. So, you know, the interpretation of what may or may not be legally permissible depending on the feedback. Not saying that the mayor could not bring that back, but I just rather deal with our legal representative on this matter because of the because of the importance of doing it right.

Robin R. Christiansen

Mr. Neil, permission to dialogue with Dr. Sudler. Dr. Sudler, I have just made the request that a person from DelDOT, if they choose to come forward, and I will certainly keep Council in the loop to keep it aboveboard so that there's no no doubt in anyone's mind whether that's on the council or in the public that the request was made and it's DelDOT's responsibility. And I will call Dr. Secretary Hastings in the morning if it's the will and order of Council for me to do so.

Fred A. Neil

...administrative?

Fred A. Neil

Yes, thank you, sir. Yes. And back... Councilman Sudler, yeah.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

Can I yield to Councilman Lewis?

Brian E. Lewis

Why Why can't we just ask for a report from somebody over at DelDOT to submit to us with respect to their opinion?

Fred A. Neil

Would would you Can I ask the solicitor the question? What, to answer whether it has more legal Wait.

Fred A. Neil

I think the mayor has offered to do that.

Brian E. Lewis

Well, instead of getting the mayor involved, I would suggest the solicitor reach out to them. And otherwise, I can't support this ordinance- excuse- this motion.

Nicholas Rodriguez

I think if the request is just to ask a representative from the Safety Advisory and Transportation committee to come, I'm not sure it's necessarily legal. It sounds

Fred A. Neil

Yes, Mr. Mayor? Dr. Sudler.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

Oh, I would be I would be amenable I would be amenable to the solici- solicitor and the mayor working together on it, but I definitely want the solicitor to be the focal point. That's, you know, that's my motion. But I would I would not be not amenable to the mayor joining him if if that's necessary. But I The motion is for the city solicitor to reach out and get feedback either via a report, or they come to council on their view in regards to the median and if there, you know, any discussion or anything pertaining to legislation that might be drafted. That's if they want to share it, you know, but there's nothing wrong with asking. If they don't want to do that, that's just fine. But as each as the city solicitor mentioned earlier, he said being proactive or gaining more information, ascertaining more information does nothing but help us in the future if we ever had to go to litigation on the matter, whether we're for...

Roy Sudler, Jr.

and see the mayor's input. I'm all about trying to gain more information and knowledge to sustain any, any action that we're going to take moving forward. I yield.

Fred A. Neil

Mr. Mayor.

Robin R. Christiansen

Yes, I respect Dr. Sudler's opinion, but I would also point out that Secretary Hastings is a lawyer. So if we make the request for her to give us the information that is requested, then I'm certainly sure that we could save ourselves some dollars instead of the solicitor if we make the request, if council so wants me to make that request of her. I yield, Mr. Chair.

Fred A. Neil

I believe that the solicitor's remarks have already been made in regards to the strength of what has to happen, the additional information, and it's on his advice that we're moving forward on this. So that is a matter of record now. The question is do we need him to to do that as well as the mayor to ask a question? Yes, Mr. Dr. Sudler.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

Uh thank you, um Council President, for recognizing. I'm just going to withdraw my motion, and um I'm just going to withdraw the motion.

Fred A. Neil

and I want to make the point this is coming up again for public comment when we vote in in January.

Andria Bennett

Is your second amenable?

Andria Bennett

Is she amenable?

City Clerk

The 12th.

Tricia K. Arndt

I'll withdraw my second.

Fred A. Neil

All right.

City Clerk

Um, there's no action at this time. Ordinance 2025-21, amending chapter 106, traffic and vehicles, article three, stopping, standing, and parking, by adding section 106-139, pedestrian safety. This constitutes the first reading, the final reading is scheduled to take place on January 12th, 2026.

Fred A. Neil

Thanks. Council Councilwoman Hall? Oh, you did have the second. Okay. Uh it's been it's with withdrew it's withdrawn. We we now still have in front of us, uh, do we need to have a a voice vote then?

Andria Bennett

It's just for first reading, we just read.

Fred A. Neil

First reading. We just have first reading basically.

Andria Bennett

So you're over here.

Fred A. Neil

No further questions, no further questions, debate's on the amendment. I now defer to Madam Clerk Bennett for the introduction of the ordinance in accordance to Section 1-9 of the Dover Code.

Fred A. Neil

Okay. We now go back to item 22, Infrastructure Modernization Project, Joe Simmons, IT Director. We could've had you in and out of here before. What took, took the time. Joe, we welcome you.

Joe Simmons

Thank you, uh, my name is Joe Simmons, the City of Dover IT Director. Uh, first I'd like to apologize, I had to step out for an urgent, um, family matter that I had to take care of, and I, you know, apologize for, um, prolonging this and, uh, having you be here a little longer than you you had to. So, what I'm bringing before, uh, City Council is, uh, the Infrastructure, uh, Modernization Project. Um, I believe back in October 28th, uh, in the committee meeting, um, I briefed the council on, uh, the project, and subsequently in, uh, executive session following, um, briefed the council on, uh, the particulars of the project. Um, the reason I'm coming to you tonight is because, um, a couple things as far as how do we get this project, um, off the

City Staff

around and some information that I learned from our vendors that support our need to move judiciously with this process.

City Staff

The first thing, as far as the sole source procurement of it, is protection of confidential system information. As you well know, as we deal with cybersecurity and deal with our infrastructure, there is an element of sensitive information that can be revealed through open-source process, bidding process, as far as architectural, internal systems, certain equipment that we may buy that supports the city operations.

City Staff

You know, and releasing some of this information to the public might put us in a situation where, you know, we compromise. And, you know, people, trust me, we know that people look at our websites, they investigate the meeting minutes, they bring all that up, and that's how some of the bad actors get information and do their recon on the city.

City Staff

Another real key function in this request is that supply chain risks with advanced chips and price escalation. Everybody know in the news with geopolitical issues going on, especially around AI, data centers, things like that, vendors that I communicated with have communicated with me that there's going to be a high probability in the first quarter of—

City Staff

2026, there's just going to be supply and demand issues because of the demand from all the data centers coming online as far as a chip shortage. And also, with that comes with demand, just like regular economics, um you're going to have price increases, um substantial price increases. Um so that may cause a loss of allocations for um the required components that we need, you know. Again, lead times. Um I was uh on with a vendor today, and we talked about the lead times. Usually around 30 to 60 to 90 days for a piece of equipment might go out to 6 to 12 months if this wait is 20- 26. So, uh we're locked into the price um of the uh quote and investment um that I communicated to Council. Um again, um this project's funding is coming from um a cyber security grant that we secured. Uh I believe it's it's almost 90 95% of it's coming from that money. And that grant has a performance period like all grants do. And the performance period um ends in uh fiscal- uh sorry, next year 26. So, we're going to be on a tight tight window if it was a disruption in anyone else getting these uh uh hardwares, security servers, because like you said, the grant funding performance period ends in uh 26. So, that's really kind of like um uh a risk that we take. Another thing we've got to discuss is that

Staff Member

you know, our current needs now, why we're going to do this project is to really stabilize our system we have now. Um, and kind of move forward and you know, there's some things that, you know, we can do to improve, far as reliability, um, backups, things like that nature. And that was the whole um, re- rationale for why we got awarded these grants, cuz it would, you know, they've seen there was a need for the city of Dover, for our state partners. Um, and it kind of follows up why we was doing this. You know, put it off as, any longer it kind of puts it at risk. So, so in conclusion, um, sole source procurement is justifiable due to the exclusive vendor capabilities that we have. Um, you know, we're not uh, uh, looking at where there's a whole bunch of manufacturers, like you know, we go in, we can pick between 20 vendors. Um, this is a real small niche, far as, on flash blade storage, SAN. The security aspect of it is that we want to make sure that, you know, things that we do is confidential, and we not putting things out that um, that may cause us risk. The urgent supply chain and the cost risk, like I said, that's significant, far as, uh, what you hear in the news, I know everybody hearing about, you know, uh, whether the chip manufacturer, tariffs, and, and, just geopolitical um, aspects of this project. So, and also, you know, again, we need to maintain our operations and, and, and, and resolve some issues that this brand was uh, originally funded for. So, with that in case, you know, uh, staff recommend that the council approve sole source procurement of a SAN, server, and networking hardware

City Staff

and service for the infrastructure modernization project. That's IT project 26-10, and IT project 26-13 for improvement ability in enhanced cybersecurity protection of the City of Dover's network infrastructure not to exceed $295,000 using the awarded cybersecurity S- C- C- P grant funding in IT service project for IT 24-04.

Robin R. Christiansen

Uh Councilman uh Lewis.

Unknown Speaker

You had your hands up.

Brian E. Lewis

Um good evening. I have a question uh with respect to uh I have your action form right here, and uh my question is how does it how does it qualify as sole source of procurement? Because I looked up the uh City of Dover purchasing policy and procedures, and uh section six, exceptions, it states sole source procurement is not permissible unless a requirement is available from only a single supplier manufacturer. Um it goes on to say, "The following are examples of circumstances which could necessitate sole source procurement. Uh a, where the compatibility of equipment, accessories, uh, or replacement parts is the uh paramount consideration. Um then b, where the sole supplier item is needed for trial use or testing." That's my first question. My second question is, who's this being awarded to? Awarded to whom?

City Staff

Okay. So, to answer your first question,

Staff

question, I think that when I talked about the, um, the lead times and the scarcity of the, um, servers for, uh, fiscal year '26 falls under that category as far as, um, uh, uh, uh, product availability. Um, I think also that, um, I checked with DEMA, that this grant this grant also falls under state procurement, and within the state procurement policy, you can, uh, do sole source for emergency, uh, situations. And again, this funding derived out of an emergency situation, uh, for the, uh, that was deemed by the state of Delaware and DEMA. That's the whole reason for the for the grant. So, I think we're covered, and like I said, if you want to have a, you know, a legal review, have no problem with that, but I think this does fall under both occasions from the state and as far as, um, the city's policy.

Brian E. Lewis

Yeah, I wouldn't want anybody to do anything, uh, illicit or not by the policy. That's why I bring it to your attention.

Staff

Right.

Brian E. Lewis

Um, now who's this going to be awarded to?

Joe

time frame, and, you know, that time frame is a certain uh that you have to advertise things as I understand it. We want to do the best we can, but that would definitely put us out or almost up to the grant performance window that, you know, we might not take advantage of it. Um so, you know, that's another reason why um for the uh sole source procurement.

Staff

This This would still This would still be going out to, as far as, um, get competitive bids, we can do that for MSPs. Um, the way servers servers in this kind of equipment works is that you don't buy from the manufacturer. You buy from MSPs, whether it be, um, MSPs we already deal with, Intercom, Solutions, CWI, uh, SHI, so all the obviously So, we can do that. What this does is that, obviously, if we had to go to RFP, um, I talked to our, you know, purchasing, um, Marche Bookman, and, you know, asked him,

Brian E. Lewis

Okay. Thank you. Um that's all the questions I have at this time. I may come back uh

Fred A. Neil

Councilman Sudler and then Councilwoman Arndt.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

Thank you for recognizing me, Council President Neil. I move to accept staff recommendation.

Andre M. Boggerty

Boggerty second.

Fred A. Neil

Councilman Arndt... Councilwoman Arndt?

Tricia K. Arndt

I was just gonna make that...

Fred A. Neil

You just second it? Well, I have that.

Tricia K. Arndt

And Boggerty seconded.

Fred A. Neil

Is there any other questions? Uh do we need to call the roll call?

City Clerk

Voice vote.

Fred A. Neil

Okay, what is the pleasure of council? All in favor, please say aye.

Council Members

Aye.

Fred A. Neil

Any opposed?

Brian E. Lewis

For the record, I'm just going to abstain on this action.

Fred A. Neil

And one abstention passes almost unanimously. Thank you Joe.

Joe

Thank you.

Fred A. Neil

Okay, now City Manager's announcements.

David Hugg

I have one quick one uh to remind council that tomorrow and the day after at uh 11:30 at the Pitts Center, we will have our our annual holiday luncheon. Council members are uh invited, urged to attend. We could certainly use you at the end like last year to help serve, and it's a good way to recognize and thank our employees for the hard work they perform, so uh that that'd be uh...

Fred A. Neil

Mr. Mayor.

Robin R. Christiansen

Yeah, here we are.

Fred A. Neil

11:30 tomorrow at Kent Center. All right. Thank you.

Fred A. Neil

Now, Mr. Mayor.

Robin R. Christiansen

Thank you, Mr. President. I'd like to remind everyone that uh the Dashing Through Dover Christmas electrically parade is going to be Saturday, December 13th at 6:00 p.m. It's going to start on Legislative Mall and proceed west on Loockerman Street. And finally, I'd like to uh offer a Merry Christmas, uh Happy Hanukkah, Happy Kwanzaa, and a happy, healthy, safe, and proud uh prosperous New Year to all of our citizens, our sit- and our employees.

Fred A. Neil

Hear, hear. Council member announcements. Councilman Anderson.

David L. Anderson

Thank you, Mr. President. I also wish everyone a Happy Hanukkah, Merry Christmas, Happy Kwanzaa, Happy New Year. I also uh want to uh point out that at the uh Dashing Through Dover event on the 13th, Toys for Tots uh will be making one of their final collections. So, if anyone has been thinking of and is interested in helping those who uh would most benefit from some Christmas cheer, I'd like to encourage them to bring an item for the Toys for Tots. Even if you don't go to the parade and you don't know another site, please drop in. There's uh and then I would like to say that Mr. Mayor, you uh may need to defend your title, uh because uh you'll hear more in January, but uh the chili cook-off is back again. Took a year off last year,

David L. Anderson

here, but um a chili cook-off, which is a or mostly the annual community fundraiser for the commu- uh community fundraiser. This year's um uh beneficiary will be People's Community Center's youth program, who helps the um underprivileged youth in the city, mostly in the Fourth District. And uh because their their their programs are doing great, but the youth program has fallen a little bit short of their budget. And it's uh And so the community should step up to help out and to uh meet those particular needs. And I would just like to uh encourage anyone who wants to help ahead of time, you don't have to wait for January. Please feel free to uh reach out. Thank you very much. I yield, Mr. President.

Fred A. Neil

Any other announcements?

Fred A. Neil

This December is birthday bonanza month! Uh, Mr. Do-, Councilman Boggerty's birthday is December 14th. And Councilman Lewis's birthday is December 23rd. And Santa delivered Councilman Rocha on December 25th. Happy birthday to you.

Julia M. Pillsbury

Wait a minute.

Fred A. Neil

Yes, Councilman.