REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
The Regular Council Meeting was held on April 14, 2008 at 7:32 p.m. with Council President Williams presiding. Council members present were Mr. Leary, Mrs. Russell, Mr. McGlumphy, Mr. Slavin, Mr. McGiffin, Mr. Hogan, Mr. Salters and Mr. Ruane.
Council staff members present were Police Chief Horvath, Ms. Russell, Mrs. Mitchell, Mrs. Townshend, Fire Chief Carey, Mr. DePrima, Deputy City Solicitor Pepper, and Mrs. McDowell.
OPEN FORUM
The Open Forum was held at 7:15 p.m., prior to commencement of the Official Council Meeting. Council President Williams declared the Open Forum in session and reminded those present that Council is not in official session and cannot take formal action.
There was no one present wishing to speak during the Open Forum.
The invocation was given by Chaplain Dixon, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.
AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS
Mr. Hogan moved for approval of the agenda as presented, seconded by Mr. Leary and unanimously carried.
Mr. Hogan requested that item #11-A, Discussion - Prioritization of Transportation Projects, be removed from the consent agenda.
Mr. McGiffin moved for approval of the consent agenda as amended, seconded by Mr. Slavin and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
ADOPTION OF MINUTES - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 24, 2008
The Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of March 24, 2008 were unanimously approved by motion of Mr. McGiffin, seconded by Mr. Slavin and bore the written approval of Mayor Carey.
CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION - DOVER HIGH BOYS BASKETBALL - FINAL 4
The City Clerk read the following Certificate of Recognition into the record:
CERTIFICATE OF CONGRATULATIONS
Presented to
Dover High School Boys Basketball
Congratulations for an exceptional 2007-2008 Basketball Season as the Salisbury Holiday Classic Tournament - Chesapeake Bracket Champions and for making the Semi Finals/Final Four of the DIAA State Tournament
April 14, 2008
On behalf of Mayor Carey, Mr. Slavin presented the Certificate to Mr. Montaño - Dover High School Principal, Mr. Eric Tolbert - Director of Athletics, and Mr. G.R. Myers - Boy’s Basketball Coach in recognition of their accomplishments.
Noting that no team members were in attendance, Mr. Montaño assured members that there are upcoming events that will provide him the opportunity to acknowledge the Certificate of Recognition issued by the City.
CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION - DOVER HIGH GIRLS BASKETBALL - HENLOPEN CONFERENCE
The City Clerk read the following Certificate of Recognition into the record:
CERTIFICATE OF CONGRATULATIONS
Presented to
Dover High School Girls Basketball
Congratulations for an exceptional 2007-2008 Basketball Season as Henlopen Conference Northern Division Champions, Henlopen Conference Tournament Champions and for making the Second round of the DIAA State Tournament
April 14, 2008
On behalf of Mayor Carey, Mr. Slavin presented the Certificate to Mr. Montaño - Dover High School Principal, and Mr. Eric Tolbert - Director of Athletics, in recognition of their accomplishments.
Mr. Montonyo relayed the regrets of Mr. Thornton Spellman - Girl’s Basketball Coach, who was unable to attend the presentation and assured members that there are upcoming events that will provide him the opportunity to acknowledge the Certificate of Recognition issued by the City.
CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION - DOVER HIGH CHEERLEADERS
The City Clerk read the following Certificate of Recognition into the record:
CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION
Presented to
Dover High School Cheerleaders
for placing third in the 2008 Delaware Cheerleading Coaches Association State Championship Small Varsity Division
Congratulations on an excellent season and thank you for your dedication
April 14, 2008On behalf of Mayor Carey, Mr. Slavin presented the Certificate to Mr. Montaño - Dover High School Principal, Mr. Eric Tolbert - Director of Athletics, and Ms. Ashley Callahan - Cheerleader Coach, in recognition of their accomplishments.
PROCLAMATION - ARBOR DAY
The City Clerk read the following Proclamation into the record:
WHEREAS, it has now been 139 years since J. Sterling Morton proposed that a special day be set aside for the planting of trees and to recognize the importance of trees in our lives; and
WHEREAS, this holiday, called Arbor Day, is now observed throughout the nation and the world; and
WHEREAS, the City of Dover was once again named a Tree City USA in 2008 for the nineteenth consecutive year by the National Arbor Day Foundation recognizing Dover for its outstanding urban forestry program; and
WHEREAS, trees in our city increase property values, enhance the economic vitality of business areas and beautify our community, and the community’s tree planting program is a living memorial to the citizens’ concerns for the quality of life; and
WHEREAS, trees can reduce the erosion of our precious topsoil by wind and water, reduce heating and cooling costs, moderate the temperature, clean the air, produce oxygen, and provide habitat for wildlife; and
WHEREAS, planting and caring for trees is a special gift that one generation gives to the next.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, CARLETON E. CAREY, SR., MAYOR OF THE CITY OF DOVER, DELAWARE, do hereby proclaim April 26, 2008 as Arbor Day in the City of Dover, and urge all citizens to support the efforts to care for our trees and woodlands.
FURTHER, as the City of Dover plants trees on public property, I urge all citizens to plant trees on private property to enhance the environment and promote the well-being of present and future generations.
On behalf of Mayor Carey, Mr. DePrima presented the Proclamation to Mr. William Cooper, Grounds Superintendent.
HEARING FOR APPEAL OF FINAL ORDER ON BUSINESS LICENSE FINAL ORDER - TAPROOM/ICE LOUNGE
During their Regular Meeting of March 24, 2008, City Council considered an appeal of the revocation of the business license for the Taproom/Ice Lounge and set an appeal hearing for this time and place.
Deputy City Solicitor Pepper reviewed the material provided to members including the license officer’s order, notice of appeal, and material provided by both parties (as on file in the Office of the City Clerk). He explained that the issue before City Council is whether the license officer’s decision should be upheld. The appellant and license officer were provided 10 minutes for each of their presentations, after which time, members of Council could pose questions.
Mr. Basil Kollias of Wilmington, attorney representing the Taproom/Ice Lounge located at 1036 Lafferty Lane in Dover, advised members that the Taproom/Ice Lounge is owned by Ms. Teresa Owens and Mr. Justin Ruiz. He stated that Ms. Owens first approached the City in October 2006, and explained what her intentions were for the business in an effort to obtain a business license. Since the application was for a “gentlemen’s club”, the City (Mrs. Townshend) indicated that the property owners would be required to apply for a property variance, since it was considered adult entertainment. He stated that during the hearing in December 2006, the Board of Adjustments denied the variance; however, he noted that the Board’s reason for the denial was due to the description of the business use not seeming to fall within the description of adult entertainment and that the use would be permitted under the present use of the property without the requirement of a variance. Although the variance was not granted, the business license was issued the following month and, in January, the business opened under their taproom license.
Mr. Kollias advised members that all performers are independent contractors and not employees of the Taproom/Ice Lounge. There were no problems until July 2007 when the business received their first provisional order, which is when he was contacted by the owners. At that time, he contacted the City and spoke with Mrs. Townshend. He stated that their conversation was very productive and resulted in the Taproom/Ice Lounge adopting several documents, such as rules and regulations, for employees and independent contractors, a statement of drug and alcohol policy, policy of investigations, etc. In addition, an abbreviated version of the rules and regulations were posted throughout the club. As a result of these actions, the City indicated that their concerns were resolved and that there were no further hearings as long as the establishment continued to follow the rules, which, he noted, included some specifics regarding appropriate dress and conduct. Sometime in September 2007, during the NASCAR Race weekend, Mr. Kollias stated that City officials inspected the establishment and that no violations were found, with the exception of one (1) inappropriate clothing issue, which was immediately resolved.
Mrs. Townshend, Director of Planning and Inspections, advised members that when Ms. Owens originally approached the City to obtain a business license, a “gentlemen’s club” was included on the application. At that time, Ms. Owens was requested to review the definition provided for adult entertainment to determine if the entertainment planned was consistent with the definition and, since it was, Mrs. Townshend explained that the only means for allowing such entertainment would be to apply for a variance. She advised members that what was explained by Ms. Owens to the Board of Adjustments and what was indicated to her regarding their intentions were totally different.
Mrs. Townshend stated that after several inquiries and complaints, staff contacted the Police Department for the use of undercover officers, who visited the establishment in July. She advised members that on July 31, 2007, the City of Dover issued a provisional order on the business license for the Taproom/Ice Lounge. The reason for the order was due to adult entertainment at the establishment. She stated that at that time, the owners had the opportunity for a hearing before the licensing officer, for which she serves. She stated that a letter was received from the appellant’s attorney as well as a phone call and was advised that the owners acknowledged that the type of activities were inappropriate and there were discussions regarding the changes that would be made at the establishment so that it did not fall under the definition of adult entertainment. Mrs. Townshend explained that the purpose for the hearing was to provide them the opportunity to deny the adult entertainment activities; however, since they agreed that there were adult entertainment activities, there was no need to conduct a hearing. She advised members that in accordance with the Dover Code, the owners are provided five (5) days to make corrections under the provisional order. She stated that again, during the past winter months, the Police Department, as well as her office, received numerous inquiries in addition to the complaint. She referred to the police reports (both July 2007 and March 2008) and noted that the documentation is very clear regarding the type of activities that were observed. Mrs. Townshend stated that after several complaints received in January and February of 2008, staff visited the site in March 2008 and observed that the activities being performed on the site clearly met the definition of adult entertainment. On March 14, 2008, the City issued a final order, which is a revocation of the business license and ordered the business to cease operations.
Mr. Kollias stated that he requested copies of any and all complaints that were submitted to the Planning and Inspections Department, as well as the Police Department. The only document that has been received is a copy of the police report which contains very few specifics.
Ms. Teresa Owens of Smyrna, owner of the Taproom/Ice Lounge, explained that her definition of a “gentlemen’s club” was a male review with females in bikinis and that her request for a variance was at the direction of Mrs. Townshend. Ms. Owens advised members that although the variance was denied, she was permitted to operate the business. She indicated that Mrs. Townshend visited the establishment and observed the same activities as the undercover officers and had indicated to her, as well as her partners and managers, that they were “doing a great job”.
Mr. Ruane moved to uphold the revocation of the business license, seconded by Mr. McGiffin and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
PUBLIC HEARING/FINAL READING - REZONING OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 442 KINGS HIGHWAY, OWNED BY LUTHER SENIOR SERVICES OF DOVER
A public hearing was duly advertised for this time and place to consider rezoning of property located at 442 Kings Highway, consisting of 0.38+/- acres, owned by Luther Senior Services of Dover. The property is currently zoned RG-5 (General Residence for Mid-Rise Apartments) and the proposed zoning is C-4 (Highway Commercial). (The First Reading of this ordinance was accomplished during the Council Meeting of February 25, 2008).
Council President Williams noted that a request has been received to withdraw the rezoning application.
Mr. Hogan moved to accept the request to withdraw the rezoning application for property located at 442 Kings Highway, owned by Luther Senior Services of Dover. The motion was seconded by Mr. Salters and unanimously carried.
PUBLIC HEARING/FINAL READING - REZONING AND PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT - LAND DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2003, AS AMENDED IN MAY 2005, SEPTEMBER 2006, AND MARCH 2007 BY AMENDING LAND DEVELOPMENT MAP 11-1 AND AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF DOVER BY CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF COMMERCE WAY
A public hearing was duly advertised for this time and place to consider approval of a proposed zoning text amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Update 2003, as amended in May 2005, September 2006, and March 2007 which would amend Land Development Map 11-1 by changing the land use type from Industrial to Residential High Density on that property located on the north side of Commerce Way, owned by H & M Properties, LLC. (The First Reading of this ordinance was accomplished during the Council Meeting of February 25, 2008).
Members were advised that a request was received to postpone the public hearing. Staff recommended that a Public Hearing be rescheduled for Tuesday, May 27, 2008 at 7:30 p.m.
Responding to Mr. Ruane, Mrs. Townshend, Director of Planning and Inspections, indicated that the owner requested the postponement to allow them to consider other zoning options. She explained that the applicant was provided a copy of staff’s report that was being submitted to the Planning Commission and that staff’s recommendation was to deny the request.
Mr. Ruane moved to deny the request to postpone and continue with the public hearing. The motion was seconded by Mr. McGlumphy.
In response to Mr. Leary, Mrs. Townshend noted that the applicant was not present. She also indicated that the Planning Commission has not issued a report regarding the rezoning and text amendment.
Deputy City Solicitor Pepper indicated that since the Planning Commission has not issued a report, nor has the 75 days lapsed that they are provided to do so, Council cannot hold a public hearing.
The motion to deny the request to postpone and ccontinue with the public hearing failed by a roll call vote of seven (7) yes and two (2) no (Mr. McGlumphy and Council President Williams).
Mr. Slavin moved to approve the request to postpone the public hearing and that it be rescheduled for Tuesday, May 27, 2008 at 7:30 p.m., seconded by Mr. Hogan and carried by a roll call vote of eight (8) yes and one (1) no (Mr. Ruane).
CIVILIAN PENSION BOARD REPORT - FEBRUARY 29, 2008
The Civilian Pension Board met on February 29, 2008 with Chairman Hogan presiding.
Discussion - Alternatives to the Standard Across the Board Pension COLA
Members were provided a booklet of information reviewed by Mrs. Mitchell, Controller/Treasurer. For discussion purposes, she provided members a proposed policy which would establish a process for Ad Hoc Pension COLA.
Referring to the review of the CPI (first bullet), Mr. DePrima suggested that an expectation of the review be included and that, with regards to determining if the asset to liability percentage decreases in the year (last bullet), he suggested that there should be more explanation to make the determination. He relayed concern with the establishment of the proposed policy, explaining his opinion that it would lead to a mandatory COLA. Noting that the Police Pension provides for an automatic COLA, Mr. DePrima explained that it was developed as a result of a negotiated matter with the union. He suggested that if the City is to consider a mandatory COLA, it should be accomplished by the retirees approaching the union members and requesting that it be considered as a negotiated matter.
Responding, Mrs. Rigby indicated appreciation for the evaluation factors since she felt they would provide protection to the plan. She relayed concern with the suggestion of involving the unions with current retirees, explaining her feeling that it would be unfair for current retirees to be tied to employees. She noted that, normally, the benefits negotiated by the unions do not affect retirees.
Mr. Hogan noted that the proposed policy is suggesting a required contribution every year. It was his opinion that the policy should suggest a review to determine if the evaluation factors indicate the ability to contribute $191,670 each year and to determine if it would be feasible for the City to include the contribution amount in the City’s budget.
Responding to Mr. McGiffin, Mrs. Mitchell explained that the proposed policy suggests that the City commit to a contribution in the amount of $191,670 each year for three (3) years; however, this would not necessarily guarantee that Council would provide retirees with a COLA.
To address the concern relayed by Mr. Hogan, Mr. DePrima suggested the addition of another paragraph that would direct the City Manager to include a contribution in the amount of $191,670 in the City’s Budget each year, with the understanding that this contribution is subject to the review and approval of City Council.
In response to the union negotiations, Mrs. Hawkins, Human Resources Director, advised members that not all union members are members of the pension plan. She noted that when the police negotiated their COLA, there was only one (1) pension plan, of which the union representatives were members. She explained that another issue is that if the unions bring this matter to the table, they represent their members and that management employees are not represented by any union.
Responding to Mr. Hogan, Mrs. Hawkins estimated that 2/3 of the employees are members of the defined pension plan and that the remaining 1/3 are members of the deferred pension plan.
Mr. Hogan suggested that Mrs. Mitchell formalize the proposed policy and make revisions based on the discussion of members to be further reviewed by members at a later date.
Discussion on Procedures and Timing of COLA Requests
During a Special Pension Board Meeting on January 16, 2008, members continued a discussion regarding alternatives to the standard across the board pension cost of living adjustment (COLA). As a result, action was deferred on this matter and staff was requested to provide members with those sections of the Charter and Code relative to the City’s Pension Plans, as well as any legal opinions and other pertinent information, for their review and consideration.
Referring to the legal opinion submitted by City Solicitor Rodriguez, dated January 9, 2008, Mr. DePrima noted that the conclusion was based on the concerns that the pension fund included monies contributed by members and the City. He reminded members that the proposal to provide differential COLA’s to retirees included the use of City funds only. Taking this into consideration, as well as the fact that so many other jurisdictions provide differential COLA’s to retirees, Mr. DePrima felt assured that there would be no legal concerns should the City choose to provide differential COLA’s to their retirees.
Mr. Hogan suggested that the next meeting be scheduled for March 26, 2008 at 1:30 p.m. with the only agenda item to be the discussion of this topic.
COLA Request for 2008
During a Special Pension Board Meeting on January 16, 2008, members considered a COLA request for 2008. The majority of members felt that the age formula provided the best alternative and was most equitable for all retirees. It was suggested that the stipend be distributed either once a year (November) or twice per year (July and November) and that the stipend be provided to those retirees that retired prior to January 1, 2008.
The committee recommended that City Council fund a $100,000 one-time stipend to retirees to be provided based on the age of the retiree, to be distributed July 15th and November 15th.
Mrs. Hawkins suggested that there be clarification regarding the retiree’s age, as to whether it is referring to the retiree’s age as of a certain date or when the stipend is dispersed. In addition, she questioned if the stipend would be provided to recent retirees. Mr. Lucas noted that members previously suggested that the stipend be provided to those retirees that retired prior to January 1, 2008.
Mr. Hogan requested that when this matter is presented to Council, Mrs. Mitchell include clarification of the date to be used regarding the retiree’s age in determining the stipend, as well as an effective date that the stipend would be provided to retirees who retired by a certain date.
Mr. DePrima provided members with details regarding the Deferred Compensation Plan and recommended that the retirees of this plan be treated equally, noting that there are only two (2) retirees of this plan at this time.
Mrs. Mitchell reminded members that she recently provided a presentation on the Worker’s Compensation Fund and noted that there was an excess carry forward balance. She stated that during the presentation, staff recommended that $100,000 of this money be transferred to the General Fund for the stipend payment to retirees; however, no action was taken.
Mr. Hogan moved for approval of the stipend for current retirees, including those that retired from the Deferred Compensation Plan, with funding to be provided from the excess carry forward balance in the Worker’s Compensation Fund. The motion was seconded by Mr. McGiffin.
Responding to Mr. Leary, Mrs. Mitchell stated that since the recommendation is to provide a one-time stipend, which will be paid from the General Fund and not the Pension Fund, federal regulations are not involved.
Mr. McGlumphy questioned the precedent that would be set to include those employees that retired from the Deferred Compensation Plan. Responding, Mr. McGiffin explained his concerns regarding this issue. He advised members that when an employee makes a choice between the Defined Pension Plan or Deferred Compensation Plan, neither of them contemplates a COLA. By providing this stipend, he felt that it would provide a compromise until the COLA issue is resolved by the Pension Board.
Mr. Hogan advised members that a workshop will be scheduled to further discuss the issues involving a COLA.
Mr. Ruane suggested that it would be more appropriate for this matter to be considered by City Council during the Budget Hearings.
Mr. Ruane moved to table this matter to allow for its consideration by City Council during the Budget Hearings, seconded by Mr. Slavin and carried by a roll call vote of six (6) yes and three (3) no (Mr. McGiffin, Mr. Hogan, and Council President Williams).
Mr. Hogan moved for acceptance of the Civilian Pension Board Report, seconded by Mr. Leary and unanimously carried.
TAX APPEALS COMMITTEE REPORT - MARCH 26, 2008
The Tax Appeals Committee met on March 26, 2008 with Chairman Ruane presiding.
Dismissal - Comcast Appeal #2007-045
Location: Poles and Lines
Staff recommended that this Appeal be dismissed for lack of submission of requested Appraisal Report. Members were advised that Comcast was given an extension on their appeal. They were given an additional ninety (90) days to submit a USPAP Self-Contained written Appraisal Report (January 31, 2008). On March 6, 2008, a letter was sent to Comcast with the Assessor’s Recommendation for dismissal of the appeal.
Mr. Salters and Mr. Ruane wanted to make sure that the appropriate persons have been notified via Certified Mail - Return receipt. Ms. Russell assured the committee that Comcast had been notified via Certified Mail - Return receipt and that no contact with the Assessor’s Office had been made.
The committee recommended approval of staff’s recommendation to dismiss Comcast Appeal #2007-045.
By consent agenda, Mr. McGiffin moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Slavin and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
Assessor’s Recommendation for Change of Value - Hertrich Capitol Auto Dealership Appeal #2007-038
Location: 1127 S. DuPont Hwy. (ED05-077.18-02-900.000-000)
Staff recommended that value be approved as follows:
Market Value appealed: $8,455,900 Recommended Value: $4,153,000
Staff changed their position regarding the valuation of the Hertrich Capitol Auto Dealership. Members were provided a memo from Eugenia Flynn with Tyler Technologies, indicating that she rendered her opinion on the valuation of the property. Mrs. Flynn reviewed the City’s data and the Appraisal submitted by the property owner. Mr. Hertrich has agreed to this value submitted by Tyler Technologies.
Mr. Ruane would like it to be known, that the Committee will continue to support a USPAP appraisal to be required; however, with this case, since a USPAP compliant firm is representing the City, the Committee will accept this appraisal. Members agreed; however, for the future, the Committee would like a representative from Tyler Technologies to be present at such meetings, where they are representing the City, in case the Committee has some question.
The committee recommended approval of the recommended value in the amount of $4,153,300, for Appeal #2007-038, considering that the adjustments made by Hertrich and reviewed by Genie Flynn are not complete and must be revisited upon completion.
By consent agenda, Mr. McGiffin moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Slavin and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
Status Clarification
Members considered the following status clarifications:
Collegian Plaza Appeal #2007-030
Location: 116 W. Loockerman St. (ED05-077.09-04-080.000-000)
Staff recommended approval of the value, as follows:
Market Value Appealed: $413,800 Recommended Value: $62,200
Staff changed their position regarding the valuation of the Collegian Plaza Land Value. Members were provided an email from the Assistant City Solicitor, who rendered his legal opinion on the valuation of the land. The value of the land was prematurely valued without a Certificate of Occupancy or change in zoning and should be reverted back to the original value until such time as a Certificate of Occupancy or rezoning is issued.
Members questioned the location of the property and requested Ms. Russell to make sure the property has not been rezoned recently.
The committee recommended approval of the recommended value in the amount of $62,200, for Appeal #2007-030.
By consent agenda, Mr. McGiffin moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Slavin and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
Compass Pointe Appeal #2007-031
Location: 800 N. State Street
Staff recommended that the value be approved, as follows:
Market Value Appealed: $2,000,000 Recommended Value: $255,000
Staff changed their position regarding the valuation of the Compass Pointe Land Value. Members were provided an email from the Assistant City Solicitor, who rendered his legal opinion on the valuation of the land. The value of the land was prematurely valued without a Certificate of Occupancy or change in zoning and should be reverted back to the original value until such time as a Certificate of Occupancy or rezoning is issued.
Members requested that staff make sure that the property has not been rezoned recently.
The committee recommended approval of the recommended value in the amount of $255,000, for the Appeal #2007-031.
By consent agenda, Mr. McGiffin moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Slavin and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
By consent agenda, Mr. McGiffin moved for acceptance of the Tax Appeals Committee Report, seconded by Mr. Slavin and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
SPECIAL PARKS, RECREATION, AND COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT COMMITTEE REPORT - MARCH 18, 2008
A Special Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee Meeting was held on March 18, 2008 with Chairwoman Russell presiding.
FY08 Grant Application Presentations, Review, and Recommendations
It was noted that the committee will serve as the FY08 Grant Application Review Panel for the Community Development Block Grant Applications for Fiscal Year 2008. As such, members were provided application details, staff reports summarizing each application, scoring criteria for CDBG funding, a CDBG Review Panel Scoring Sheet, and a worksheet for summarizing individual evaluations of each application. Mrs. Harvey, Community Development Coordinator, requested that each member summarize their evaluation of each application on the CDBG Review Panel Worksheet based on needs determined from the oral presentations from each applicant and individual scoring of each applicant. She explained that the number in the parenthesis for each measure to be scored is the maximum score for a given category. The maximum total points is 100. Mrs. Harvey advised members that the total grant available for activities is $257,336 and explained the allocation requirements of the grant, as follows:
CDBG Funds Allocation $269,266
Anticipated Program Income 52,404
$321,670
20% of the grant must be allocated for $321,670
Program Administration x .20
$ 64,334
Public Service activities cannot exceed 15% $321,670
of the grant x .15
$ 48,250
Total Grant Available for Activities $257,336
ORAL PRESENTATIONS
Each applicant was provided an opportunity to make oral presentations before the committee, as follows:
First State; Resource Conservation and Development Council (RC&D) - $25,000
Ms. Christine L. Stillson, Director of Emergency Home Repair Project, and Ms. Kelley Steed, Field Coordinator, for the First State Resource Conservation and Development Council (RC&D), explained that the grant application, in the amount of $25,000, is to support the activities of the Emergency Home Repair Project for repairing an estimated eight (8) to ten (10) homes in the City of Dover during the 2008/2009 fiscal year. She advised members that these funds will assist very low income homeowners in the elimination of severe housing conditions that constitute immediate health or safety hazards to the residents of the home, such as heating systems, roof replacements, hazardous electrical systems, and wheel chair ramps.
Having received CDBG Grant money in previous years, Ms. Stillson stated that the grants have provided qualifying home repairs to 23 (24 by end of current fiscal year) homeowners within the City limits. Members were provided details regarding the site locations and the repairs that have been accomplished from July 2005 to date.
Connections Community Support Programs, Inc. - $25,000
Representatives of Connections Community Supports Programs, Inc., Mr. Chris Devaney, Vice President of Program Operations, and Mr. Russell Buskirk, Director of Substance Abuse Services, advised members that the organization serves individuals that have been chronically homeless for one (1) year or more and have extremely low income. The grant application, in the amount of $25,000, will increase their capacity to provide access to entitlements and housing for chronically homeless adults in the City of Dover, Connection to Housing and Entitlements for Homeless Persons in Dover Program.
Mr. Devaney explained that Connections Community Support Programs, Inc. provides a comprehensive array of community-based treatment, support, housing, and rehabilitation services for people recovering from and living with mental health and substance use conditions, homelessness, and HIV/AIDS.
City of Dover Police Department - $25,000
Lt. Paul Bernat, Patrol Unit Commander for the City of Dover Police Department, explained that the grant application, in the amount of $25,000, would allow for the Police Department to re-start the Operations Downtown Program in the Target Area. He advised members that this program enhances the quality of life in low and moderate income areas by preventing crime through increased drug enforcement and community policing, especially in the target block and other problem areas. Lt. Bernat indicated that this program allows for additional foot patrols and police involvement in the downtown areas.
Dover Interfaith Ministry to the Homeless - $60,000
Ms. Jeanine Kleimo, Representative of Dover Interfaith Ministry, addressed members regarding the Dover Interfaith Ministry CDBG application in the amount of $60,000 for the development of a shelter for the homeless and to provide services to the homeless to assist in obtaining permanent housing. She advised members of the critical and ongoing need for shelter for men, explaining that other organizations such as Whatcoat and Shepard’s Place give women and children priority.
House of Pride - $15,000
On behalf of Ms. Marian Harris, Mr. Tim McGee, Case Manager, and Mr. Randall Revay, client, represented the House of Pride. Mr. McGee addressed members regarding the House of Pride CDBG application in the amount of $15,000 for operating costs. He stated that the organization provides transitional housing for substance abuse and drug addicted individuals, community outreach, short-term and long-term emergency and transitional housing and community beautification projects.
Staff advised members that the House of Pride received a CDBG grant in 2003 for $25,000, which was returned to the City for failure to comply with program guidelines and to expend the funds in a 24 month period. In addition, the House of Pride received a CDBG grant in 2007 for operating costs which the payments were delayed due to code compliance, life safety code, and zoning compliance issues.
Responding to Mrs. Russell, Mrs. Townshend advised members that a recent inspection of all the properties owned by the House of Pride indicated that there were several code violations. A detailed report was provided to the House of Pride which indicated that they would be provided 30 days to bring the violations into compliance. Although some of the corrections were made, Mrs. Townshend indicated that there are numerous deficiencies. In addition, she advised members that the inspectors had significant concerns regarding the structural stability of two (2) of the properties. The House of Pride was provided 30 days to obtain a structural engineer to conduct an inspection, which has not been accomplished. Mrs. Townshend advised members that there are two (2) additional buildings that are on the City’s Dangerous Building list and are scheduled to be submitted to Council for demolition.
As a client, Mr. Randall Revay advised members that prior to becoming homeless, he had many of the amenities of most Americans, big house, cars, and other luxuries. When his wife became ill, he stated he had trouble dealing with the situation and turned to drugs. In seeking help for himself, he explained the many benefits that the House of Pride has provided to him in his desire to once again be self-sufficient and gain his independence back.
City of Dover Community Development Project: Homeowner Rehabilitation Assistance Program - $91,000
Mrs. Tracy Harvey, Community Development Director, stated that the Homeowner Rehabilitation Assistance Program funds, in the amount of $91,000, will be used to rehabilitate six (6) owner occupied homes and bring them up to housing code for low to moderate income homeowners.
Responding to Mr. Ruane, Mrs. Harvey advised members that each homeowner is allowed $15,000; however, the average amount used by each homeowner in the past has been $8,000 to $12,000. In response to concerns of Mr. Ruane regarding the unencumbered balances for this program, Mrs. Townshend explained that staff cannot assume that the bids will be less than the $15,000 allowed for each homeowner.
City of Dover Community Development Project: Homeownership Assistance Program - $50,260
Mrs. Tracy Harvey, Community Development Director, indicated that the Homeownership Assistance Program funds, in the amount of $50,260, will be used to provide five (5) first time home buyers down-payment or settlement assistance who purchase property in the City of Dover.
Staff provided members with a Status Report of the FY07 CDBG Program Expenditures and a Status Report of the FY06 CDBG Program Expenditures.
REVIEW/SCORING OF CDBG GRANT APPLICATIONS
Members reviewed and discussed the various CDBG grant applications to develop a score for each applicant. In accordance with the HUD regulations, Mrs. Townshend reminded members that public services activities cannot exceed 15% of the total grant, which amount to $48,250. She noted that since the total request for public service activities total $65,000, it will be necessary to make reductions that total a minimum of $16,750. If members decide to fully fund the $48,250 for public services activities, Mrs. Townshend stated that it will be necessary to take $33,924 from the remainder of the requests. She explained that if members wish to fully fund the public services activities, the non public services activities would be reduced by $33,924.
Responding to Mr. Ruane, Mrs. Townshend indicated that the House of Pride is the only applicant that is not compliant with the City Codes and noted that compliance is mandated in accordance with the City’s policy that was recently approved. She explained that staff was required to prepare the CDBG Grant Applications in time for the committee’s review, which was prior to the extension deadline provided to the House of Pride for addressing the non-compliance issues. Since the preparation of the packet material, the House of Pride still has not taken any action to address these issues. Mrs. Townshend stated that if this information would have been known, staff would have excluded them from the submitted applications to be considered by members since they would not have met the criteria in accordance with the City’s policy that was recently approved.
The committee recommended that the House of Pride CDBG application for FY09 be removed based on extensions that have been granted to fulfill their requirements for the FY07 CDBG grant awarded; no such monies shall be awarded until all code violations have been met and the House of Pride is in compliance with all the City’s rules and regulations; it was noted that the members believe in their mission.
By consent agenda, Mr. McGiffin moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Slavin and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
Mr. Ruane noted that the City has approved two (2) additional police officers dedicated to the work required involving Sex Offenders. He stated that the Police Department had indicated that prior to these additional officers, other police officers shared in this responsibility. It was his feeling that since the additional police officers will relieve the other officers from this responsibility, they would be available for the Operations Downtown Program. If this is not the case and additional officers are necessary to carry out this program, he suggested that the Police Department submit this as a request in their budget.
Mrs. Russell advised members of the positive impact that there is in the target area with the presence of the additional police officers.
With regards to the scoring system, Mr. Ruane felt that there should be a requirement to indicate if there are other funding resources, noting that this is the case for some of the applicants. He also questioned the need for members to use the scoring system in instances when all applicants will be provided grant monies.
After much discussion, it was the consensus of members that the CDBG grant monies be distributed as follows:
Amount Amount
Applicant Requested Recommended
First State; Resource Conservation and
Development Council (RC&D) $25,000 $25,000
Connections Community Support Programs, Inc. $25,000 $15,000
City of Dover Police Department $25,000 $21,000
Dover Interfaith Ministry to the Homeless $60,000 $60,000
City of Dover Community Development Project:
Homeowner Rehabilitation Assistance Program $91,000 $91,000
City of Dover Community Development Project:
Homeownership Assistance Program $50,260 $45,000
The committee recommended that all eligible applicants receive 100 points on their scoring, noting that the House of Pride was eliminated from consideration since it was determined that they were ineligible.
By consent agenda, Mr. McGiffin moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Slavin and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
By consent agenda, Mr. McGiffin moved for acceptance of the Special Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee Report, seconded by Mr. Slavin and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
UTILITY COMMITTEE REPORT - MARCH 24, 2008
The Utility Committee met on March 24, 2008 with Chairman Ruane presiding.
Electric Cost of Service Study
Mrs. Mitchell, Controller/Treasurer, advised members that the Dover Air Force Base (DAFB) notified the City some time ago that they would not be setting aside the funds for the FY08 electric rate increase until they completed a review of the City’s rate study data and determined if the new rates were fair to DAFB. She stated that the DAFB has completed their review and both the City and base personnel met on March 18th to discuss their concerns. Also in attendance were Mr. Ted Kelly of Burns & McDonnell (City consultant) and Dr. Dennis Goins (DAFB consultant). Along with the Cost of Service Study, Burns & McDonnell will be providing the City with the tools necessary to do a cost of service by customer class simultaneously with the financial model updates.
Mrs. Mitchell stated that the main concern of the DAFB was the across the board rate increases the City implemented in July 2006, January 2007, and July 2007 without conducting a formal cost of service study. She explained that the across the board increases are done based on energy and no consideration is given to demand. The DAFB contends that the fixed cost components are being allocated on a per megawatt basis as you would do for power supply (variable cost). Therefore, the DAFB believes it was charged higher rates than it would have if the City had included the demand component. It was agreed that the City would perform a cost of service study to determine its FY09 rates.
In regards to the FY07 and FY08 rates, Mrs. Mitchell stated that the DAFB has agreed to provide the City with the necessary cost and pricing data forms to be completed. It had not been communicated to the City in the past (under prior base personnel) that it was necessary to submit these forms with notification of rate increases. The City explained that the current rate could not be retro-actively changed, as it would have adverse consequences on the City’s debt covenants and bond rating.
Staff recommended approval of an expenditure in the amount of $25,000 for the completion of a Cost of Service Study to determine electric rates by customer class for FY09 by Burns & McDonnell. Mrs. Mitchell assured members that the proposal submitted by Burns & McDonnell will be provided to members. Since Burns & McDonnell conducted the last cost of service study for the City, she explained that they have been requested to update the analysis, which would be less costly for the City. She also indicated that there are time constraints involved since DAFB is in need of this information as well as the City for budgetary purposes.
Responding to Mr. Ruane, Mrs. Mitchell stated that the study will provide information on all electric classes and would not benefit the DAFB only.
The committee recommended approval for the completion of a Cost of Service Study to be conducted by Burns & McDonnell at a cost not to exceed $25,000 to be completed by May 20, 2008, with the understanding that this is an exception to the normal bidding process which is authorized by Council due to the time constraints involved.
By consent agenda, Mr. McGiffin moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Slavin and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
Comcast Pole Attachment Agreement
The City of Dover enacted a Pole Attachment Ordinance on February 25, 2008 for all poles located within the City of Dover limits. Members were provided a proposed agreement between Comcast of Delmarva, Inc. and the City of Dover for the poles located outside of the City limits. The proposed agreement incorporates the tenets of the ordinance and has been modified into an agreement format for execution between the parties. The pole attachment rate mirrors the rate included in the ordinance, which is $8.17 per pole attachment. As a reminder, Mr. Lunt, Public Utilities Director, stated that this payment compensates the City for the carrying costs associated with constructing, operating, and maintaining the poles, ducts, and conduits. The attachment fee can be considered the cost of “renting” a portion of the pole, ducts, or conduit and are meant to recover pole, duct, or conduit related costs incurred by the City. The implementation of this Agreement is estimated to generate approximately $24,510 annually (estimated 3,000 poles x $8.17).
Staff negotiated an Agreement with Comcast of Delmarva and they concur with the proposed Agreement. Staff recommended approval of the Pole Attachment License Agreement with Comcast of Delaware, Inc. for Poles Located Outside of the City of Dover Limits and that the City Manager be given authority to execute this agreement.
Responding to Mr. Ruane, Mr. Lunt assured members that the agreement has been reviewed by legal counsel. Mr. Ruane noted that several of the documents being submitted do not include dates and, for clarification, he encouraged staff to include dates on the documents being submitted for consideration.
The committee recommended approval of the Pole Attachment License Agreement with Comcast of Delaware, Inc., for Poles Outside of the City of Dover Limits and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement with Comcast of Delmarva, Inc.
By consent agenda, Mr. McGiffin moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation (Exhibit #1), seconded by Mr. Slavin and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
Public Utilities Electric Capital Improvement Projects (CIP’s) FY 2008-09
Members were provided the Electric Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) by the Public Utilities for Fiscal Year 2008-09. Mr. DePrima, City Manager, explained that the CIP Projects proposed for the next fiscal year are being presented to the committee in order to provide them a better understanding of issues that are presented for their review and recommendation during the year.
Mr. Lunt, Public Utilities Director, reviewed the CIP’s, as follows:
69KV Feeders 3 and 4 Danner Farm Transformer
Replacement of 69KV Breakers Horsepond 600 Transformer
Distribution Upgrades SR1/SR9 Pole Line Relocation
Lighting Project and Rehabilitation New Developments
St. Jones Substation
With regards to the 69KV Feeders 3 and 4 Project, Mr. Lunt indicated that letters were sent to affected property owners and businesses advising them that there may be instances when it would be necessary for their service to be interrupted; however, he assured members that the interruption will be scheduled during times that would be less of an inconvenience to the customers.
Mr. Ruane stated that the public is very much interested in the City’s utilities and suggested that staff make every attempt to communicate with the residents the maintenance requirements of the utilities and their associated costs. Mr. Leary suggested that the City’s Public Relations Officer assist in this endeavor.
The committee recommended acceptance of the reports provided on the Electric Capital Improvement Projects for FY2008-09.
By consent agenda, Mr. McGiffin moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Slavin and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
House Concurrent Resolutions Related to Wind Power (HCR 38 and HCR 40)
At the suggestion of Chairman Ruane, members were provided House Concurrent Resolution #38, which recommends that the Controller General vote to approve the Power Purchase Agreement between Bluewater Wind and Delmarva Power because, in the opinion of the majority of the General Assembly, the proposed Power Purchase Agreement meets the criteria set forth in House Bill 6 of the 143rd General Assembly and is in the best interests of the citizens of this State. The Concurrent Resolution further requests that the Public Service Commission determine if the costs for the Bluewater Wind contract should be distributed among all Delmarva Power customers.
In addition, members were provided House Concurrent Resolution #40, which ensures that all of Delaware's electric customers are paying their fair share of costs in support of the proposed offshore wind farm. The offshore wind farm provides a societal benefit that should be paid by all Delawareans enjoying the benefit. The Bluewater Wind offshore wind farm is a renewable energy source that benefits all the citizens of Delaware since it uses the natural resource of wind to generate power, thus, does not produce any harmful emissions and promotes clean air for Delaware's environment. Therefore, this Resolution requests the Delaware Energy Office to promptly draft and submit to the General Assembly legislation to spread the costs of the offshore wind farm among all Delaware electricity users in a fair and equitable manner.
With regards to the HCR 40, members relayed concern regarding the costs and the requirement for the cots of the wind farm to be spread amongst Delaware electricity users.
Mr. Frank Tenusak, 880 Schoolhouse Lane, stated his understanding that the objective of the State legislators is to bring some certainty to the price of power in the future that is reasonably priced and affordable relative to the alternatives under the current conditions. In the environments where there is deregulation, there is another objective which is to assure there is environmentally sound power production, which wind would serve as a possible alternative. Mr. Tenusak relayed concern with the State not permitting competitive bids which allows Bluewater Wind to control a monopoly. He suggested that there be discussions to determine the basic objectives and, as an alternative, there may be consideration to re-regulate to assure any power that is competitively obtained by the traditional suppliers in the State to the consumer does not produce an unreasonable rate of return in accordance with historic public utility monopoly regulatory practices.
Responding, Mr. Ruane advised members that bidding was accomplished quite some time ago and Bluewater Wind was selected.
The committee recommended that the City Manager be authorized to formulate a letter to be sent to the General Assembly relaying support of HCR 38 and opposition to HCR 40.
By consent agenda, Mr. McGiffin moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Slavin and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
PACE/NAES Monthly Report (January)
Mr. DePrima provided the PACE/NAES Monthly Reports for January 2008. He reminded members that the reports are being provided to allow members the opportunity to monitor what is being sold in electric and the revenues received, which will give members a better understanding of any fluctuations and make improvements if deemed necessary. It was not his intention to make a presentation of the report; however, he welcomed any questions.
In response to Mr. Ruane regarding PJM not dispatching the McKee Run or VanSant units in the month of January, Mr. DePrima suggested that it was due to a mild winter and the price of oil.
Mr. Ruane requested that staff provide a summary of major issues, both positive and negative, involving the electric utilities during the next committee meeting.
The committee recommended acceptance of the PACE/NAES Monthly Report for January.
By consent agenda, Mr. McGiffin moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Slavin and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
By consent agenda, Mr. McGiffin moved for acceptance of the Utility Committee Report, seconded by Mr. Slavin and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
SAFETY ADVISORY AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE REPORT - MARCH 25, 2008
The Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee met on March 25, 2008 with Chairman Hogan presiding.
Discussion - Prioritization of Transportation Projects
Each year, members of Council submit a prioritization list of transportation projects for the City of Dover to the Secretary, as well as the Governor and other distinguished delegates, for their review and consideration. To aid in this review, members were provided with the letter and list of projects submitted in 2007 (adopted by Council on April 9, 2007), as well as the Dover/Kent County MPO List of Unfunded Proposed Projects. During their meeting of February 26, 2008, members tabled the discussion for the prioritization of transportation projects due to the absence of Ms. Juanita Wieczorek, Director of the Dover/Kent County Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO).
The committee removed the matter from the table.
Since the Governors Avenue Corridor Upgrades have begun and the Downtown Dover Signalization Upgrades is near completion, Mr. Hogan suggested that these projects be eliminated from the prioritization list. He noted that the West Dover Connector is no longer a study and suggested that this project be given a higher priority on the list. He also noted that DelDOT has created a study group that is working on the design for the Kenton Road Corridor Upgrades; therefore, he suggested that this project also be given a higher priority on the list. With regards to the College Road Corridor Upgrades, Mr. Hogan advised members that DelDOT is not currently reviewing this project. Since the new Dover High School is proposed to be located on Route 8, he suggested the addition of the Route 8 Corridor Study to the prioritization list.
Mr. Slavin referred to the recent presentation regarding Air Passenger Travel and the adoption of a Resolution by Council in support of Weekend Bus Service. It was his feeling that the City should be a participant in the grant funding for the Air Passenger Travel Study. He questioned if these types of projects should be included on this list or if the City should create a separate prioritization list of policy/program projects to be further explored.
Noting the traffic congestion problem on West Street at the intersection of North Street, Mr. Hogan suggested that West Street be made one-way westbound to alleviate the situation until the completion of the West Dover Connector. In consideration of this matter, members suggested that since the lack of the Connector is the cause of the traffic problem, “West Street Traffic Flow” should be added to the West Dover Connector priority.
At the suggestion of Mr. Hogan, members agreed with the elimination of item #1 - Governors Avenue Corridor Upgrades, and item #2 - Downtown Dover Signalization Upgrades; that item #3 - Intermodal Transportation Terminal be listed as item #1; the re-prioritization of item #6 - West Dover Connector, to be listed as item #2, and item #7 - Kenton Road Corridor Upgrades, to be listed as item #3; that the remaining items follow in their current order; and the addition of item #9 - Route 8 Corridor Study.
Referring to the Policy/Program Prioritization List, Mr. Slavin suggested that the Red Light Photo Enforcement Program also be included. He noted that although this program was initiated to enhance revenue, Chief Horvath has indicated that this program has very much served as a safety measure. Mr. Slavin also noted that Chief Horvath indicated that the City does not decide the location of the cameras; therefore, he felt that if the City indicated their support for the program and communicated their desire for the location of the devices in certain areas, DelDOT would take this into consideration.
Mr. Slavin indicated his desire to include the bike path connectivity, particularly as it relates to Eden Hill, to assure that the pedestrian and bike path is included in the recreation/open space for the development.
As an alternative to a second list, Mr. Hogan suggested the possibility of grouping the list to distinguish those projects being considered by the City for future funding.
The committee recommended approval of the Transportation Project Prioritization List as developed.
Mr. Hogan advised members that Mr. Ruane had provided suggestions to be considered which were inadvertently omitted. There being no objections, he recommended that these items be added to the list, as follows:
►Item #5 - Policy/Program: Continued Exploration of Options for Relocating the Storage and Marshalling of Chemical Cars at the Norfolk Southern Yard on New Burton Road
►Item #6 - Policy/Program: Additional Studies of Next Phase to Implement Commuter Passenger Rail Service between Wilmington and Dover
►Item #10 - Projects: Garrison Tract Connector Road
►Change wording of item #2 - Policy/Program to read as follows: “Airport Studies and Improvements to Accommodate Passenger and Aircraft Related Industries”
Mr. Hogan moved to recommend approval of the Transportation Project Prioritization List, as amended (Exhibit #2), seconded by Mr. Leary and unanimously carried.
Mr. Hogan moved for acceptance of the Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee Report, seconded by Mr. Leary and unanimously carried.
SPECIAL LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE REPORT - MARCH 31, 2008
A Special Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee Meeting was held on March 31, 2008 with Chairman Slavin presiding.
Auditor’s Correspondence to Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee (Audit Committee)
Mrs. Mitchell, Controller/Treasurer, advised members that at the completion of each audit, the Auditor is required to submit a Management Letter to the Council and an Audit Committee Report regarding their review of Internal Controls. While both letters are dated the date of the completion of the annual report, she stated that they are not issued until the A-133 Audit (Federal & State Grants) audit is completed. She noted that the A-133 Audit has to be completed and submitted to the Federal Clearing House by March 31st. Staff provided members with the reports for discussion and acceptance, as follows:
Standard Management Letter
Mrs. Mitchell reported that the audited Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) and the A-133 Audit came back with no material findings and a clean opinion. She indicated that a complete copy of the A-133 Report is on file with the Finance Department and is available upon request.
Staff recommended acceptance of the Standard Management Letter.
The committee recommended approval of staff’s recommendation.
By consent agenda, Mr. McGiffin moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Slavin and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
Audit Committee Report
Mrs. Mitchell explained that the Audit Committee Report addresses the auditor’s consideration over the City’s internal controls. She noted that there were two (2) matters they felt deserve consideration, which she reviewed as follows:
1. The Electric Revenue Fund, at the time of the audit, had an increase in inventory not used during the past 36 months of $660,000. The City’s current reserve balance is $276,629 and the current obsolete/non-moving inventory is $627,617. In 2003, the City implemented the inventory reserve to write off obsolete and damaged inventory. The City has appropriated a total of $350,000 to provide for any inventory disposals. To date, $73,371 has been written off. The auditor’s concern stems from the dollar amount of obsolete/non-moving inventory as compared to the City’s reserve balance. Mrs. Mitchell stated that she will be recommending that the City increase the annual appropriation to $175,000 in the FY09 Budget in order to bring the reserve balance up to a more appropriate level over the next few years. At the same time, it has been communicated to staff that any sales of obsolete inventory should also get credited to offset the amounts written off. (i.e. tree wire).
2. The Police Department submitted a Committee Action Form for its HVAC equipment without obtaining quotes or bids. The prior equipment was Trane, which had a sole vendor for maintenance. The new equipment being purchased and installed (not maintenance) was Honeywell, which are universally available, less expensive, and extremely user friendly. The auditor’s believe that the new equipment did not justify a continuity of service bid exception due to a vendor preference. Mrs. Mitchell advised members that this matter has been discussed with the Police Department.
Mrs. Mitchell advised members that these types of matters should be resolved by providing training to department heads by the Finance Department and that this training was scheduled to be accomplished this fiscal year; however, due to personnel matters, the training may not be accomplished until the next fiscal year.
Staff recommended acceptance of the Audit Committee Report.
Mr. McGlumphy suggested that when a sole vendor item is presented to Council, that staff color code the action form to assist in bringing the matter to Council’s attention.
Responding to Mr. Ruane regarding the inventory matter, Mr. DePrima explained that the City’s goal was to reduce the amount of inventory over a three (3) year period. This information is provided to members in the City Manager’s Monthly Report. Relative to the Electric Department, he stated that items that have been inventoried for more than three (3) years does not necessarily indicate that the item is too old or obsolete, explaining that many items are maintained in case of storms or for purposes of installation. Mrs. Mitchell also advised members that the Central Services Manager distributes a list of inventory items to the departments requesting them to indicate those items that are no longer usable and that he is advised of any exceptions such as transformers.
The committee recommended approval of staff’s recommendation.
By consent agenda, Mr. McGiffin moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation for acceptance of the Audit Committee Report, seconded by Mr. Slavin and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
Reserve Balance Analysis
Mrs. Mitchell, Controller/Treasurer, advised members that the City of Dover has established, over time, Budget Balance and Reserve Accounts in order to manage cash flow, provide for contingencies and capital asset replacements or projects. The detailed requirements for the reserve balances are outlined in the City of Dover Financial Policies. In an effort to update members on these accounts, staff provided an analysis that lists each account, their current balance, and a summary of the requirements from the City’s policy.
Mrs. Mitchell noted that staff will be submitting recommended amendments to the Financial Policies in the near future.
Referring to the Capital Asset Project Reserve, Mr. Ruane questioned the reserve being under-funded and the concept of its funding by non-recurring revenues. Responding, Mrs. Mitchell explained that it must be determined if the transfer tax from certain sales (such as apartment complexes) are considered non-recurring revenues or regular transfer tax revenue. Mr. Ruane suggested that staff be tasked with developing a remedy for the Capital Asset Project Reserve with some identifiable non-reoccurring revenue, otherwise, he felt that the funds necessary will never be acquired.
Responding, Mr. DePrima reminded members that when the Capital Asset Project Reserve goal of $500,000 was established, it pre-dated the efforts to build the Library Reserve. He noted that the City has been very successful in building the Library Reserve and that once the Library Project is finalized, the focus can be returned to the Capital Asset Project Reserve. He also reminded members that the funds included in the Capital Asset Project Reserve is not earmarked for a particular project, explaining that the concept was to build a fund for future replacement of major assets, such as buildings. Mr. DePrima reiterated that the City has been successful in using various mechanisms to build the Library Reserve that would have otherwise been used to build the Capital Asset Project Reserve.
Mr. McGlumphy requested that Mrs. Mitchell provide members with a complete analysis of unaccountable money that has been received through this fiscal year and where these monies were credited.
Review of Investment Policy
Members were provided with the City’s Investment Policy. Mrs. Mitchell, Controller/Treasurer, reminded members that in accordance with Section 15, the policy is to be reviewed at least once every two (2) years by the committee, which is charged with considering the existing policy and referring any recommendations to modify the policy to City Council for action.
Staff recommended no changes to the Policy at this time.
The committee recommended approval of staff’s recommendation.
By consent agenda, Mr. McGiffin moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Slavin and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
Recommendations of Tax Exemption Review Committee
During their Regular Meeting of August 27, 2007, City Council approved the appointment of an ad-hoc committee to review the substance and procedure of the City of Dover property tax exemption. Mr. McGiffin, Chairman of the Tax Exemption Review Ad-Hoc Committee, advised members that the Committee completed its review and concluded that the following recommendations would best address the needs of Dover citizens:
1. Individuals who are determined to be disabled under the law applicable to the Social Security Administration are qualified to apply for the property tax exemption (amendment to §102-183(b) of the Dover Code).
2. Income received by an individual from Federal Civil Service Retirement System shall be excluded from the income counted for purposes of determining eligibility for the property tax exemption (amendment to §102-183(b)(3) of the Dover Code).
3. The income limit applicable to the property tax exemption shall be adjusted to reflect the federal Cost of Living Adjustments (COLA) for the two years that have transpired since the present levels were set. The COLA for 2006 was 3.3%, and the COLA for 2007 was 2.3%. The individual income limit will be adjusted to $15,851, and for a couple $21,192. The income limits shall increase at the same rate as any COLA used by the federal Social Security Administration and effective before the tax exemption application deadline (amendment to §102-183(b)(1) & (2) of the Dover Code).
Members were provided proposed ordinance amendments to Chapter 102 - Taxation, of the Dover Code, which included the recommendations of the Tax Exemption Review Committee, for their review and recommendation to City Council.
The committee recommended approval of the recommendations of the Tax Exemption Review Committee and adoption of the proposed ordinance amendments to Chapter 102 - Taxation, of the Dover Code.
By consent agenda, Mr. McGiffin moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Slavin and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. (The First Reading of the ordinance will take place during the latter part of the meeting).
Donation to Central Delaware Economic Development Council
Members considered a request of the Central Delaware Economic Development Council (CDEDC) for a donation, in the amount of $16,000 to assist with attracting new employers and job opportunities. It was noted that since 1999, the City has assisted the CDEDC with this endeavor, and that during the past fiscal year a donation was provided in the amount of $16,000.
Mr. Dan Wolfensberger, Director of the CDEDC, reviewed the cost/benefit analysis of the City of Dover support of the CDEDC over the last 10 years and provided members with details regarding the Program of Work approved for 2008 for the CDEDC and Budget.
Responding to Mr. McGlumphy, Mr. Wolfensberger stated his opinion that downtown Dover has potential and that there is a need for it to be unique and marketed to announce its existence. He also suggested that a person dedicated to locating companies and encouraging them to locate in the downtown area is essential.
Mr. McGlumphy reminded Mr. Wolfensberger of a report he requested in 2004 regarding the number of new companies for the City of Dover since 1998. He requested that this report be updated and provided to members.
Responding to Mr. McGlumphy regarding the monies appropriated for economic development, Mr. DePrima explained that the current balance for economic development in the Mayor’s budget is approximately $18,000 and that an additional $5,000 is budgeted for marketing (for economic development). He alluded to a recent request for funding assistance, in the amount of $7,500, for the Air Passenger Travel Study and advised members that there has not been a decision in this regard. Should Council wish to provide funding assistance, he stated that the $7,500 would also be provided from the City’s economic development budget, which would leave a balance in the amount of $10,500.
Mr. Ruane noted that the monies contributed to the CDEDC is not earmarked and questioned the possibility of stipulating that the balance be provided with the understanding that the amount needed for the Air Passenger Travel Study would be provided from this money. At the request of Mr. Ruane, Mr. DePrima explained that $20,000 has been budgeted for economic development and that $5,000 has been budgeted for economic development marketing.
In response to Mr. Slavin, Mayor Carey indicated his concurrence with the contribution to CDEDC in the amount of $16,000. He noted that the contribution requested for the Air Passenger Travel Study, in the amount of $7,500, is to be shared by Kent County and other organizations, such as the Chamber of Commerce, and indicated no objection to the City contributing their portion.
The committee recommended approval of the request of the Central Delaware Economic Development Council (CDEDC) for a donation in the amount of $16,000.
Mr. Slavin moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Salters and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
With regards to the contribution of an amount up to $7,500 to be allocated for the Air Passenger Travel Study, Mr. Salters felt that other municipalities such as Smyrna and Milford should share in this contribution since they too could benefit from the study, which would help alleviate the burden for the City of Dover. Responding, it was Mr. DePrima’s opinion that the CDEDC would be responsible for preparing the Memorandum of Understanding and obtaining contributors for the study.
The committee recommended that the City of Dover contribute an amount up to $7,500 to be allocated for the Air Passenger Travel Study, with the stipulation that other entities become partners.
Mr. Slavin noted that since the committee meeting, members have been advised that Kent County Levy Court has decided not to become a partner at the level that was anticipated.
Mayor Carey urged members to commit $2,500 towards the grant writing process. He stated that it is hoped that the Kent County Levy Court will also contribute $2,500 and noted that the Chamber of Commerce has already committed $1,500 and Kent County Tourism has committed to $1,000, which would provide the $7,500 necessary to complete the grant. If the grant is approved, Mayor Carey stated that these partners would be expected to provide 10% in-kind funds towards the grant, which would equate to $10,000 for the City, explaining that the grant is for $100,000.
Mr. Slavin moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Hogan.
Mr. Ruane referred to the material provided and relayed concern with the successes of such airports and the commitment required from the local community to subsidize.
Mr. McGlumphy relayed concern of future commitments required of the City by participating in the grant application process.
The motion that the City of Dover contribute an amount up to $7,500 to be allocated for the Air Passenger Travel Study, with the stipulation that other entities become partners, was carried by a roll call vote of five (5) yes and four (4) no (Mrs. Russell, Mr. McGlumphy, Mr. Salters, and Mr. Ruane).
Proposed Ordinances - Downtown Dover Partnership
Mrs. Townshend, Director of Planning and Inspections, provided members with a draft ordinance which would abolish the Parking Authority as it currently exists, officially form the Downtown Dover Partnership, and make the Partnership the beneficiary of the contribution for the downtown incentives (applicants receiving the incentives must contribute 10% of the value of the incentives to the Partnership). She explained that the proposed amendments are a part of a number of steps necessary to consolidate the Downtown Dover Development Corporation, Parking Authority, and Main Street Dover into one organization, the Downtown Dover Partnership. She reminded members that the consolidation of these organizations is a key strategy in moving forward with revitalization of downtown.
Mrs. Townshend noted an error in the synopsis and advised members that “Development Corporation” in the first sentence should be replaced with “Partnership”. In addition, she stated that the ordinance should include an effective date of July 1, 2008. She assured members that these corrections would be made when the ordinances are presented to City Council for a First Reading.
Staff recommended adoption of the proposed ordinances amending Chapter 106 - Traffic and Vehicles, and Appendix C - Downtown Redevelopment, Article II - Definitions and Article III - Eligibility, of the Dover Code.
Responding to Mr. Ruane’s concerns regarding the elimination of Division 5 - Parking Authority of the Dover Code, Mrs. Townshend stated that due to the discussions that occurred in the development of the partnership concept, the City Solicitor’s opinion was requested. She assured members that according to Deputy City Solicitor Pepper, the powers granted to the Parking Authority under State Statutes can be assumed by the Partnership and that there will be no loss of power.
Concurring, Mr. DePrima stated that the new organization, Downtown Dover Partnership, will be empowered with the same responsibilities as the Parking Authority with the exception of the creation of parking tax districts. Since such districts have never been considered, he stated that there were no concerns with the elimination of this power. He indicated that there are some condemnation powers that would not be provided to the Partnership and that if a condemnation is ever necessary, it would be exercised through the City.
Relative to the creation of the new partnership, Mr. Salters relayed concern with the elimination of Main Street Dover.
Responding to Mr. Ruane, Mrs. Townshend advised members that there are no further Code amendments; however, she stated that there will be new By-Laws, Articles of Incorporation, budgets, etc. required as a result of the new Partnership. Mr. Ruane requested that when the ordinances are presented to Council, the entire content of those sections of the Code be provided to members for clarification of the proposed amendments.
The committee recommended adoption of the proposed ordinances amending Chapter 106 - Traffic and Vehicles, and Appendix C - Downtown Redevelopment, Article II - Definitions and Article III - Eligibility, of the Dover Code.
By consent agenda, Mr. McGiffin moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Slavin and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. (The First Reading of the ordinance will take place during the latter part of the meeting).
Donation of $10,000 for Vietnam War Memorial
Mayor Carey provided members with a letter received from Mr. George Chabbott, President/Broker of Chabbott Petrosky Commercial Realtors, Ltd., requesting a donation in the amount of $10,000 to $60,000+/- for the purpose of building a monument to honor local service members killed and/or missing in action in Vietnam. He noted that Mr. Chabbott provided a letter he received from the Vietnam Association of America, Kent County Chapter 850, explaining that they recently received a land donation from Kent County, located at the southwesterly corner of the intersection of South Little Creek Road and Levy Court Drive, which will be used for building the monument.
For reference purposes, members were also provided with the City’s Community Leader and Organization Recognition Policy.
In discussing the request with the City Manager and consideration of the City’s policies, Mayor Carey suggested that the City provide in-kind services, such as assisting with lighting for the monument. Mr. DePrima stated that the costs for the installation of conduit and electric could be absorbed through the City’s street lighting expenses. It was noted that the materials for the lighting is estimated at $6,500.
Referring to Section II, Paragraph C, of the Community Leader and Organization Recognition Policy, Mr. McGlumphy felt that the request for the Vietnam War Memorial should be considered an exception and suggested that members approve a donation in the amount of $10,000 as requested.
Mr. Ruane referred to Section V of the Policy and suggested that the original motion better adheres to the policy, noting that the purpose of the policy was to provide for a strict interpretation to avoid the City being inundated with these types of requests.
Mr. McGlumphy stated his feeling that the request for the Vietnam War Memorial is an exception, explaining that the City of Dover is a military town and that $10,000 is minimal to help support a monument to honor those who lost their lives in Vietnam.
The committee recommended support of the Vietnam War Memorial with an in-kind contribution not to exceed $10,000 within the policies of the City.
At the request of Mr. Ruane, Mr. Slavin indicated that when the committee’s recommendation is presented to Council, a funding source would be identified.
Mr. McGlumphy moved that the City provide a cash donation in the amount of $10,000 for the Vietnam War Memorial, as well as any in-kind contributions, seconded by Mrs. Russell.
In response to Mr. Hogan, Mr. Slavin explained that regardless of the discussion that occurred at the committee meeting and any confusion resulting from the committee’s recommendation, the final action is Council’s responsibility. It was his feeling that Mr. McGlumphy has captured the spirit of the conversation that occurred at the committee meeting by including the cash donation, as well as providing any in-kind services that may be required, and relayed his support of the motion.
Mr. McGiffin cautioned members regarding the making of any cash donations, noting that there are numerous worthy causes and organizations.
Mrs. Russell recollected a previous request of the Elks Lodge made several years ago for a City flag donation. She stated that it was determined that members of Council could not grant the request due to City policies and, as a result, members of Council made a personal donation. She questioned if the request before members at this time is different than that of the Elks Lodge and if a donation is permitted in accordance with City policy.
Mr. Hogan moved that the matter be tabled to allow for clarification, seconded by Mr. Leary and carried by a roll call vote of six (6) yes and three (3) no (Mr. McGlumphy, Mr. Slavin, and Mr. Salters).
Mr. Slavin moved for acceptance of the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee Report, seconded by Mr. Hogan and unanimously carried.
LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE REPORT - APRIL 14, 2008
The Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee met on April 14, 2008 with Chairman Slavin presiding. Council President Williams noted that, with the exception of the following time sensitive issue, the committee’s report from April 14, 2008, will be presented to Council during the Regular Meeting of April 28, 2008 for their review and consideration.
Downtown Dover Development Corporation (DDDC) - City Loan Guarantee and Proposed Resolution Adopting a Slum Clearance and Redevelopment Authority in Accordance with the Provision of 31 Del. C. §4051, Et Seq.
Mrs. Mitchell, Controller/Treasurer, advised members that the Downtown Dover Development Corporation (DDDC) has solicited loan proposals for Economic Development in the central business district, which was provided to members for their review. She indicated that four (4) proposals were
received from the following banks: 1) Citizens Bank; 2) PNC Bank; 3) Wachovia Bank; and 4) Wilmington Trust.
Mrs. Mitchell explained that the purpose of the loan is for the purchase of property located at 120 and 144 South Governors Avenue for redevelopment. She noted that the requested loan amount is greater than the most recent appraisal on the properties and that banks normally require 15% to 20% equity in the property. In order to secure the loan and obtain the lowest possible interest rate, it was suggested that the City guarantee the loan. She assured members that the proposal has been reviewed by the City Solicitor and Bond Counsel to insure compliance with City and State Codes as well as securing the City’s guarantee.
Mrs. Mitchell stated that the DDDC recently met and approved the proposal provided by PNC Bank with the understanding Council approval would be required for the City guarantee. The proposal includes the following: 1) $1.3 million tax exempt loan; 2) 5 year balloon payment; 3) Interest only payments (at current rates, $47,970 annually); 4) Current interest rate in the amount of 3.69% (will be based on rate at time of closing); and 5) Closing cost will be paid from remaining loan proceeds. Mrs. Mitchell noted that the loan payments will be made from the tenants’ lease payments.
Staff recommended approval for the City of Dover to provide a guarantee on a loan to purchase two (2) adjoining parcels located at 120 and 144 South Governors Avenue.
Mr. DePrima explained that in accordance with the City Solicitor, the Slum Clearance and Redevelopment Authority Act (31 Del. C. §4501, Et Seq.) provides that the City of Dover may, by resolution, adopt the exercise of powers, functions, and duties by the community itself as provided in the Act. Members were provided a proposed Resolution, prepared by the City Solicitor, for their review.
Mr. Ruane noted that there are many elements to the Slum Clearance and Redevelopment Authority Act and suggested that staff provide a better explanation at a future meeting.
The committee recommended approval of staff’s recommendation and adoption of the Resolution.
Mr. Slavin moved for approval of staff’s recommendation for the City of Dover to provide a guarantee on a loan to purchase two (2) adjoining parcels located at 120 and 144 South Governors Avenue, seconded by Mr. Salters and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
Mr. Slavin moved for adoption of the Resolution adopting a Slum Clearance and Redevelopment Authority in accordance with the Provision of 31 Del. C. §4501, Et Seq., as recommended by the committee. The motion was seconded by Mr. Leary and by a unanimous roll call vote, Council adopted the following Resolution:
RESOLUTION ADOPTING A SLUM CLEARANCE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF 31 DEL. C. §54501, ET SEQ.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER IN
COUNCIL MET:
WHEREAS, the Slum Clearance and Redevelopment Authority Act passed by the General Assembly and codified in 31 Del. C. §54501, et seq., provides that the City of Dover may, by resolution, adopt the exercise of powers, functions, and duties by the community itself as provided in this Act; and
WHEREAS, in adopting this resolution, the City of Dover must find that one or more slum or blighted area (as defined in 54501of Title 31) exists in the City of Dover and that redevelopment of such areas is necessary in the interest of the public health, safety, morals, and welfare of the residents of the City of Dover which is the finding of Council; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the provisions of 54503 of Title 31, Council finds it to be in the public interest for the City of Dover to exercise such powers, functions, and duties by itself.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that:
1. Council, having made the findings necessary as stated in 31 W. . 54504, as stated in this Resolution and, further, that the exercise of powers, functions, and duties under the Slum Clearance and Redevelopment Authority Act should be adopted by the City of Dover as the Slum Clearance and Redevelopment Authority as defined in 31 W. C. 54501(2), such adoption and findings are hereby made by this Resolution.
ADOPTED: APRIL 14, 2008
Mr. Slavin moved for acceptance of the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee Report, with the understanding that the remainder of the items will be presented during the Council Meeting of April 28, 2008. The motion was seconded by Mr. Salters and unanimously carried.
MONTHLY REPORT - FEBRUARY 2008 - CIP REPORT
By consent agenda, Mr. McGiffin moved for acceptance of the CIP Report for February 2008, seconded by Mr. Slavin and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
QUARTERLY REVENUE REPORT
Mrs. Mitchell, Controller/Treasurer, reviewed the Quarterly Revenue Report as of February 2008, as well as updated Quarterly Revenue Reports as of April 7, 2008.
Mr. Slavin moved for acceptance of the Quarterly Revenue Report as of February 2008 and April 7, 2008, seconded by Mr. Hogan and unanimously carried.
EVALUATION OF BIDS - WELLHEAD REDEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
Mr. Lunt, Public Utilities Director, advised members that the Wellhead Redevelopment Program will provide information for rehabilitation and repair of nineteen (19) production wells in an effort to maintain operations and/or increase the yield of each well as it relates to the permitted allocation. The recommended bidder will perform testing of each well and provide a report detailing testing results, as well as recommendations. If a well requires further examination, the contractor will pull the well by removing the pump equipment, examine all materials, video each well shaft as necessary and return the well to original working conditions. The City is to be notified of any well which must be pulled for further investigation and all findings must be conveyed while the well is pulled. Upon reviewing information provided by the contractor, the City will plan for and/or schedule further repairs as needed.
Mr. Lunt stated that a Request for Proposal (RFP) was advertised and a mandatory pre-bid meeting was held with four (4) potential bidders in attendance. Two (2) proposal responses were received. The proposals were evaluated and a telephone interview was conducted with the bidders to discuss their experience and to confirm that both potential bidders could comply with the City of Dover’s scheduling situation. He stated that the potential bidders reassured the City that they could comply with the requests and that they would be more than willing to work within the requirements. Upon review, it was decided that both bidders were qualified and further analysis of cost would be needed by staff.
Staff recommended awarding the project to the low bidder, A.C. Schultes of Delaware, Inc. for $41,000.
Mr. Ruane moved for approval of staff’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Salters and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
REAPPOINTMENTS RECOMMENDED BY MAYOR CAREY - DOWNTOWN DOVER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION - THREE (3) YEAR TERMS TO EXPIRE APRIL 23, 2011
Mayor Carey requested the following reappointments to the Downtown Dover Development Corporation for three (3) year terms to expire April 23, 2011:
Arden Bardol - Private Citizen Representative
Ed Perez - Business Representative
James D. McGinnis - Private Citizen Representative
By consent agenda, Mr. McGiffin moved for approval of the reappointments to the Downtown Dover Development Corporation, as recommended by Mayor Carey, seconded by Mr. Slavin and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
FIRST READING - PROPOSED ORDINANCES
Council President Williams reminded the public that copies of the proposed ordinance are available at the entrance of the Council Chambers or can be obtained from the City Clerk's Office. Final action by Council on the proposed ordinances will take place during the Council Meeting of April 28, 2008.
In accordance with Section 1-9 of the Dover Code, Council acknowledged the First Reading of the Ordinance Amendment as read by the City Clerk, by title only, as follows:
►Chapter 102 - Taxation, Article VI - Exemptions; Tax Appeals Committee, Section 102-183 - Tax Exemption for Senior Citizens, Subsection (b) - Qualifications (Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee)
►Chapter 106 - Traffic and Vehicles, Article iii - Stopping, Standing and Parking, Division 5 - Parking Authority (Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee)
►Appendix C - Downtown Redevelopment, Article II - Definitions and Article III - Eligibility (Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee)
FINAL READING - PROPOSED ORDINANCES
The First Reading of the following proposed ordinance was accomplished during the Council Meeting of March 24, 2008.
PROPOSED BUDGET ORDINANCES
Mr. McGiffin moved that the Final Reading of the proposed ordinance be acknowledged by title only, seconded by Mr. Leary and unanimously carried.
Mr. Ruane moved for adoption of the budget ordinances (Exhibit 3), seconded by Mr. Leary and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.