REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
The Regular Council Meeting was held on November 23, 2009 at 7:31 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 Christiansen, 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 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. McGlumphy moved for approval of the agenda as presented, seconded by Mrs. Russell.
Responding to Mr. Leary regarding item #8, Reconsideration of Proposed Ordinances adopted November 9, 2009, Council President Williams stated that this matter was being presented to Council at the request of a member of Council. She explained that during the initial vote, this member had indicated that his vote was reflective of only one of the ordinances and that at the time, it was not realized that the vote was for all three (3) ordinances. In accordance with the City Solicitor, she advised members that the matter is being presented for the purpose of allowing members to vote on the ordinances separately and that there will be no discussion permitted.
City Solicitor Rodriguez reiterated that the motion made November 9, 2009 was passed and properly voted on at that time. Since it was explained that the motion included all three (3) ordinances, he stated that if there were any objections, they should have been made at that time. Concurring with Mr. Leary, he confirmed that in the consideration of agenda item #8, there should be no discussion regarding the merits of the ordinances and that the item is to allow for the reconfiguring of a member’s voting record only.
The motion for approval of the agenda, as presented, was unanimously carried.
Mr. McGlumphy requested that item #6G,Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee Report - Review of Draft Memorandum of Understanding for the Kent County Aeropark, 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.
ADOPTION OF MINUTES - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2009
The Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of November 9, 2009 were unanimously approved by motion of Mr. McGlumphy, seconded by Mr. Leary and bore the written approval of Mayor Carey.
PRESENTATIONS BY MAYOR CARLETON E. CAREY, SR. - MAYOR’S PRAYER BREAKFAST CONTRIBUTIONS
Mayor Carey reminded members that each year, proceeds from the Mayor’s Prayer Breakfast are donated to organizations and groups that are in need of additional funds during the year. This year, he stated that there is a total of $2,500 in proceeds and presented checks, each in the amount of $500, as follows: 1) Daniel Simpson of Del Tech Terry Campus (for scholarship); 2) representatives of the Dover Interfaith Mission; 3) Councilman Salters of Inner City Cultural League; 4) Kate Lyons of Modern Maturity Center Meals on Wheels Program; and 5) Del Failing and Crystal Allen-Horne of People’s Place/Whatcoat Social Services Agency.
Mayor Carey thanked the Sheraton Inn, those involved with the event, and especially those who attended, noting that without the attendance, he would not have the opportunity to make the donations.
Representatives of the Dover Interfaith Mission for Housing presented Mayor Carey and the City of Dover a Certificate of Appreciation for their consistent involvement and valued contributions to Dover Interfaith Mission for Housing.
PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED RESOLUTION APPROVING STREET ABANDONMENT - PORTION OF GALAXY DRIVE
A public hearing was duly advertised for this time and place to consider abandonment of a 600 foot unimproved portion of Galaxy Drive lying between Lot 12 and Lot 22 in the Kent County Aeropark.
Mr. DePrima, City Manager, explained that the proposed abandonment is for a “paper street” - a street that was platted but never constructed. He reminded members that the street abandonment was considered by the Utility Committee during their meeting of October 26, 2009 and it was determined that the abandonment would not impact the service of utilities to the remaining lots in the Aeropark. The Planning Commission and Utility Committee recommended approval of the requested abandonment, stipulating that utility easements be reserved for the City.
Council President Williams declared the public hearing open.
Mrs. Townshend, Director of Planning and Inspections, advised members that an email was received earlier today from Mr. Dan Wolfensberger on behalf of the Aeropark Authority requesting that the matter be tabled to allow the opportunity to work out issues with a neighboring property owner who has objected to the abandonment. She stated that the Aeropark Authority would like to resolve the objections before Council takes final action on this matter.
Council President Williams declared the public hearing closed.
Mr. Hogan moved to table the request to abandon a 600 foot unimproved portion of Galaxy Drive lying between Lot 12 and Lot 22 in the Kent County Aeropark, seconded by Mr. Leary.
Responding to Mr. Ruane, Mr. DePrima stated his understanding is that an adjacent property owner (Lot 21) had planned to attend the public hearing; however, they were contacted by the Aeropark Authority and were requested to discuss the matter in an attempt to resolve the issue so that there would not be a protest against the abandonment. As a result of that conversation, Mr. DePrima stated that the protesting party chose not to come to the public hearing since they were under the impression that the City would be tabling the matter and the applicant notified the City of their request for the matter to be tabled.
The motion tabling the request to abandon a 600 foot unimproved portion of Galaxy Drive, lying between Lot 12 and Lot 22 in the Kent County Aeropark, was carried by a roll call vote or five (5) yes, and four (4) no (Mrs. Russell, Mr. McGlumphy, Mr. Salters, and Mr. Ruane).
FINAL READING - PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2009-22 - COMPREHENSIVE REZONING PROJECT 2009 - AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF DOVER BY CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATIONS TO CONFORM WITH THE 2008 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Council President Williams reminded members that a Public Hearing was held on November 2, 2009 to consider approval of proposed Ordinance #2009-22 - Comprehensive Rezoning Project 2009, which would amend the zoning ordinance and zoning map of the City of Dover by changing the zoning designations to conform with the 2008 Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. Salters moved that the final reading of the proposed zoning text amendment be acknowledged by title only, seconded by Mr. McGiffin and unanimously carried. (The First Reading of this ordinance was accomplished during the Council Meeting of September 14, 2009).
Mrs. Townshend, Director of Planning and Inspections, stated that the proposed ordinance would adopt a new zoning map that would bring the zoning map in conformance with the 2008 Comprehensive Plan, as required by Delaware Code. She assured members that the recommended changes that were made by Council, during the public hearing held on November 2, 2009, have been incorporated into the proposed ordinance.
Mr. McGiffin moved for the adoption proposed Ordinance #2009-22, seconded by Mr. Salters and, by a unanimous roll call vote, Council adopted Ordinance #2009-22, as follows:
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF DOVER BY CHANGING ZONING DESIGNATIONS TO CONFORM WITH THE 2008 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
WHEREAS, the City of Dover has enacted a zoning ordinance regulating the use of property within the limits of the City of Dover; and
WHEREAS, Delaware Code, Title 22, Chapter 3 Municipal Zoning Regulations, Section 303, Purpose of Regulations, states that zoning regulations shall be made in accordance with a Comprehensive Plan and designed to lessen congestion in the streets, to secure safety from fire, panic and other dangers, to provide health, general welfare, adequate light and air, to prevent the overcrowding of land, to avoid undue concentration of population, and to facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewage, schools, parks, and other public requirements; and
WHEREAS, Delaware Code, Title 22, Chapter 7 Planning Commission, Section 702 (c) Comprehensive Development Plan, states that the Comprehensive Plan shall be the basis for the development of zoning regulations and that upon adoption of the Comprehensive Development Plan, the official zoning map shall be amended to rezone all lands within the municipality in accordance with the uses of land provided for in the Comprehensive Development Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City of Dover adopted the City of Dover 2008 Comprehensive Plan on February 9, 2009; and
WHEREAS, the City of Dover has prepared a Comprehensive Rezoning Map 2009 showing recommendations to change zones for an identified series of properties so that the City of Dover Zoning Map is in accordance with the adopted 2008 Comprehensive Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET:
1.That from and after the passage and approval of this ordinance the Zoning Map and Zoning Ordinance of the City of Dover is amended by changing the zoning designations of specific properties to conform with the Zoning Map changes presented to City Council on November 23, 2009 as depicted on the map and summary table entitled "City of Dover Comprehensive Rezoning Project 2009."
ADOPTED: NOVEMBER 23, 2009
FINAL READING - PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2009-21 - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS - AMENDING THE 2008 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BY REPLACING TABLE 12-1 LAND USE AND ZONING MATRIX AND MAP 12-1: LAND DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Council President Williams reminded members that a Public Hearing was held on November 2, 2009 to consider approval of proposed Ordinance #2009-21 - Comprehensive Plan Amendments, which would amend the 2008 Comprehensive Plan by replacing Table 12-1 Land Use and Zoning Matrix and Map 12-1: Land Development Plan.
Mr. Salters moved that the final reading of the proposed zoning text amendment be acknowledged by title only, seconded by Mr. Hogan and unanimously carried. (The First Reading of this ordinance was accomplished during the Council Meeting of September 14, 2009).
Planner's Review
Mrs. Townshend, Director of Planning and Inspections, stated that the proposed ordinance would adopt amendments to the 2008 Comprehensive Plan that are technical corrections to Table 12-1, Land Use and Zoning Matrix, and Map 12-1, Land Development Plan. These technical corrections are being made in concert with the 2009 Comprehensive Rezoning Project. She assured members that the recommended changes that were made by Council, during the public hearing held on November 2, 2009, have been incorporated into the proposed ordinance.
Mr. Hogan moved for the adoption proposed Ordinance #2009-21, seconded by Mr. Leary and, by a unanimous roll call vote, Council adopted Ordinance #2009-21, as follows:
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2008 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BY REPLACING TABLE 12-1: LAND USE AND ZONING MATRIX AND MAP 12-1: LAND DEVELOPMENT PLAN
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Dover, on February 9, 2009, adopted the 2008 Comprehensive Plan pursuant to Title 22, Section 702 of the Delaware Code; and
WHEREAS, the Honorable Jack Markell, Governor of the State of Delaware, certified the 2008 Comprehensive Plan on April 24, 2009; and
WHEREAS, Title 22, Section 702 of the Delaware Code requires that the City rezone properties in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Staff has reviewed the Land Development Plan Map (Map 12-1), along with the Zoning Map, and during this review has identified necessary corrections to the Land Development Plan Map and Table 12-1, Land Use and Zoning Matrix, of the 2008 Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 20, 2009, after which the Commission recommended in favor of the amendments to the Land Development Plan and the Land Use and Zoning Matrix.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED THAT the Mayor and Council of the City of Dover hereby amend Chapter 12, Land Development Plan, Table 12-1, Land Use and Zoning Matrix, and Map 1-1, Land Development Plan, of the 2008 Comprehensive Plan by replacing the referenced table and map with the Amended Table 12-1 and Map 12-1 presented to City Council on November 23, 2009.
ADOPTED: NOVEMBER 23, 2009
UTILITY COMMITTEE REPORT - NOVEMBER 9, 2009
The Utility Committee met on November 9, 2009 with Chairman Ruane presiding.
Dedication of Rights-of-Way and Infrastructure - Banning Street (Eden Hill)
Mr. DePrima, City Manager, advised members that the developer of the Eden Hill Medical District property, Eden Hill Medical Center, LLC, has requested that all public infrastructure improvements associated with the construction of Banning Street be dedicated to the City of Dover for permanent ownership and maintenance. He further advised that Eden Hill Medical Center, LLC, has constructed all of the improvements in accordance with City standards and specifications and that City staff inspected the public improvements and, as of this date, all work related to the public infrastructure has been completed by the developer. Mr. DePrima explained that a one (1) year maintenance agreement, letter of credit, and a release of liabilities has been submitted by the developer as part of the dedication process. In addition, as-built drawings of the right-of-way and infrastructure have been submitted to the City.
The committee recommended acceptance of the dedication of right-of-way and public infrastructure on Banning Street, including all referenced public improvements.
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.
Review of Utility Related CIP’s (Electric and Water/Wastewater)
Members were provided with the Public Works Utility and Grants, and the Electric Improvement and Extension Fund FY10 Project Tracking Reports (as of September 21, 2009).
Mr. Anthony DePrima, City Manager, briefly reviewed the reports and advised members that this report, which is similar to the report typically provided Council, would be submitted monthly to the Utility Committee. In the future, the report will include two additional columns titled “status” and “notes”.
Mr. DePrima advised members that the water projects were delayed due to the lengthy process involved in the State Revolving Fund Program.
Responding to Mr. Ruane, Mr. DePrima stated that Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT) is responsible for all infrastructure included in the Governors Avenue project, unless the City requests an upgrade. For example, if DelDOT was moving a 8" water line and the City wanted to change the line to 12", the City would be responsible for the difference.
In response to Mr. Ruane, Mr. DePrima stated that the water quality improvements on West and Pear Streets are almost complete.
Responding to Mr. McGlumphy, Mr. DePrima stated that the easements for the Route 13 Water Main are complete and the project is awaiting financing.
Responding to Mr. McGlumphy, Mr. DePrima stated that the CIP is a five (5) year program and the projects are listed by priority. He further noted that the goal is to budget realistically and have 90% of the CIP projects completed on time.
In response to Mrs. Williams, Mr. DePrima stated that once a project number is assigned, it is not changed regardless of the completion date or lender.
The committee recommended acceptance of the Utility Related CIP Report.
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.
Update - Green Energy Funding and Programming
On January 22, 2007, City Council adopted the Municipal Utilities’ Green Energy Fund Program Caps and Regulations. The program was developed by the Delaware Municipal Electric Corporation (DEMEC) and allows for the City to provide comparable grant limits and regulations to most other municipal and investor-owned utilities within Delaware.
Mr. DePrima, City Manager, advised members that the Sustainable Energy Utility (SEU) has rolled out programs such as residential reimbursement for appliances and a rebate program for commercial industrial lighting. He further explained that the SEU is working with companies that will perform energy efficiency studies for commercial and industrial users, and that the City will meet to see if they can take part in this program for City Hall.
Mr. DePrima advised members that the City of Dover has been verbally approved for $180,000 through the Green Energy Grant.
Responding to Mr. Ruane, Mr. DePrima stated that the street light replacement will take begin on Walker Road.
In response to Mrs. Williams, Mr. DePrima advised that the $9,593,500 allocated to the State Energy Office is for the use of the SEU to finance and subsidize programs such as the residential appliance and commercial lighting programs.
Referring to Dover’s Green Energy Grant Program Fund Summary, Mr. DePrima stated that, although this fund demonstrates a $467 deficit, it is performing relatively well when compared to other municipalities who have a lengthy or closed waiting list, or who have chosen to use the funds for municipal projects only. He further explained that the City of Dover might need to take precautionary measures to avoid similar circumstance. (City Clerk’s Office Note: The fund summary indicated a $465 deficit; however, the actual deficit was calculated at $467)
The committee recommended acceptance of the Update on Green Energy Funding and Programming Report.
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.
By consent agenda, Mr. McGlumphy moved for acceptance of the Utility Committee Report, seconded by Mr. Leary and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE REPORT - NOVEMBER 9, 2009
The Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee met on November 9, 2009 with Chairman McGlumphy presiding.
Review and Recommendation - Filling of Critical Positions
During their meeting of February 23, 2009, members recommended approval of the Hiring Freeze for Fiscal Year 2008-2009, but to allow the hiring of critical positions through the review and approval of the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee and City Council. It was suggested that there be a “standing” agenda item to consider the filling of critical positions and, if there are no positions to consider, the item could be removed.
Transmission and Distribution (T&D) Engineering Coordinator
Mr. Anthony DePrima, City Manager, reminded members that a request to recruit for a Systems Operator position was recommended for approval during the Committee meeting of August 24, 2009. Mr. DePrima explained that the current T & D Engineering Coordinator applied for and was selected for the Systems Operator position, creating the present vacancy. He noted that the incumbent of this position works in the Electric Department and coordinates the procurement, receipt, and issuance of materials for all Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) utility-wide and requests and receives materials for line crews for all maintenance, emergency, and non-CIP jobs. Mr. DePrima stated that if the position is not filled, responsibilities would be distributed among a number of different positions, which would critically affect the Department’s ability to complete projects.
Mr. Ron Lunt, Public Utilities Director, explained that the incumbent handles two (2) types of projects, outside projects, which involves bids, and stock jobs. For outside projects, responsibilities include researching projects, determining the types of items needed, identifying manufacturers, and conducting research to develop specification sheets. He noted that specification sheets may be forwarded to the Contract and Procurement Manager for bidding, or the incumbent may receive bids and present recommendation for awards to the Public Utilities Director. When handling stock jobs, the T&D Engineering Coordinator must determine the materials to be used for a job, assign a project date, and arrange for all materials to be available for projects when needed.
In response to Mr. McGlumphy, Mr. Peter Gregg, Contract and Procurement Manager, stated that this position does not duplicate his own job duties. He explained that this position requires a utility background and functional expertise since the incumbent must write specifications for specialized equipment and evaluate bids for water and electrical system projects. He noted that the individual selected will also have authority to make purchases up to the $25,000 threshold ($200,000 for projects) which is delegated to the Utility and Police Departments in the City’s purchasing policy.
The committee recommended that staff be granted permission to recruit for the position of Transmission and Distribution (T&D) Engineering Coordinator, as requested.
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.
Storekeeper/Buyer
Mr. DePrima reviewed a request to recruit for a Storekeeper/Buyer. He stated that the request is to recruit either a Storekeeper/Buyer I or II, noting that if an in-house candidate is promoted into the existing Storekeeper/Buyer II vacancy, a Level I vacancy would be created. Mr. DePrima explained that the primary functions of this warehouse position are to manage stock, monitor inventory, and work at the warehouse counter. He noted that there are three (3) Storekeeper/Buyer positions currently; one (1) has been vacant for some time and another employee is retiring. If this position remains vacant, it would create a 66% reduction in warehouse staffing.
The committee recommended that staff be granted permission to recruit for the position of Storekeeper/Buyer I or II, as requested.
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.
Certified Police Officer
Chief Jeffrey Horvath explained that the prospective retirement of Major Raymond Taraila on November 20, 2009 will create a new vacancy and will reduce the police force to 91 officers, from an authorized strength of 93. He noted that the 91st officer is currently in the Academy and is funded by a Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) grant that was approved by Council on September 14, 2009. Filling this position would allow the Police Department to maintain 91 officers on duty, which is necessary for the City to remain compliant with the COPS grant. He stated his belief that every police officer position is critical in providing safety for the citizens of Dover.
The committee recommended that staff be granted permission to recruit for the position of Certified Police Officer as requested.
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.
In response to Mr. Ruane, Mr. DePrima stated that the positions being recruited for are vacancies that were created since the budget was implemented. He agreed to advise members if requests for filling critical positions affect those vacant positions that were built into the budget as savings.
In response to Mr. McGlumphy, Mr. DePrima stated that future requests to fill critical positions will include estimated salary and benefit information.
Letter of Support for "Communities Putting Prevention to Work" ARRA Funding
Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, stated that the State of Delaware Division of Public Health offered an opportunity to participate in a grant application to the U. S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Center for Disease Control. She explained that the Division of Public Health would be the grant recipient for this program, entitled “Communities Putting Prevention to Work”, and that it is possible that the City would be a sub-recipient if the grant was secured; Mrs. Townshend stated that if this occurs, grant policy procedures would be followed to position the City to receive the money. She noted that signing the Letter of Support would not be a financial commitment for the City and explained that the money would be spent on one-time expenses, such as crosswalk improvements or making parks more accessible to walkers and bicyclists, rather than long-term projects that the City would have to sustain.
In response to Mr. Salters, Mrs. Townshend noted that national and state health authorities are committed to making communities more walkable and bikeable as a means to improve public health. She also noted that there are a number of potential partners in this grant submission, including Kent and Sussex Counties. She indicated that when the amount of the grant award is determined, the City will come forward under the grant policy to receive it, and decisions will then be made as to how funds will be expended.
The committee recommended approval of the Letter of Support for the Division of Public Health’s “Communities Putting Prevention to Work” grant, as recommended by staff. Due to time constraints, this matter was considered by City Council during their meeting held on the same evening, November 9, 2009.
MAG Overview of Recommendations (Deferred by Committee on October 26, 2009 Due to Time Constraints)
Mr. Anthony DePrima, City Manager, reviewed a revised version of Exhibit #5, Performance Based Pay Policy for Non-Bargaining Employees, from the MAG study which he stated includes three new sections as follows:
II. Pay Plan Maintenance
“The Pay Plan will be updated yearly in the Annual Budget by the City Manager for City Council consideration and approval. The City Manager shall use the CPI-U [Consumer Price Index - All Urban Consumers] published in January (the prior year’s inflation rate) as the basis of annually increasing the Pay Plan, except when the CPI-U is less than zero, then no increase in the Pay Plan will be recommended. Every third year the City will retain the services of a professional labor market researcher to review the City’s Pay Plan and report whether it is satisfactory or in need of further adjustment. The annual increase in the Pay Plan shall not be considered a cost of living salary increase.”
Mr. DePrima indicated this provision will keep the pay plan current by “refreshing” it each year using the inflation rate, and every third year hiring a professional to examine it in more detail and make recommended changes. He noted that performing this incrementally will prevent the need to make large adjustments to the pay plan and keep starting salaries current so that there will be no need to start new employees at the mid or upper levels of salary ranges. He noted that tying salary levels to the inflation rate is a simpler approach than making comparisons to salary levels used by various other entities such as Kent County, the State of Delaware, the Bureau of National Affairs, and the City of Newark, which was the approach used previously.
In response to Mr. Salters, Mr. DePrima emphasized that annually refreshing pay raises does not constitute a cost of living increase.
III. Annual Salary Appropriation for Non-Bargaining Salary Increases
“The City Manager shall place in the annual budget an overall appropriation for non-bargaining salary increases to be approved by City Council. The amount of the appropriation shall be equal to the total current year base salary for non-bargaining employees’ multiplied by the sum of the CPI-U published in January plus 1%. The additional 1% shall be used to compensate employees with commendable and outstanding performance. However, where the CPI-U is less than an increase given to a bargaining unit through a contract then the higher increase will be used as a basis by the City Manager instead of the CPI-U.
While it is the intent of the City to keep salaries competitive within the marketplace, the City Council reserves the right to set percentage increases based on what it determines the City can afford regardless of changes in the CPI-U or bargaining unit increases. The annual appropriation approved by City Council shall be disbursed to non-bargaining employees in accordance with the following Sections of this policy.”
Mr. DePrima noted that, in the past, Council appropriated a certain amount of money to go to non-bargaining increases, which the City Manager and department heads disbursed in accordance with the system in place.
In response to Mrs. Williams, Mr. DePrima stated that under this plan the City would not institute layoffs in order to ensure adequate funds are available to compensate outstanding non-bargaining employees. He emphasized that Council would adopt a lump sum amount that would be placed in the budget and only that amount of money would be disbursed. In addition, he noted that if revenues to the City do not match inflation, Council would have the discretion to make adjustments.
In response to Mr. Ruane’s question regarding how vacant positions would be considered in performing these calculations, Mr. DePrima stated that vacant positions should be removed from the budget if they are not intended to be filled. He believed that the basis for calculating the appropriation should be the recommended authorized strength of the work force rather than the number of positions in the prior year.
IV. Performance Evaluation and Advancement Guidelines
“The CPI-U published in January of each year will be the basis for the percentage of mid-point increase for an employee who receives a “good” performance. In years where the City Council approves a higher bargaining unit increase instead of the CPI-U, then the basis shall be the bargaining unit’s increase. Employees with Commendable or Outstanding Performance Scores shall receive higher midpoint adjustments, and employees with Unacceptable and Needs Improvement Performance Scores will receive lower or no mid-point salary adjustments. The actual percentage increases at the mid-point shall be calculated so that the total amount appropriated shall not exceed the amount approved by City Council, as described in Section II. After approval of the Annual Budget, the City Manager will publish a schedule that sets forth the approved mid-point increases for each Salary Range and Performance Score for use by Department Heads to complete Personnel Status Action Forms.”
Mr. DePrima noted that this provision imposes a restriction on appropriating more funds, based on scoring, than Council has approved in the budget. He noted that he continues to endorse the idea of using the mid-point as the adjustment point because, by doing so, all employees who are in the same pay range and have the same basic score receive the same amount of cash. He believed that this methodology would slowly elevate those in the lower half to the mid-point and provide a mechanism to advance entry-level employees. It would also do away with the need to evaluate which employees are above or below market and by what percentage.
In response to Mrs. Williams, Mr. DePrima stated that the salary information utilized by MAG included data that encompassed a wide array of sources over a lengthy period of time.
Noting that the state and municipal governments historically offer below market salaries but greater job security, and that the market is currently more beneficial to employers, Mrs. Williams questioned whether this system would allow the City to benefit from the present market advantage. Responding to Mrs. Williams, Mr. DePrima stated that this system will provide a greater ability to hire at the low end of entry level. He stated that hiring below published entry levels could create difficulty in retaining employees when the market improves; however, he noted that Council could include provisions to do so.
Mr. McGlumphy noted that there are items related to the MAG study that remain to be discussed, including Exhibit #1 and the Job Analysis Qualifications addressed in Exhibit #5. He stated his desire to address these issues at the next Committee meeting and to conclude the review of the MAG report by the end of November.
Mrs. Kim Hawkins, Human Resources Director, provided members a Pay for Performance (PFP) Distributions Report (included as Attachment #2 to the committee minutes). Mr. McGlumphy noted that, due to time constraints, this information would not be reviewed this evening but encouraged members to review it for discussion at a later date.
The committee recommended tabling further discussion of the MAG study until the next meeting due to time constraints.
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.
Review and Analysis of Vacant Positions Report
Mr. Anthony DePrima, City Manager, reviewed the Review and Analysis of Vacant Positions report, which is prepared monthly by Mrs. Kim Hawkins, Human Resources Director. He noted that additional columns were included at the request of Councilman McGlumphy to reflect funds budgeted for each position. Mr. DePrima noted that figures were not precise due to the difficulty of capturing promotions and transfers. He noted that figures highlighted in green will increase due to the fact that employees in these positions are continuing to receive terminal leave.
In response to Mr. Ruane, Mr. DePrima stated that the net savings reflected provides a very general indicator of an amount in the budget that is not intended to be spent. However; he cautioned that savings realized would be distributed across the general fund, the wastewater fund, and the electric fund and that some of these positions may be proposed for recruitment in the future.
In response to Mr. Ruane, Mr. DePrima noted that occasionally contractors have been hired to perform duties of these vacant positions, such as custodial or web developer functions. He did not believe funds had been transferred from the salary line item for this purpose yet; however, he felt that this may become necessary.
Mr. Ruane requested that this issue be researched to determine whether staff has discretionary power to transfer funds from salary savings to other line items in the budget and report this information to Council. (City Clerk’s Office Note: In accordance with Finance Procedure F306 - Budget Administration - Guidelines for Operating Departments, Department Managers may redistribute monies “within” a group of accounts in a particular category, except salary/benefits, and capital outlay accounts. Transfers from salary and benefit accounts are permitted with approval of the City Manager to cover unanticipated expenses created by vacancies. Examples are advertising, agency
labor, contract services, and recruiting agencies. The City Manager may approve intra-fund transfers (i.e., within the General Fund) of up to five percent per annum, with the exception of line items associated with salary and benefits.
Dover Fire Department Financial Report
Chief Christiansen reviewed the Dover Fire Department Financial Report.
In response to Mr. DePrima, Mr. Terry Witham, Treasurer for the Dover Fire Department, stated that he is learning to utilize Quickbooks software to track financial information and will work to incorporate information on amounts budgeted for line items for the year in future reports.
The committee recommended acceptance of the report.
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.
Proposed Ordinance #2009-26 - Reinspection Fee for Residential Rental Inspections (Chapter 22 - Buildings and Building Regulations and Appendix F - Fees and Fines)
Mrs. Ann Marie Townsend, Director of Planning and Community Development, reviewed Proposed Ordinance #2009-26 and explained that the ordinance would impose a fee of $50 for each reinspection after the first follow-up inspection for residential rental inspections. She noted that inspectors frequently return to inspect rental properties and find that required work has not been completed. Mrs. Townshend noted that this is a costly and time-consuming effort on the part of code enforcement staff and stated that staff believed that imposing this fee would motivate property owners to complete repairs before reinspection. In addition, she stated that the language related to suspension of rental permits was expanded to include dwellings other than multiple dwellings.
In response to Mr. Salters, Mrs. Townshend stated that her department is considering developing a “problem landlord” ordinance and is examining legislation used by other communities. She concurred with Mr. Salters that there are many residents in the Fourth District living in substandard housing and noted the challenge of compelling landlords to adhere to codes without displacing tenants. Mrs. Townshend stated that she would attempt to provide a proposal by February or March to address this issue.
The committee recommended adoption of Proposed Ordinance #2009-26, as recommended by staff.
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. (The First Reading of the ordinance will take place during the latter part of the meeting).
Proposed Ordinance #2009-27 - Income and Expense Reports (Chapter 102 - Taxation, Article I - In General, Section 102-5)
Ms. Cheryl Russell, Tax Assessor, reminded the Committee that on July 27, 2009 Council adopted Ordinance #2009-05 which created Section 102-5 - Income and Expense Reports. She explained that staff is recommending an amendment to the ordinance which would change the wording which imposes a penalty for failure to return the Income and Expense Form from “fine” to “fee”. Ms. Russell noted that this would remove the requirement of going through the court system to collect penalties and would allow the money to be billed through the City’s HTE software and collected through property taxes.
The committee recommended adoption of Proposed Ordinance #2009-27 amending Chapter 102 - Taxation, as recommended by staff.
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. (The First Reading of the ordinance will take place during the latter part of the meeting).
Review of Draft Memorandum of Understanding for the Kent County Aeropark
Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, explained that, in 1986, Kent County acquired the Kent County Aeropark and annexed the land into the City of Dover. At that time, the City and County entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) regarding annexation, zoning of the property, infrastructure development, land development approvals, and inspections and permit fees. She explained that the components of the MOU have been fulfilled by the jurisdictions; however, she noted that the dual process, which afforded review by the Kent County Regional Planning Commission according to the provisions of the City of Dover’s Zoning Ordinance, and the issuance of building permits by Kent County and mechanical, plumbing, and fire protection permits by the City of Dover, has caused confusion and has made it very difficult for the County or the City to expedite approvals in accordance with economic development goals.
City Staff worked with the Kent County Administrator and the Executive Director of the Kent County Aeropark Authority to develop an updated MOU that would address the continuing issues of coordination necessary between the two jurisdictions: land development review and approval, building permit review and approval, building inspections, and building permit revenue. The draft MOU was presented to the Kent County Aeropark Authority Board of Directors and the Board supported the changes. The proposed MOU would supercede the existing Aeropark agreement and would retain the property’s MOU zoning unless both parties agree to change it. The City would be responsible for site plan development approvals, construction plan approvals, and fifty percent (50%) of building permit revenue would be given to Kent County, which would allow the County to invest money back into the park.
Mr. Ruane felt that granting 50% of the permit fee revenue to Kent County was excessive when City employees are performing the work involved. He requested that staff verify that County revenues would be invested into the Park and not be fed into the County’s general fund.
The committee recommended approval of the Memorandum of Understanding with Kent County Levy Court, as recommended by staff.
At the request of Mr. McGlumphy during the Council Meeting, Mrs. Townshend briefed members on the MOU with Kent County Levy Court. She noted that in reviewing the MOU provided to members, staff discovered an error on page 2, explaining that it reflects the property as being zoned IPM. The property is actually zoned IPM and AEOZ (Airport Environs Overlay Zone); therefore, this should be corrected in the MOU.
Mr. McGlumphy moved to add the designation of AEOZ to the appropriate page and section for the Kent County Aeropark in the Memorandum of Understanding and for approval of the Memorandum of Understanding with Kent County Levy Court (Exhibit #1). The motion was seconded by Mr. Hogan and unanimously carried.
Mr. McGlumphy moved for acceptance of the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee Report, seconded by Mr. Leary.
Responding to Mr. Ruane regarding the inquiry he made during the committee meeting relative to the investment of County revenues, Mrs. Townshend stated that according to Mr. Petit de Mange, County Administrator, the building permit revenue that has been received by Kent County does not come close to the amount of money expended in the park, which includes fees for grass cutting, sign repairs, legal fees for land transactions, etc. Since 2003, Kent County has spent $308,683 in the Aeropark and since the park’s inception, they have collected approximately $25,000 worth of building permits. Therefore, the amount of funds required by Kent County annually far exceeds any of the 50% that they would receive as a result of the MOU.
Mr. Ruane felt it would be disingenuous for Kent County to be paid for the site plan development approval services that are being conducted by the City staff. However, he noted that the funds that are earned by the City will be going into the general fund and felt that this is like paying for the same service twice.
The motion for acceptance of the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee Report was carried with Mr. Ruane voting no.
EVALUATION OF BIDS - VANSANT CONTROL SYSTEM UPGRADE
Members were reminded that the major part of the VanSant Controls CIP scope of work is for the replacement of the Combustion Turbine control equipment located in the control cab of the unit. The original manufacturer of this equipment had notified staff that the control equipment is no longer going to be manufactured and that once their inventory of replacement parts was consumed, they could no longer provide either spare parts or service for diagnosing problems. This proposed contract addresses the replacement of these major control components with a fully engineered turbine control system having state of the art, commercially available, off the shelf components. In addition, the proposed system design will provide for improved reliability of the overall unit due to improved component reliability and diagnostic capabilities. This replacement should extend the life of the control system to support an estimated life of the plant, up to 15 years.
Mr. DePrima, City Manager, advised members that a request for proposal was drafted to include a total price for: engineering, procurement of all control system material, supply of a factory assembled and tested panel mounted control system; removal and disposal of existing control panel equipment; field testing of all associated work; commissioning of the equipment; and providing training and training simulator. He stated that although seven (7) bids were received, two (2) of the bids did not meet technical requirements and were rejected as non-conforming. Mr. DePrima noted that there will be other components/services awarded under subsequent proposals to complete the project; however, at this time, staff is confident this project will be under budget.
Members were provided details regarding the evaluation scores and submittal prices. Mr. DePrima advised members that after evaluation of the proposals, it was determined that the highest evaluated contractor was also the low bidder. The requested optional remote monitor is an engineering work station used for diagnostic and performance monitoring of the control system and auxiliary equipment.
Staff recommended awarding the contract to the low bidder, Innovative Control Systems, Inc. for $269,930 for the base price and including the following option: $11,400 for a Remote Monitor for a total contract award of $281,330.
Mr. Salters moved for approval of staff’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Hogan and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
RECONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED ORDINANCES ADOPTED NOVEMBER 9, 2009
Council President Williams reminded members that during their Regular Meeting of November 9, 2009, members adopted Ordinance #2009-17 with Amendment #1, Ordinance #2009-24, and Ordinance #2009-25, as a group. She stated that a request has been made to allow members to vote on the ordinances individually. She reiterated that the matter was being presented for the purpose of allowing members to vote on the ordinances separately and that there would be no discussion permitted.
Mr. Ruane moved to allow Council the opportunity to learn about the reconsideration of a motion, seconded by Mr. McGiffin and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
Since the motion requires further review of Roberts Rules of Order, Council President Williams suggested that there be a brief recess.
Mr. Hogan moved for a brief recess, seconded by Mr. Leary and unanimously carried.
Meeting recessed at 8:14 p.m. and reconvened at 8:23 p.m.
Mr. Hogan moved to reconvene the meeting, seconded by Mr. McGiffin and unanimously carried.
City Solicitor Rodriguez requested that members table the matter at this time to allow for a thorough review of Roberts Rules of Order.
Mr. McGiffin moved to table the reconsideration of proposed ordinances adopted November 9, 2009, seconded by Mr. Leary and unanimously carried.
REAPPOINTMENTS RECOMMENDED BY MAYOR CAREY - ST. JONES GREENWAY COMMISSION - THREE YEAR TERMS TO EXPIRE DECEMBER 31, 2012
Mayor Carey recommended the reappointments of Mr. Robert Gorkin and Mr. Michael P. Mercer to serve on the St. Jones Greenway Commission for three (3) year terms to expire December 31, 2012.
By consent agenda, Mr. McGlumphy moved for approval of the appointments of Mr. Gorkin and Mr. Mercer, as recommended by Mayor Carey. The motion was seconded by Mr. Leary and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
REZONING REQUEST/FIRST READING - 1051 COLLEGE ROAD, OWNED BY LANDS OF JNK, LLC
A request was received to rezone properties located at 1051 College Road, owned by Lands of JNK, LLC, consisting of 4.32+/- acres, less a street right-of-way area consisting of 0.55+/- acres that divides the original tract into two (2) pieces. The properties are currently zoned R-8 (One-Family Residence) and the requested zoning is RG-2 (General Residence).
Prior to amending the zoning ordinances and zoning map of the City of Dover