REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
The Regular Council Meeting was held on September 8, 2008 at 7:30 p.m. with Vice President Salters presiding in the absence of Council President Hogan. Council members present were Mr. Leary, Mrs. Russell, Mr. McGlumphy, Mr. Slavin, Mr. McGiffin, Mrs. Williams, and Mr. Ruane.
Council staff members present were Captain Sammons, Ms. Russell, Mrs. Mitchell, Mrs. Townshend, Fire Chief Carey, Mr. DePrima, City Solicitor Rodriguez, Mrs. McDowell, and Mayor Carey.
OPEN FORUM
The Open Forum was held at 7:15 p.m., prior to commencement of the Official Council Meeting. Council President Hogan declared the Open Forum in session and reminded those present that Council is not in official session and cannot take formal action.
Mr. David Anderson, 217 Cecil Street, advised members that he was requested to relay his experience as a member of the Human Relations Commission. Vice President Salters explained that unfortunately, in accordance with the rules for the Open Forum, public testimony is not permitted for any matter listed on the agenda for consideration. Since the Human Relations Commission item was on the agenda, he stated that Mr. Anderson would not be able to comment at that time.
Mr. Anderson requested that he be informed when public testimony would be permitted regarding this issue.
The invocation was given by Pastor Patricia Payne of St. Andrew’s Lutheran Church, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.
AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS
Mr. McGlumphy moved for approval of the agenda as presented, seconded by Mr. McGiffin and unanimously carried.
Mr. Ruane requested that item #5B, Scope of Review - Chapter 58, Human Relations, of the Dover Code, be removed from the consent agenda.
Mr. McGlumphy moved for approval of the consent agenda as amended, seconded by Mr. Leary and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Council President Hogan absent).
ADOPTION OF MINUTES - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 25, 2008
The Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of August 25, 2008 were unanimously approved by motion of Mr. McGlumphy, seconded by Mr. Leary and bore the written approval of Mayor Carey.
PROCLAMATION - CONSTITUTION WEEK
The City Clerk read the following Proclamation into the record:
WHEREAS, September 17th, 2008 marks the two hundred and twenty-first anniversary of the drafting of the Constitution of the United States of America by the Constitutional Convention; and
WHEREAS, it is fitting and proper to officially recognize this magnificent document and the anniversary of its creation; and
WHEREAS, it is fitting and proper to officially recognize the patriotic celebrations which will commemorate the occasion and where Delawareans should recognize the importance particularly since it was first ratified by the State of Delaware; and
WHEREAS, public law 914 guarantees the issuing of a proclamation each year by the President of the United States of America designating September 17 through the 23rd as Constitution Week;
NOW, THEREFORE, I, CARLETON E. CAREY, SR., MAYOR OF THE CITY OF DOVER, DELAWARE do hereby proclaim September 17th through the 23rd, 2008 to be CONSTITUTION WEEK in the City of Dover, and ask our citizens to reaffirm the ideals the Framers of the Constitution had in 1787.
PROCLAMATION - DOVER CROP HUNGER WALK
The City Clerk read the following Proclamation into the record:
WHEREAS, at the end of World War II many people wanted to share our country's abundance with European war victims; and Church World Service and CROP's first purpose was to gather wheat and other crops from U.S. farms for shipment to Europe; and
WHEREAS, today, locally-organized, Church World Service-sponsored CROP Hunger Walks are an important part of community life for more than 2,000 towns and cities in the United States, bringing together people of different faiths, diverse cultures, and all age groups; and
WHEREAS, in the last 15 years alone, CROP Hunger Walks have raised over $200 million to bring help and hope to people in need in more than 80 countries, including the U.S.; and
WHEREAS, each year CROP Hunger Walks help more than 3,200 local food pantries, food banks, and meal sites in the U.S. provide food to neighbors in need, including our own Kent Ecumenical Food and Crisis, Calvary Baptist Soup Kitchen, Whatcoat Methodist Soup Kitchen, and Mount Zion AME Church Soup Kitchen; and
WHEREAS, the Annual CROP Hunger Walk will be held on September 28th to help our community become aware of and concerned about hunger and its causes; and
WHEREAS, the CROP Hunger Walk will raise funds to help stop hunger both locally and globally.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Carleton E. Carey, Sr., Mayor of the City of Dover, Delaware, do hereby proclaim September 28, 2008 as CROP HUNGER WALK DAY and urge the citizens of Dover to support this CROP Hunger Walk.
PROCLAMATION - SENIOR CENTER MONTH
The City Clerk read the following Proclamation into the record:
WHEREAS, older Americans are significant members of our society, investing their wisdom and experience to help enrich and better the lives of younger generations; and
WHEREAS, the Modern Maturity Center has acted as a catalyst for mobilizing the creativity, energy, vitality and commitment of the older residents of Dover, Delaware; and
WHEREAS, through the wide array of services, programs and activities, senior centers empower older citizens to contribute to their own health and well-being and the health and well-being of their fellow citizens of all ages; and
WHEREAS, senior centers affirm the dignity, self worth and independence of older persons by facilitating their decisions and actions; tapping their experiences, skills and knowledge, and enabling their continued contributions to the community.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, CARLETON E. CAREY, SR., MAYOR OF THE CITY OF DOVER, DELAWARE, do hereby proclaim September 2008 SENIOR CENTER MONTH and call upon all citizens to recognize the special contributions of the senior center participants, and the special efforts of the staff and volunteers who work every day to enhance the well-being of the older citizens of our community.
Mayor Carey presented the Proclamation to Ms. Carolyn Fredericks of the Modern Maturity Center in recognition of all the benefits provided to the senior citizens of the City of Dover.
Ms. Fredericks relayed appreciation for the recognition.
PUBLIC HEARING/PROPOSED RESOLUTION - ABANDONMENT OF 1124, 1128, and 1130 FORREST AVENUE
A public hearing was duly advertised for this time and place to consider abandonment of 1124, 1128, and 1130 Forrest Avenue.
Mr. DePrima, City Manager, reminded members that a request was received from Mr. Bruce C. Ennis, Managing Member of Ennis Business Associates, LLC., for the abandonment of an alley which runs southerly 215 feet from Forrest Avenue and then easterly 200 feet between 1124, 1128 and 1130 Forrest Avenue. The alley is unimproved and is considered to be a “paper” alley; therefore, it does not require review by the D.A.C. or Planning Commission.
During their meeting of August 25, 2008, City Council approved the Utility Committee’s recommendation for favorable consideration of the paper alley abandonment to include the paper alley which runs 215 feet from Forrest Avenue in a southerly direction and 200 feet in an easterly direction to property now or formerly owned by Cardiology Consultants. In addition, members recommended and support a future parcel consolidation plan, as well as a site development plan for the parcels.
Vice President Salters declared the public hearing open.
On behalf of Ennis Business Associates, LLC, Mr. Bruce Ennis, Managing Member (509 S. State Street), respectfully requested approval of the alley abandonment.
There being no one else present wishing to speak, Vice President Salters declared the public hearing closed.
Mr. Slavin moved for approval of the request for abandonment of the unimproved, paper alley running between 1124, 1128, and 1130 Forrest Avenue. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Russell and by a unanimous roll call vote, Council adopted Resolution No. 2008-18, as follows:
A RESOLUTION VACATING AND ABANDONING A CERTAIN 15-FOOT WIDE UNIMPROVED ALLEY SITUATED IN THE CITY OF DOVER.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET:
Section 1. The Council of the City of Dover hereby vacates and abandons the following alley:
All that certain piece or parcel of land situated in the City of Dover, Kent County, State of Delaware, a 15 foot wide paper alley running north to south approximately 207.5 feet on the south side of Delaware Route 8 immediately west of Tax Parcel #ED-05-076.11-02-20.01-000, then running in a easterly direction 200 feet along Tax Parcels #ED-05-076.11-02-20.01-000, #ED-05-076.11-02-20.00-000, #ED-05-076.11-02-21.00-000 and #ED-05-076.11-02-22.00-000, comprising 6,112.50 square feet, more or less.
Section 2. Since no person has been deprived of property by the vacating and abandoning of the aforesaid alley, no compensation is awarded.
Section 3. All costs of conveyance shall be borne by the property owners.
Section 4. This resolution shall be effective upon the filing of a revised plot plan of the aforesaid alley.
ADOPTED: SEPTEMBER 8, 2008
TAX APPEALS COMMITTEE REPORT - AUGUST 19, 2008
The Tax Appeals Committee met on August 19, 2008 with Chairman Ruane presiding.
STIPULATIONS
The committee considered the following stipulations:
Cedar Beach Enterprises Inc. Appeal #2008-012
Location: 191 N. DuPont Hwy. - ED05-068.18-01-18.00
Original Recommended
Land $332,500 $189,900
Improvements $529,100 $ 87,100
Value $861,600 $276,000
Staff recommended that the stipulated value be approved.
Background and Analysis
Mr. Steiner filed an appeal with the Assessor’s Office, because the value for the above property had been valued too high based on previous building permits. Mr. Steiner requested an appeal with the previous Assessor last year afer a change of value was made, but missed the deadline.
Mr. Steiner provided the Assessor’s Office with the requested Appraisal Report which was forwarded to Tyler Technologies for review.
After reading the appraisal and looking into the matter, the Assessor’s Office realized that the land value was considerably high and did not have the same size adjustment as did other properties of this size in the immediate area. Also, when the building permit information was reviewed, the previous Assessor did not accurately make the necessary increase to the property.
The permit information was reviewed again and utilizing the Appraisal for accurate information, corrections were made to the improvements. After doing so, the property value dropped to $276,000 which was accepted by the Appellant.
Mr. Salters asked if there are procedures in place to re-evaluate the property. The Acting Assessor Cheryl Russell assured him that the property would be re-evaluated at the next re-valuation. Mr. Ruane wanted to state, for the record, that there was an analysis by Eugenia Flynn of Tyler Technologies, which substantiates that the assessment by the Assessor is correct.
The committee recommended approval of staff’s recommendation based on the Analysis by Tyler Technologies.
By consent agenda, Mr. McGlumphy moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Leary and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Council President Hogan absent).
James & Anne McClements Appeal #2008-006
Location: 508 N. DuPont Hwy. - ED05-068.13-01-42.03
Original Recommended
Land $163,500 $109,000
Improvements $ 79,000 $ 90,000
Value $242,500 $199,000
Staff recommended that the stipulated value be approved.
Background and Analysis
Mr. & Mrs. McClements filed an appeal with the Assessor’s office, because the value for the above property had been valued to high based on recent sales of related properties.
Mr. McClements did not provide the Assessor’s Office with an appraisal report, but since the property is in the same complex as the properties Mr. Ellis appealed, the office used the appraisal report supplied by Mr. Ellis.
After reading the appraisal and looking into the matter, the Assessor’s Office realized that the Income Approach should have been applied to the property, which was confirmed by Tyler Technologies analysis. After doing so, the property value dropped to $199,000 which was accepted by the appellant.
Mr. Ruane wanted to make sure that Tyler Technologies was in support of this appraisal, as Mr. McClements did not supply the Assessor’s Office with the appraisal. The Acting Assessor explained that the Appraisal supplied by Mr. Ellis was used as these condominiums are within the same building.
The committee recommended acceptance of the stipulated values.
By consent agenda, Mr. McGlumphy moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Leary and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Council President Hogan absent).
Walter J. Ellis Appeal #2008-003
Location: 504 N. DuPont Hwy. - ED05-068.13-01-42.01
Original Recommended
Land $163,500 $109,000
Improvements $ 78,700 $ 83,000
Value $242,200 $192,000
Staff recommended the stipulated value be approved.
Background and Analysis
Mr. Ellis filed an appeal with the Assessor’s office, because the value for the above property had been valued too high based on sales of related properties.
Mr. Ellis provided the Assessor’s Office with the requested appraisal report which was forwarded to Tyler Technologies.
After reading the appraisal report and looking into the matter, the Assessor’s Office realized that the Income Approach should have been applied to the property, which was confirmed by Tyler Technologies analysis. After doing so, the property value dropped to $192,000 which was accepted by the appellant.
Mr. Ruane wanted to state, for the record, that there was an analysis by Eugenia Flynn of Tyler Technologies, which substantiates that the assessment by the Assessor is correct.
The committee recommended acceptance of the stipulated value.
By consent agenda, Mr. McGlumphy moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Leary and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Council President Hogan absent).
Walter J. Ellis Appeal #2008-004
Location: 512 N. DuPont Hwy. - ED05-068.13-01-42.05
Original Recommended
Land $163,500 $109,000
Improvements $ 78,100 $ 90,000
Value $241,600 $199,000
Staff recommended that stipulated value be approved.
Background and Analysis
Mr. Ellis filed an appeal with the Assessor’s office, because the value for the above property had been valued to high based on sales of related properties.
Mr. Ellis provided the Assessor’s Office with the requested appraisal report, which was forwarded to Tyler Technologies.
After reading the appraisal and looking into the matter, the Assessor’s Office realized that the Income Approach should have been applied to the property, which was confirmed by Tyler Technologies analysis. After doing so, the property value dropped to $199,000 which was accepted by the appellant.
Mr. Ruane wanted to state, for the record, that there was an analysis by Eugenia Flynn of Tyler Technologies, which substantiated that the Assessor’s assessment was correct.
The committee recommended acceptance of the stipulated value.
By consent agenda, Mr. McGlumphy moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Leary and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Council President Hogan absent).
Walter J. Ellis Appeal #2008-005
Location: 514 N. DuPont Hwy. - ED 05-068.13-01-42.00
Original Recommended
Land $163,500 $109,000
Improvements $ 79,600 $ 83,000
Value $243,100 $192,000
Staff recommended that the stipulated value be approved.
Background and Analysis
Mr. Ellis filed an appeal with the Assessor’s office, because the value for the above property had been valued to high based on sales of related properties.
Mr. Ellis provided the Assessor’s Office with the requested Appraisal Report, which was forwarded to Tyler Technologies.
After reading the appraisal and looking into the matter the Assessor’s Office realized that the Income Approach should have been applied to the property, which was confirmed by Tyler Technologies analysis. After doing so, the property value dropped to $192,000 which was accepted by the appellant.
Mr. Ruane wanted to state, for the record, that there was an analysis by Eugenia Flynn of Tyler Technologies, which substantiates that the assessment by the Assessor is correct.
The committee recommended acceptance of the stipulated value.
By consent agenda, Mr. McGlumphy moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Leary and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Council President Hogan absent).
By consent agenda, Mr. McGlumphy moved for acceptance of the Tax Appeals Committee Report, seconded by Mr. Leary and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Council President Hogan absent).
LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE REPORT - AUGUST 25, 2008
The Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee met on August 25, 2008 with Chairman Slavin presiding.
Independent Accountant Report (Haggerty & Haggerty)
During their meeting of February 25, 2008, members were provided the Independent Accountant’s Report on Applying Agreed Upon Procedures pertaining to the Dover Fire Department prepared by Haggerty & Haggerty, Certified Public Accountants and Management Consultants, and accepted the Report, with the understanding that the Fire Chief and Finance Director will report back to the committee within two (2) to four (4) weeks with a set of procedures that will be beneficial to all parties involved.
Mrs. Mitchell, Controller/Treasurer, advised members that several meetings were held and the agreed upon procedures were reviewed and agreed upon with the City Manager. She provided members with several solutions developed by staff members of the Finance Department, Central Services, and the Fire Department. At the request of the Fire Chief, Council President Hogan and Councilman Slavin met with the Fire Chief and the President of Robbins Hose Company to discuss this issue on July 3, 2008.
Staff recommended acceptance of the agreed upon procedures.
As a result of some discrepancies, Council President Hogan advised members that he, along with the City Manager, met with several members of the Fire Department to review the procedures. All participants agreed upon procedures 2, 5, 6, 7, and 8. He stated that there were unresolved issues with 1, 3, and 4 and that the Fire Department submitted alternative recommendations. Council President Hogan noted that item #3 of the Fire Department’s Recommendations should not have been listed since it was agreed upon. He also noted that an alternative Action Form, dated August 25, 2008, has been submitted by the Fire Department.
At the request of Mr. Slavin, Fire Chief Carey clarified that the Fire Department will only agree to Option 1 of the Independent Accountant’s Report on Applying Agreed-Upon Procedures by Haggerty & Haggerty.
Responding to Mrs. Williams, Fire Chief Carey indicated that if Option 1 of the Independent Accountant’s Report is rejected, the membership of the Fire Department has requested to be provided a letter explaining their reasons.
Referring to Option 1, Dr. Jones questioned what the Fire Department views as the City’s role in terms of accountability for the funds once they are allocated by the City. Fire Chief Carey declined to respond, explaining that he was directed to bring Option 1 to members and request a response if it were rejected.
Mr. Ruane noted that the Action Form provided by the Controller/Treasurer indicates that staff’s recommendation is a result of several meetings with the Fire Chief and consists of agreed upon procedures. Responding, Mr. Slavin explained that when the meetings were held, each representative was attempting to come to an agreement for those they serve. He reminded members that the Fire Chief is elected by the membership of the Fire Department and that this membership does not concur with the agreed upon procedures and requested that the Fire Chief submit an alternative. He explained that the Fire Chief’s representation at the meetings was similar to that of Council President Hogan and himself. There was an agreement, in principle, between those that met; however, there was an understanding they would present the agreed upon procedures to those they represent.
Responding to Dr. Jones, Mr. Slavin suggested that the Fire Department would select their representatives to participate in the negotiations. Dr. Jones relayed concern that if a number of representatives of the Fire Department are not participants, the matter will not be resolved.
Chief Carey suggested that Council write a letter to the Fire Department explaining why Option 1 was rejected. Once received, the Fire Department would then make any necessary decisions.
Mrs. Williams questioned why members would reject Option 1 when it is no different than the Federal Government granting money to the City. Although she does not feel that it is the City’s responsibility to micro-manage the Fire Department, she felt that it is the City’s responsibility to assure that the monies provided to them are spent as dutifully as intended.
The committee recommended that negotiations continue between the Fire Department, including the Controller/Treasurer and Council, and that those members of Council participating be appointed by Council at their next meeting and be given authority to represent Council for a report back at a future meeting of the committee for a final resolution of this matter.
Mrs. Williams moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Slavin.
Mr. Slavin moved to suspend the rules to allow the Fire Department members the opportunity to speak, seconded by Mrs. Williams. The motion failed by a roll call vote of four (4) no, four (4) yes (Mrs. Russell, Mr. Slavin, Mr. McGiffin, and Mrs. Williams) and one (1) absent (Council President Hogan).
Since there have already been agreed upon procedures that occurred during previous negotiations, Mr. Ruane explained his opposition to the continuation of any further negotiations and indicated his support for the list of eight (8) procedures approved during the previous negotiations.
On a call for the question the motion for approval of the committee’s recommendation that negotiations continue between the Fire Department, including the Controller/Treasurer and Council, and that those members of Council participating be appointed by Council at their next meeting and be given authority to represent Council for a report back at a future meeting of the committee for a final resolution of this matter was carried by a roll call vote of five (5) yes, three (3) no (Mr. Leary, Mr. McGlumphy, and Mr. Ruane), and one (1) absent (Council President Hogan).
Vice President Salters indicated that the appointment of Council Members to review the Haggerty & Haggerty recommendations will take place during the latter part of the meeting.
The committee recommended that the negotiating principles are the eight (8) points found on the action form submitted by the Controller/Treasurer.
Mr. Slavin moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation that the negotiating principles are the eight (8) points found on the action form submitted by the Controller/Treasurer (Exhibit #1). The motion was seconded by Mr. McGiffin and carried by a roll call vote of six (6) yes, two (2) no (Mr. Leary and Mr. McGlumphy), and one (1) absent (Council President Hogan).
The committee recommended denial of Option #1 of the Independent Accountant's Report.
Mr. McGlumphy moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation for denial of Option #1 of the Independent Accountant’s Report, seconded by Mr. Leary. The motion failed by a roll call vote of five (5) no, three (3) yes (Mr. Leary, Mr. McGlumphy, and Mr. Ruane), and one (1) absent (Council President Hogan).
Mr. Slavin moved that Option #1, to provide monthly payments to the fire department, be added as another point that can be considered during the negotiations, seconded by Mrs. Williams.
Responding to Mr. McGlumphy, Mr. Slavin clarified that the intent of the motion is to simply allow for all options to be open for discussion. He concurred that the addition of Option #1 would provide for nine (9) principles in play. He explained an understanding that Option #1 has a binary quality associated, whereby, if adopted, the other eight (8) points would be eliminated. However, if Option #1 is not adopted, the remaining eight (8) points would each be negotiated.
The motion that Option #1, to provide monthly payments to the fire department, be added as another point that can be considered during the negotiations was carried by a roll call vote of five (5) yes, three (3) no (Mr. Leary, Mr. McGlumphy, and Mr. Ruane), and one (1) absent (Council President Hogan).
Noting several firefighters in attendance, Fire Chief Carey requested the opportunity to discuss concerns regarding the recommendations. Vice President Salters explained that since the motion to suspend the rules failed, no further discussion would be permitted regarding this matter.
Mr. Slavin moved for a brief recess, seconded by Mrs. Williams and carried by a roll call vote of five (5) yes, three (3) no (Mr. Leary, Mr. McGlumphy, and Mr. Ruane), and one (1) absent (Council President Hogan).
Meeting Recessed at 8:06 P.M.
Mrs. Williams moved to reconvene, seconded by Mr. Slavin and unanimously carried.
Meeting Reconvened at 8:14 P.M.
For clarification, Mr. Slavin stated that since the motion to suspend the rules failed, no public testimony by the fire department was permitted at that time; however, he stressed that this action does not reflect a decision of Council to cease discourse or that Council does not wish to hear the concerns of the fire department. He explained that the more appropriate venue for further discussions with the fire department would be during the negotiations. When this matter is brought back to Council, after the negotiations, Mr. Slavin relayed his hope that Council would allow for public testimony (by scheduling a public hearing or waiving the rules) and provide the fire department the opportunity to speak on the merits of the issue.
Scope of Review - Chapter 58, Human Relations, of the Dover Code
At the request of Council President Hogan, members were provided Chapter 58, Human Relations, of the Delaware Code, as well as correspondence dated January 16, 2007 from Council President Williams, correspondence dated February 8, 2007, December 11, 2007, and October 5, 2006 from Mr. Calvin Christopher, Chairman of the State Human Relations Commission (SHRC), and the City of Dover Human Relations Commission (DHRC) By-Laws for their review and recommendation regarding concerns addressed in the correspondence.
Mr. Slavin disclosed a potential conflict of interest, explaining that he may become an instructor at Delaware State University and serve in the department which is managed by Dr. Sam Hoff, who serves as the Chairman of the Dover Human Relations Commission. When this position has been finalized, he assured members that he would recuse himself from any discussion or voting on the matter.
Mr. Slavin suggested that members identify the scope of the committee’s review, perhaps to establish ground rules and boundaries and conduct the review. In reviewing the material, he suggested that members identify questions that should be further explored and provide Council with answers. He explained that members have been requested to review the scope of activities of the DHRC to ensure they are within the charge provided by City Council. He envisioned that the committee would present the questions and answers to City Council and not necessarily suggest any remedial actions, which would be determined by Council.
At the request of Mr. Salters, Mrs. Williams explained that, as Council President, she became concerned when the SHRC submitted complaints and concerns regarding the DHRC. She met with their executive director, members, and chairman. They discussed ideas that the SHRC felt would serve as a precursor to any action. It was felt that the DHRC had gone off mission whey they began reviewing complaints since that is the total purview of the SHRC. As Council President at the time, Mrs. Williams stated that she decided to delay any further appointments to the membership of the DHRC until the concerns were resolved. She stated that Mr. Christopher met with the DHRC and reported that the meeting was very difficult and felt that it was a disappointing experience; however, he would continue to attempt to provide training in order for the mission of the DHRC to be adhered. to. She explained that it was the opinion of the SHRC that the DHRC should be more positively directed in terms of creating events and activities to bring people together rather than serving as a judicial body that determines who is right and who is wrong.
After becoming Council President, Council President Hogan stated that he was made aware of the concerns and read the material to become familiar with the situation. It was his opinion that there are differences between the mission of the DHRC authorized by City Council and the DHRC Bylaws. He suggested the need for a review of the City Code and Bylaws for possible improvements. This suggestion was relayed to the DHRC and he stated his hope that the members would participate in this endeavor. Council President Hogan expressed his desire to make this a positive force to make this a commission that is viable and a positive source for the City. To do so, he suggested the need to examine several issues and indicated his feeling that the Bylaws of the DHRC seem to contradict the mission granted by City Council. He also advised members that the SHRC has suggested a change to the title of the DHRC, explaining that the State serves as the Human Relations Commission for the State of Delaware. Council President Hogan reiterated his feeling that a complete review is necessary for possible amendments in order for the DHRC to serve as a viable commission for the City of Dover. He noted that he has begun to make appointments to the DHRC.
Mr. Ruane stated that the Annual Reports of the DHRC provided to City Council have indicated positive actions, programs, public forums, etc. It was his opinion that this information provides a positive image of the DHRC and that it is difficult to document the reference to their acting as a judicial body. He felt that there needs to be a clear understanding of what the DHRC has accomplished, and that the scope should provide the DHRC with an opportunity to present, to City Council in a summary form, the steps that have been taken to meet their mandate, and clearly document the number of complaints that have been taken, how they were processed, which were referred to the SHRC in accordance with Section 58 and those that were not, if any. Also, he suggested that the scope should include an examination of what is the best method to make sure there is a variety of member to serve on the DHRC who meet the mandate of Section 58, noting that the method currently used is to interview potential members and submit a recommendation to City Council, which has been used on the basis of its understanding. The question would be to determine what would be the best method to be used to provide volunteers with the opportunity to be interviewed for those positions so that recommendations can be made to the Mayor and President of Council.
Mr. Ruane suggested that the scope would include the following: 1) method of selection of candidates for membership - what has it been and what it should be; and 2) what has the intake process been and what it should be. He felt that it should be a positive presentation and an opportunity to highlight what activities have been engaged in, what successes have been accomplished, and what some of the frustrations are, noting that some of the problems presented to the DHRC are not finalized.
Mr. Salters felt that the DHRC has served admirably and has acted responsibly. He suggested that any differences, such as the expenditure of funds by the DHRC and the manner in which appointments are made, can be resolved by respectful communications. He also suggested the possibility of an annual workshop between the DHRC and City Council in an effort to strengthen the DHRC.
Referring to the expenditure of funds for advertisements by the DHRC, Mr. DePrima advised members that there are several sources available to the City free of charge that would eliminate an unnecessary expense. It was his intent to write a letter to the Chairman of the DHRC making this suggestion.
Based on the committee’s discussion, Mr. Slavin submitted the following questions that require a response:
1)What is the stated mission of the DHRC and is it in alignment with the enabling legislation;
2)What is the history of accomplishments by the DHRC in those areas that are chartered and are there areas of activities that the DHRC participated in that are outside of the initial charter. If so, what are they, and what have their accomplishments been;
3)What is the best method to attract membership and achieve a balanced commission and what have the previous methods been to attract membership;
4)What is the intake process - what has it been, what should it be;
5)Do the bylaws of the DHRC contradict the Dover Code;
6)Does the very title of the DHRC cause confusion among the public with the SHRC;
7)Does the commission have the authority to remove members;
8)Review of the expenditure of funds.
Mrs. Williams suggested an additional question - has the DHRC successfully met its goal.
Dr. Hoff, Chairman of the DHRC, advised members that the DHRC is accountable and responsible to the City Council and that its membership consists of a diverse representation of the citizens of Dover. The DHRC has no concerns regarding the review of their performance; however, he felt it would be unusual, and perhaps inappropriate, for the committee to deal with problems outside of a regular and predictable review of every other appendage, committee, commission, etc. without one (1) of three (3) issues occurring, as follows: 1) Is there an allegation of inconsistent operation, such as the inconsistency between the bylaws and charter; 2) is there criticism of the effectiveness of the DHRC, which has diminished their performance, requiring the need for an inquiry; or 3) has there been a substantial change in the mission of the DHRC. To his knowledge, none of these issues have occurred. Therefore, although the City has the prerogative to conduct a review, Dr. Hoff indicated that it is extremely unusual and disappointing. He felt it was appalling that the disagreements were publicized, explaining that this did not result in a positive affect on the City.
Although there have been minor disagreements, Dr. Hoff indicated that they have been minor issues such as the reduction of the DHRC’s budget, elimination of City staff to serve as a liaison, etc. His main concern has been not having a full contingent of members appointed to the DHRC and any delay is unfortunate. Concurring with Mrs. Williams, Dr. Hoff reminded members that the DHRC was founded during a crisis; however, the DHRC needs to demonstrate its viability in a non-crisis atmosphere. The DHRC is not subordinate to the SHRC, which he felt is an important factor that needs to be expressed. He assured members that it is the desire of the DHRC to work with the committee and City Council to resolve any issues and looks forward to continued cooperation with the City.
Mr. Ruane noted that the committee successfully established a scope of review of the Human Relations Commission’s purpose and meaning and its accomplishments; however, after the meeting, members have learned that there is an interest from representatives of the State’s Human Relations Commission to make comments. He also noted that responses have been received from Dr. Hoff regarding some of the issues and that Council President Hogan, who is not present at this meeting, has serious interest in this matter. Therefore, he felt that the matter should be tabled.
Mr. Ruane moved to table the Scope of Review - Chapter 58, Human Relations, of the Dover Code, seconded by Mr. Leary and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Council President Hogan absent).
Mr. Slavin moved for acceptance of the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee Report, seconded by Mrs. Williams and unanimously carried.
SAFETY ADVISORY AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE REPORT - AUGUST 26, 2008
The Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee met on August 26, 2008 with Chairman Leary presiding.
Central Middle School Traffic Flow
When the Capital School District applied to the City for reconstruction of the gymnasium and renovation to the auditorium at Central Middle School, the initial site plan submitted showed all ingress and egress to the site of off Smith Street, north of the gymnasium building. At a public hearing before the Planning Commission on December 17, 2007, neighbors of the school expressed concerns about the proposed site plan, particularly as it related to providing accessible off-street parking and the proposed traffic flow showing all access to the new parking from Smith Street.
The Planning Commission tabled the application and the School District held meetings with residential neighbors of the school property to discuss options for parking layout and access. The School District proposed options for building/parking layout and site access to the Planning Staff and Public Services Manager. The option preferred by staff was rejected by the neighbors, and the School District brought to the Planning Commission in January the option that was ultimately approved and is being constructed. Representatives of the Murphy School expressed concern about the location of egress adjacent to their property.
The circulation pattern that was approved is represented in the site plan sheets. The plan allows for one-way ingress off of Smith Street with a drive way continuing east behind the school building, then turning south to allow for right turns onto Delaware Avenue. As approved, the entrance off of Smith Street includes a 24-foot wide drive aisle (which doubles as a fire lane), which narrows to 18 feet after it turns south behind the school building.
Mr. Slavin expressed concern that the proposed radius could not accommodate turning buses. Responding, Mr. Scott Koenig, Public Services Director, advised members that the design now has a long right-handed radius which has been tested in the turning templates. He also noted that there is a double stop: one as the bus leaves the school property and one at the end of the alley exiting onto Delaware or Kent Avenues to facilitate safe travel.
Mrs. Townshend, Director of Planning and Inspections, noted that, although the Murphy School believed that they owned the property, the City’s property records indicate that the right-of-way belongs to the City.
Mr. Slavin thanked Dr. Michael Thomas, Superintendent of the Capital School District, and Mr. Raymond Paylor, Capital School Board Member, for attending the meeting to address any questions or concerns. He noted that the job site has been well maintained and a number of the neighbors are pleased with how the project is being handled.
Dr. Thomas stated that they would continue to be sensitive to the needs of the neighbors during construction.
Presentation by Mayor Carey - Mayor's Meeting with Norfolk Southern Railroad
Mayor Carey advised members that he attended the Dover/Kent Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) - Norfolk Southern/Mayors Meeting held on July 15, 2008 at the Dover Police Department - Public Assembly Room.
Mayor Carey reviewed the minutes of the meeting and advised members that the purpose of the meeting was to discuss concerns of the railroad and the potential problems associated with the railroads close proximity to manufacturing facilities, the possibility of a leak, and the action that would be taken in the event of a leak. Mayor Carey stated that Norfolk Southern assured them that they meet all of the standards, they are doing everything that they should be doing, and that they would like to inventory the cars more often to determine which cars are empty and which are full. He stated that he addressed the issue of identification of the contents of the tank cars with a placard, which would provide the capability of immediately identifying the contents of a tank car and whether or not it is empty.
Members were advised that there was discussion of purchasing vacant land north of Dover in a less inhabited area for the storage of the cars in a fenced, secure area; however, the land they were considering is no longer available and they are not currently looking for another vacant storage area. He noted that they are trying to control the number of cars in the area and the length of time they are in the area.
Mayor Carey advised members that if there is a chemical or vapor leak, you can call ChemTrack and provide them with the number on the car and they will advise you of health hazzards and evacuation plans based on the contents of the car.