COUNCIL COMMITTEES
The Council Committees Meeting was held on August 11, 1997 at 6:30 p.m., with Council President Christiansen presiding. Members of Council present were Mr. Lambert, Mr. Pitts, Mr. Leary, Mr. Truitt, Mrs. Malone, Mr. Salters and Mr. Weller. Councilman Fenimore was absent.
AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS
Mr. Leary moved for approval of the agenda, seconded by Mrs. Malone and unanimously carried.
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE
The Parks and Recreation Committee met with Chairwoman Malone presiding. Members present were Councilmen Truitt and Weller and Mrs. Maxted. Mrs. Northshield was absent.
Dover Recreational Facilities Committee - Phase II Report
During the March 24, 1997 committee meeting, the Dover Recreational Facilities Committee (DRFC) presented their findings of the Phase I Report to the Parks and Recreation Committee. City Council accepted the report and directed the DRFC to conduct the second phase of their report.
Mrs. GiGi Windley, Chairwoman of the DRFC, stated that the objective of Phase II was to develop recommendations for type(s) of management facilities and location(s) that would best optimize our recreational structure and meet the needs of the community as identified in Phase I. In response to the Phase I report, the DRFC, in cooperation with the Department of Parks and Recreation, immediately conducted a needs assessment of existing parks and facilities. Committee members personally visited all of the facilities and listed the following areas for improvement:
∙ Signage should be uniformly placed at all sites
∙ Playground equipment should be painted at all sites
∙ Picnic pavilions should be constructed on selected sites
∙ Picnic tables and park benches should be placed at selected sites
Mrs. Windley reported that the suggested improvements were made to our current facilities and everyone agrees that the improvements are an asset to the facilities. They recommend an ongoing review process be developed to ensure (1) the community’s recreational needs are aligned with programs and facilities and (2) funding should be set aside accordingly to continuously maintain and upgrade existing facilities. It is recommended that a study group be assembled to review this issue.
The Committee went through a process of reviewing what cities of comparable size to Dover have done to meet the recreational needs of their residents. They visited Greenbelt and Laurel, Maryland to tour two existing community recreation complexes to get a first hand understanding of the types of programs and amenities that are typically included in the design of a recreation facility.
The Greenbelt Aquatic and Fitness Center, located in Greenbelt, Maryland with a resident population of 21,000 persons, has been in operation for five years. The Center provides recreational opportunities to a population of approximately 60,000 and averages 200,000 visitors per year. It includes a year-round, full-service aquatics center with Olympic size indoor pool, handicapped accessible hydrotherapy pool, large whirlpools, a fitness center which offers free-weight and mechanical resistance training, aerobic exercise equipment, multi-purpose activity rooms, and men and women locker rooms. The aquatic and fitness center has an annual operating budget of about $650,000, 88% ($572,000) of which is generated through fees for membership, class dues, and day use fees. This facility is adjacent to the community outdoor swimming complex, a youth center, and a community center which also houses a Town Museum. The Community Center involves an annual operating budget of $500,000, 60% ($300,000) of which is generated by user fees for various programs and events.
The Fairland Aquatics Center, located in Laurel, Maryland involves an annual operating budget of $650,000. It features a 50 meter pool with portable bulkhead dividers and moveable floor to vary the depth of the water. With the dividers in place, the pool becomes three separate pools which can be used for various purposes simultaneously. It includes bleacher seating, heated whirlpool, outdoor sun deck and complete locker facilities with massage therapy available. It also offers a wide array of hydrotherapy services, martial arts classes, gymnastics training, weight lifting and aerobic training, indoor and outdoor tennis, and on-site baby sitting service. Most of the services are provided through contractual arrangements with third party providers.
On the same property is the newly completed ice skating arena which was built and is operated by a third party. This facility is a full service skating center which includes two ice rinks, pro-shops, fitness center, snack bar and game room. The arcade-like game room offers private party rooms for special gatherings such as birthday parties and group outings.
Mrs. Windley stated that the Committee reached several conclusions, as follows:
∙ Centralized Management - the centralized management of staff and scheduling activities optimizes coordination, training, inter/intra staff communications and oversight of activities. Substantial efficiency and lower costs were realized.
∙ Operating Concept - day/night capability, as well as year round availability, is essential. Communities consist of a great variety of people with differing needs. It was found that senior citizens tend to utilize such facilities during the early part of the day. Shift workers tend to use a variety of day/night hours. Youth use afternoon, after-school and weekend time periods. Parents use after dinner hours. It was concluded that the committee should be looking at a 7-day week operation with very extended operating hours.
∙ Programming Options Needed - Dover has almost no indoor temperature controlled facility which can house indoor recreational activities. Rain, inclement weather (winter - summer) plays havoc with even the best recreational plans. Active and passive activities under our present posture are near impossible to coordinate successfully and major civic activities, such as Old Dover Days, are at high-risk.
∙ Location - A centralized location in terms of population distribution was a common characteristic of centers visited or researched. Convenience to low cost transportation was a key, as was buffer space of sufficient distance to obviate complaints of noise, night lighting and parking congestion from neighboring homes and businesses. A balanced mixture of wooded areas and large level-ground areas was common to all. Nature walk-ways, jogging paths, and bike paths were well used when properly designed.
After the Committee reviewed Dover’s unmet needs and investigated the manner in which other communities of comparable size had met these needs, it was their recommendation that a Dover Community Recreation Center be created. Such a Center should meet the following criteria:
∙ Multi-Functional - must be able to meet the needs of a variety of people with differing needs.
∙ Expandable - The Center would be so designed, engineered and configured to accommodate future recreational trends and growth.
∙ Affordability - The Center must be of such configuration and cost as to be acceptable and reasonable to the Dover community. It must add a new component to the services offered which will add substantially to the quality of life and the health of our citizens.
∙ Accessible - The Center should be located near its user population. It must be accessible by all forms of transportation and provide adequate internal road networks and parking to make getting there quick, safe and convenient. There must be drop off zones, service by mass transit, adequate motor coach parking and maneuvering room, and handicap and special population provisions.
When determining where such a Center should be located, the Committee examined future population distribution as it relates to industry, housing and recreational areas. The principle criterion is to find a land mass area located in such a fashion that while sufficient in size, would concurrently be located such that it could serve the current and anticipated future population distribution of Dover. The Committee created a detailed checklist of desirable characteristics, which are outlined in their report.
After taking into consideration all of the above, the Committee unanimously concluded that Schutte Park ideally meets the strictest of criteria for the creation of a Dover Community Recreation Center. Should City Council wish the Dover Recreational Facilities Committee to proceed further, it is recommended that funding be provided to have prepared a set of conceptual drawings and floor plans. This would assist greatly in the task of informing the general public. Although the Committee believes that a supportive community consensus is developing, there has been no formal sampling or informational effort undertaken. The tools for such an effort will not be in-hand until the completion of Phase III, and it was noted that City Council is still in the deliberative process of weighing the solution proposed.
The Dover Recreational Facilities Committee requested that they be authorized to proceed with Phase III, which will include an RFP for necessary conceptual architectural and engineering design work, at an estimated cost of $60,000.
If such a facility is built at Schutte Park, Mrs. Maxted asked if it would take land area away from the current soccer fields and if so, if there is additional land available for expansion of the soccer fields. Mrs. Windley stated that an architect and engineer would be able to assist the Committee with questions of this nature. Mrs. Malone stated that the DRFC did identify a need for additional outdoor property and this must be taken into consideration since we are currently utilizing all available fields.
Mr. Truitt noted that other ongoing projects, such as a proposal for a civic center, may have an effect on the plans of the DRFC and asked if they are coordinating their efforts with other local organizations. Mrs. Windley stated that they have taken into consideration the ongoing efforts of others. Regarding the Civic Center, she stated that they are looking at two entirely different types of facilities. She stated that it is imperative that they not duplicate efforts of other facilities so they are working very closely with institutions such as Delaware Technical and Community College (since they are currently planning to expand their outdoor recreational facilities) and the YMCA.
Mr. Lambert asked if the other facilities permitted users from outside the City to utilize the facilities. Mrs. Windley stated that she believes that others are permitted to use the facilities, but must pay a higher user fee. Referring to the need for accessibility and public transportation, Mr. Lambert asked if any progress has been made on a proposal for a bike path from Schutte Park to south Dover. He also suggested that we begin the process of working with Conrail on a crossover for the tracks on North Street. Mr. O’Connor stated that the City is already working on this, stating that grant monies are available to tie into the Greenway project and we are exploring different options for crossing the railroad tracks. One option that is being considered is to utilize the existing tunnel. This is an on-going process that will be pursued by City staff.
Mr. Salters stated that we do not have a very good public transportation system and asked if the Committee has investigated the possibility of increasing hours and routes of the State’s bus services. Mrs. Windley stated that typically the demand factor determines additional hours and routes. Mr. O’Connor stated that there is an existing route that goes to the industrial sites and that an additional stop could easily be added for Schutte Park.
Referring to park improvements to existing parks, Mr. Truitt asked why improvements were not made to Williams Park. Mr. O’Connor stated that during meetings with the Whiteoak Farms Civic Association, he was told that the residents did not want improvements that would invite additional use of the Park. Should the wishes of the community change, Mr. O’Connor stated that the City would be willing to look into improvements. Mr. Truitt stated his opinion that the wishes of only a few were heard at the Civic Association meeting and relayed his opinion that there are some types of development that would be conducive to the neighborhood. Mrs. Malone suggested that Mr. Truitt work with the City Manager to set up a meeting for this topic to be discussed with the residents.
The members of the Parks and Recreation Committee, along with all members of City Council, commended the DRFC members on the report, recognizing that a considerable amount of time has been devoted by them for this project.
Mrs. Malone moved to recommend acceptance the Phase II Report of the Dover Recreational Facilities Committee and to authorize them to continue with Phase III; stipulating that the City provide adequate funding for the conceptual architectural and engineering design work, as requested the DRFC. The motion was seconded by Mr. Weller and unanimously carried.
Meeting Adjourned at 7:15 P.M.
LEGISLATIVE AND FINANCE COMMITTEE
The Legislative and Finance Committee met with Chairman Salters presiding. Members present were Councilman Leary, Councilwoman Malone and Mr. Merritt. Mr. Schaefer was absent. Mr. Lambert served as a member in Mr. Schaefer’s absence.
Bond Bill Appropriation - Use of One Time Aid Allocation
The City of Dover was granted a total of $447,248 through the Bond Bill Act for One Time Aid, of which $209,821 was specifically designated for Police Radios, with a total of $237,427 remaining for any general capital item. Mrs. Malone requested that the remaining funds be set aside in the Parkland Reserve Fund to be used specifically to adequately address the recreational goals already identified by the citizens of our community, through their participation in the development of the Comprehensive Plan and by the Dover Recreational Facilities Committee. This would also provide funds for the request from the Dover Recreational Facilities Committee for conceptual architectural and engineering design work.
Mrs. Malone distributed information on the history of the Parkland Reserve Fund, noting that the Parkland Account Details Report for the period March 11, 1994 through June 30, 1997, shows a balance brought forward of $269,806. An additional $38,411 was added to this account from various developers as a payment in lieu of parkland during this same period of time. Funds from this account have been used for the continued development of Schutte Park and the current fund balance is only $82,819. City Council recently approved an expenditure for fencing which will come from this account and it is anticipated that lighting will be needed as well.
Mrs. Malone reminded Council members that most of our programs are supported by user fees. Funds for recreational programs are hard to acquire and she suggested that Council set aside all unfunded revenues towards development of a Community Recreation Center.
Mr. Leary asked if Mrs. Malone is suggesting that the remaining bond bill appropriation funds ($237,427) be used to replenish, in part, the funds that have been expended from the Parkland Reserve Fund. Mrs. Malone agreed that this basically explains her proposal.
Mr. Lambert stated that he supports the attempts of Mrs. Malone and he fully supports adequate funding necessary to proceed with Phase III of the DRFC. However, he does not support the concept of targeting revenues to a specific project. He reminded members that although Council has done this in the past, the Finance Director suggested that revenues go into the General Fund to be used as needed and/or to offset a beginning balance in future years. He stated that if City Council determines that it wishes to build a recreation center, it will require a referendum in order to acquire the necessary funds. In the interim, he felt that all revenues should go into the General Fund where they can be used in the best manner identified by Council.
Although the Finance Director may have requested that revenue not be specified for particular projects, Mrs. Malone reminded Council that this has been done in the past. She reminded Council of revenues that came in for fish ladders at Silver Lake that was directed for use at Robbins Hose Station #2. This obviously was a revenue that was directed towards parks and recreation but she voiced no objections at the time to another use since monies were needed for Robbins Hose Station #2.
Mr. Salters voiced concern with placing the monies in the Parkland Reserve Fund, reminding Council that in accordance with the rules of the fund, Council would not have the authority to move the funds in the event a more pressing need should arise. He also voiced concern with the City’s declining beginning balance for the next two fiscal years.
Mr. Leary stated that although current predictions may show a declining beginning balance, we need to keep this information in perspective. We are experiencing a fairly good economic environment and just last month, the City experienced a striking increase in electricity revenues due to the dry, hot month of July and it seems that August will be the same. He stated his opinion that he did not find it unreasonable to give thought to replenishing a fund that has been depleted over the last few years.
Mrs. Malone agreed that if Council determines it wishes to build a recreation center, a referendum will be necessary. However, she stated that the more money that we save towards this project, the less tax burden it would have on our citizens.
Mrs. Malone moved to recommend that the $237,427 from the Bond Bill Appropriation - Use of One Time Aid Allocation, be placed in the Parkland Reserve Fund, seconded by Mr. Leary. The motion was approved by a vote of three (3) yes, two (2) no (Mr. Lambert and Mr. Salters).
Proposed Budget Revisions #1
To meet the changing needs of the City’s operations and to update revenues, the City revises the budget three or four times a year. The Finance Director/Treasurer submitted the first proposed budget revisions to the 1997/98 budget (Attachment #1A and 1B). It is noted that the proposed budget revisions contain two options on use of funds ($237,427) from the Bond Bill Appropriation - Use of One Time Aid Allocation. The chosen option will be determined at the Council Meeting of August 25, 1997.
Mr. O’Connor stated that many of the proposed revisions are the result of projects that were not complete at the end of the last fiscal year. Therefore, the monies were re-budgeted into the current fiscal year budget.
Mr. Leary moved to recommend acceptance of the proposed revisions as recommended by City staff. The motion was seconded by Mr. Salters and unanimously carried.
Meeting Adjourned at 7:50 P.M.
UTILITY COMMITTEE
The Utility Committee met with Chairman Lambert presiding. Members present were Councilmen Pitts and Weller and Mr. Carey and Mr. Kramedas. (Due to Mr. Fenimore’s absence, Mr. Weller served as a replacement member.)
Wood Pole Inspection/Treatment
As part of our routine maintenance program for our overhead electric system, we will be contracting with a vendor to inspect and treat all of our wood poles. The industry standard for this type of project dictates that this should be done every ten (10) years. There are nine (9) categories of inspections and treatments that may be required and this will depend on the field circumstances and the type of decay found within each pole. Some poles will need more than one type of treatment if internal decay/damage is found during the inspection.
Mr. O’Connor explained that the City has been trying to accomplish the task under an existing contract with other firms and with our own employees. We believe that the job will be more successful if it is contracted to a private company. There is a two year extension agreement, with a 2% increase in 1998 and 2.5% increase in 1999. If we find that the work is being performed to our satisfaction, Mr. O’Connor stated that he would like to be authorized to exercise the extension options.
Mr. Lambert reminded members of the ice storm experienced a few years ago which demonstrated the need for properly maintained poles.
Mr. Kramedas asked if the telephone company or the cable company share in the maintenance costs of the poles, since they share their use. Mr. O’Connor stated that approximately one-third of the poles are owned by the telephone company and they pay for maintenance to those poles as well as a pole fee for use of the City’s poles. Although they do not specifically pay for use of the poles, the cable company pays a franchise fee to the City of Dover and pays a pole fee for use of our poles that are outside the City limits (but within our utility territory).
Mr. Carey moved to recommend that Utility Pole Technologies be issued a purchase order in an amount not to exceed $65,827.80 to perform various methods, as required, to complete inspection and treatment of all of our wood poles, noting that the bid provides a two year extension with a 2% increase in 1998 and 2.5% increase in 1999. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lambert and unanimously carried.
Mr. Salters moved to adjourn, seconded by Mr. Leary and unanimously carried.
Meeting Adjourned at 7:55 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Robin R. Christiansen
Council President
RRC/DJB