REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING

The Regular Council Meeting was held on October 8, 2007 at 7:30 p.m. with Council President Salters presiding. Council members present were Mr. Carey, Mrs. Russell, Mr. McGlumphy, Mr. Slavin, Mr. McGiffin, Mr. Hogan, and Mr. Ruane.

Council staff members present were Police Chief Horvath, Ms. Russell, Mrs. Mitchell, Mrs. Townshend, Fire Chief Osika, Mr. DePrima, Deputy City Solicitor Pepper, Mrs. McDowell, and Mayor Williams.

OPEN FORUM

The Open Forum was held at 7:15 p.m., prior to commencement of the Official Council Meeting. Council President Salters declared the Open Forum in session and reminded those present that Council is not in official session and cannot take formal action.

Mr. Eric O’Brien, 30 N. New Street, advised members of the deplorable living conditions in his neighborhood, noting that there is a continued problem with strangers “taking over” public streets. He suggested that there be a police presence and that more attention be given to North New and Fulton Street, between Governors Avenue and Queen Street. It was his feeling that the government is failing the people. He provided pictures and documentation depicting these conditions (as on file in the Office of the City Clerk).

The invocation was given by Chaplain Dixon, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.

AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS

Mr. Carey moved for approval of the agenda as presented, seconded by Mr. Hogan and unanimously carried.

Mr. Slavin requested that item #6E, Modification of Maintenance Agreement - Persimmon Park Place Islands, be removed from the consent agenda. Mr. McGlumphy requested that item #6D, FY 2007/08 Water/Wastewater Capital Improvement Project (CIP) Briefing be removed from the consent agenda. Mr. Ruane requested that item #6A, Proposed Amendments to the City of Dover Electric Service Handbook - Proposed Increases for Residential and Commercial Underground Extension Fee, be removed from the consent agenda.

Mr. McGiffin moved for approval of the consent agenda as amended, seconded by Mr. Slavin and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.

ADOPTION OF MINUTES - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 24, 2007

The Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of September 24, 2007 were unanimously approved by motion of Mr. McGiffin, seconded by Mr. Slavin and bore the written approval of Mayor Williams.

OATHS OF OFFICE - CITY COUNCIL

The Honorable James T. Vaughn, Jr., President Judge Superior Court, administered the Oath of Office for the Mayor, Carleton E. Carey, Sr.

Mr. Brooks Banta, Kent County Levy Court President, noted that several members of the Levy Court and the County Administrator were present to congratulate Mayor Carey and stated that they look forward to working with the Mayor and Council. They presented Mayor Carey with a County Pin, and several hats to add to his collection, most particularly a Kent County Levy Court hat.

On behalf of Delaware’s Congressional Delegation, Senator Carper wished Mayor Carey and his family much happiness and success. It was his feeling that the City of Dover will be taken care of as the new Mayor takes office.

State Representative Stone stated that the dedication and public service of Mayor Carey to his community has been evident as he has served as a volunteer, a member of City Council, and now serving as Mayor. She noted that we are all partners in making this community the best for our citizens and that it can be accomplished through a partnership between the City, County, and State government, along with the congressional delegation - together, great things can be accomplished.

Mayor Carey thanked everyone for their support and for attending and stated the importance of the City working with the County and State for the betterment of the community. He recognized the attendance of representatives of the Dover Air Force Base, which is a primary contributor to our community.

Dr. Sessoms, President of the Delaware State University, stated that the university looks forward to working with the City, County, and State, and thanked Mayor Carey for his support.

RECESS

Mr. Slavin moved to recess for 15 minutes, seconded by Mr. Hogan and unanimously carried.

Meeting recessed at 7:49 P.M.

Mr. McGlumphy moved to reconvene, seconded by Mrs. Russell and unanimously carried.

The meeting reconvened at 8:03 p.m., with Council President Williams presiding. Council members present were Mrs. Russell, Mr. McGlumphy, Mr. Slavin, Mr. McGiffin, Mr. Hogan, and Mr. Ruane. Mayor Carey was also present (arrived at 8:25 p.m.).

PRESENTATION - CERTIFICATE OF APPRECIATION - RECOGNITION OF SERVICE - TIMOTHY P. MULLANEY, SR. - DOVER PARKING AUTHORITY (FEBRUARY 2006 - FEBRUARY 2007)

On behalf of members of Council, Council President Williams presented a Certificate of Appreciation to Mr. Timothy Mulaney, Sr. in recognition for his service as a member of the Dover Parking Authority, having served from February 2006 through February 2007.

Mr. Mullaney thanked members for giving him the opportunity to serve, explaining that due to his move out of the City limits, it was necessary for him to relinquish his seat on the Dover Parking Authority; however, he will continue to serve on the Police Pension Board.

PRESENTATION - CERTIFICATE OF APPRECIATION - ATLANTIC COAST CHAMPIONSHIPS OF THE TOURNAMENT OF BANDS - DR. JOHN KREITZER - SOUTHERN REGIONAL DIRECTOR

Mr. Slavin explained that many events brought to our community also bring customers to our hotels, restaurants, etc. He presented a Certificate of Appreciation to Dr. John Kreitzer, Southern Regional Director of the Atlantic Coast Championships of the Tournament of Bands, and Mr. Groom Mears, Chapter Coordinator for the Tournament of Bands for Delmarva, for bringing the Atlantic Coast Championships of the Tournament of Bands to Delaware State University, which will bring more than 130 marching bands to our City.

On behalf of the National Judges Association, Dr. Kreitzer relayed appreciation for the recognition. Last year, the show brought over 10,000 competitors. The event is scheduled for November 10-11, 2007, with the morning event on November 10, 2007 being held at Dover High School. The Saturday afternoon, evening and Sunday events will be held at Delaware State University. It was his hope that this tournament will continue to be held in the City of Dover.

PROCLAMATION - HALLOWEEN TRICK-OR-TREAT (OCTOBER 31, 2007)

The City Clerk read the following Proclamation into the record:

WHEREAS, the children of the City of Dover enjoy the fun and festivities associated with the observance of the Halloween Trick-or-Treat custom of traveling with friends and family going from door to door in their neighborhood, displaying their costumes, and gathering treats; and

WHEREAS, parents are urged to join in the festivities by accompanying their children throughout their journeys in celebrating Halloween Trick-or-Treat; and

WHEREAS, residents are requested to indicate their willingness to welcome children by keeping their porch or exterior lights on and that youngsters call only on homes so lighted; and

WHEREAS, the Mayor of the City of Dover has deemed it advisable to observe the celebration of Halloween Trick-or-Treat on Wednesday, October 31, 2007 between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, CARLETON E. CAREY, SR. MAYOR OF THE CITY OF DOVER, do hereby proclaim that the Halloween Trick-or-Treat observance be held on the 31st day of October 2007, between the hours of 6:00 P.M. and 8:00 P.M. in the City of Dover and urge all residents, both young and old, to make this a happy and safe occasion for our children.

UTILITY COMMITTEE REPORT - SEPTEMBER 24, 2007

The Utility Committee met on September 24, 2007 with Chairman Ruane presiding.

Proposed Amendments to the City of Dover Electric Service Handbook - Proposed Increases for Residential and Commercial Underground Extension Fee

Mr. Lunt, Public Utilities Director, advised members that in September 2006, the Electrical Engineering Division conducted a study and developed a material list for the equipment needed to supply electrical service to developments. From that study, a “per lot” fee was developed to recover all the City-supplied material costs and was included in the City of Dover Electric Service Handbook (Division III, Rules and Regulations, Section 3-36), which currently requires an $850 residential underground extension fee (per lot) for new developments and/or extension requests. Mr. Lunt stated that although the $850 fee recovered the material and transformer costs of the new electric distribution extension, it did not include labor. The fees in the Handbook also applied the same rate to Commercial and Industrial extensions where more than one (1) customer was served.

Due to the rising cost of material, staff felt that it was necessary to re-evaluate the fees associated with providing the infrastructure for underground electric service extensions. Mr. Lunt advised members that the result of this re-evaluation, which used the same material lists as the 2006 study, is that the average cost for providing residential electric service is approximately $1,200 per service. Staff provided members with details regarding the estimated material costs for three (3) developments to reflect the pre-2007 and 2007 average cost per lot.

Staff recommended increasing the Residential Underground Extension Fee from $850 per service to $1,200 per service and increasing the Commercial and Industrial Underground Extensions from $850 per electrical service to total material cost recovery.

The committee recommended approval of staff’s recommendation.

Mr. Ruane advised members that it was staff’s intention to communicate the proposed amendments to the developers that will be affected by this change. To provide the developers the opportunity to review and comment, he suggested that action regarding this matter be deferred by Council.

Mr. Ruane moved to table the proposed amendments to the City of Dover Electric Service Handbook in order to provide the developers the opportunity to review and comment. The motion was seconded by Mr. McGlumphy and unanimously carried.

Revised CIP’s for 69KV Feeders 3 and 4 and St. Jones Substation

During their meeting of July 23, 2007, members were briefed on the changes to the scope of the 69 Kv Feeder Project, which included constructing it as a design/build versus an EPC and reducing it to a two (2) phase project rather than a three (3) phase project. Members also were advised that the St. Jones Substation Project would need to be accelerated to coincide with the 69 Kv Feeders 3 and 4 - Phase II Construction.

Members were provided revised CIP’s for the 69 Kv Feeders 3 and 4 and St. Jones Substation. Mr. Lunt, Public Utilities Director, advised members that staff has been preparing a detailed budget for both projects in an effort to update the CIP’s with reliable cost estimates. In addition, he advised members that the bond sale mandates that all funds be spent within three (3) years of the bond sale and the acceleration of the St. Jones Substation Project will assist in meeting this requirement.

Mr. Lunt indicated that the change in scope to the 69 Kv Feeder Project will result in a savings of approximately $2,525,410. The St. Jones Substation Project costs have increased due to the increases in the price of metals, switchgear, and related equipment. He reminded members that in fiscal year 2006, the project was estimated at $5.1M; however, it was reduced to $3.6M in fiscal year 2007 based on a temporary reduction in actual bid costs. Mr. Lunt stated that the current estimates for the Substation are approximately $5.3M and the total costs related to both projects are projected to be $17,598,158, which is a net reduction in the amount of $749,342 over the previous fiscal year 2007 estimates. He stated that the budget amendments will be prepared and presented for approval to reflect these changes during the first scheduled budget amendments.

Responding to Mr. Ruane, Mrs. Mitchell, Finance Director/Treasurer, advised members that a presentation of the Revenue Bond Issue will be conducted at the next committee meeting. She explained that the Bond Issue Resolution will be written in such a way that the City will be reimbursed any money spent on this project prior to the bond issue.

The committee recommended approval of the changes in the scope, schedule, and expense related to the CIP’s for St. Jones Substation and 69 Kv Feeders 3 and 4, as recommended by staff.

By consent agenda, Mr. McGiffin moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Slavin and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.

Bid Evaluation - Two (2) Substation Transformers

Bids were solicited for Request for Proposals (RFP) for two (2) Substation Transformers; one to be installed at the Horsepond Substation and the other at the St. Jones Substation. Both are existing substations that will be undergoing upgrades due to the age and condition of the existing transformers.

Staff recommended awarding the proposal to the lowest responsive bidder, Kuhlman Electric Corporation, in the amount of $1,615,481 which includes two (2) transformers ($1,566,466), one (1) set of spare parts ($4,905), and transformer field assembly ($44,110).

Mr. Lunt, Public Utilities Director, advised members that staff included the expense of the following spare parts: a gasket set, one (1) high and low voltage bushing, and one (1) cooling fan with motor. In addition, he advised members that staff recommended including the turnkey installation for both transformers, which includes unloading, assembly, oil filling/processing, field testing, and a five (5) year warranty. Although the Kuhlman proposal is a firm price, it does contain the following payment requirements: 1) 20% down payment; 2) 30% 15-weeks prior to scheduled shipment; 3) 30% 35-days prior to scheduled shipment; and 4) 20% upon shipment (due net 15 days after receipt of transformers).

The committee recommended approval of staff’s recommendation.

By consent agenda, Mr. McGiffin moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation to award the proposal to the lowest responsive bidder, Kuhlman Electric Corporation, in the amount of $1,615,481 which includes two (2) transformers ($1,566,466), one (1) set of spare parts ($4,905), and transformer field assembly ($44,110). The motion was seconded by Mr. Slavin and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.

FY 2007/08 Water/Wastewater Capital Improvement Project (CIP) Briefing

During their meeting of September 10, 2007, members began review of the FY 2007/08 Water/Wastewater Capital Improvement Projects. Due to time constraints, it was necessary to continue the review for this time. It was noted that the committee stopped their review at the South Governors Avenue Sewer Main Upgrade Project.

Responding to Mr. Ruane with regards to the South Governors Avenue Sewer Main Upgrade Project, Mr. Lunt, Public Utilities Director, advised members that the State has issued a Notice to Proceed and that the City has begun to order materials. He explained that the Sewer Main Upgrade is less of an issue since it will be installed by the State in its entirety and the City will be billed for the upgrade and changes in the sewer pipe. Mr. DePrima stated that although this will be accomplished by the State, the City will assure that residents will be notified of closures, etc. as a result of this project.

Mr. Lunt continued the review of the remainder of the projects in detail, as follows:

            Lafferty Lane Package Pump Station Replacement and Upgrade

            White Oak Farms Pumping Station VFDs

            US Route 13 East Sanitary Sewer Interceptor

Dover East Pumping Station and Force Main (project has been cancelled since Rojan Meadows is planned for development; once the land is developed, the pumping station will no longer be needed, it will be converted to a gravity flow. Upon evaluation, staff determined that the pumping station should be sufficient for the next two (2) years until the development of Rojan Meadows is completed)

            Wellhead Redevelopment Program

            Wellhead VFD Upgrades

            Water Quality Improvements

            Miscellaneous Distribution System Improvements

            Remote Control and Monitor Wells

            Emergency Generators (Wells)

            1.0 MG Elevated Water Storage Tower

            Piney Point Well

            Scarborough Road Interconnection (Tidewater Utilities)

            South Governors Avenue Water Main Upgrade

Mr. McGlumphy noted that during a Utility Committee meeting held earlier in the evening, members were provided a FY2008-2012 Electric Plan relative to the Bond Issue, and requested that the same type of format be utilized to delineate the Water/Wastewater Capital Improvement Projects. He stated that this would provide information regarding the funding for the projects.

Modification of Maintenance Agreement - Persimmon Park Place Islands

Members were reminded that in September of 2004, the City of Dover accepted the dedication of streets in Persimmon Park Place. This project had been developed with private streets and, over time, they began to deteriorate and the Condominium Association was not able to care for them in the long term. Mr. DePrima, City Manager, advised members that the City agreed to take over ownership and responsibility once funding of their repair was secured through Community Transfer Fund provided principally by Representative Bruce Ennis.

Mr. DePrima stated the maintenance, mostly consisting of grass cutting of traffic islands, was specifically reserved by the Condominium Association as their responsibility. Members were provided a copy of the deed from the transfer of the land which, in paragraph 3, addresses this reservation. He stated that there have been several occasions when the new Homeowners Association and/or the Condominium Council has requested that the City mow the traffic islands in an effort to reduce their grass cutting expense. Mr. DePrima indicated that the City has maintained that the Homeowners Association and/or Condominium Council is responsible for the traffic islands and that they are not the responsibility of the City.

Recently, the City was advised that Representative Ennis has agreed to fund “bricking” the islands, which will significantly reduce the cost of the maintenance. Considering this, he questioned if the City should modify the deed and take over responsibility of the islands. Although the expense for maintaining the islands will be reduced to a cost of occasionally spraying for weeds, staff felt that the Condominium Association could more than handle this responsibility and that the City should not stretch its landscape crews any further.

Mr. Slavin advised members that he has been working with Mr. Fred Tolbert, President of the Persimmon Park Place Homeowners Association and Condominium Council, on this issue and relayed appreciation to Representative Ennis for his dedication and the funding provided for this project. He explained that the traffic islands serve a public safety purpose and felt that the City should assume the responsibility, noting that required maintenance would be minimal.

Mr. Tolbert thanked members for their time in considering this request. He explained that the previous President of the Condominium Council agreed to retain responsibility of the traffic islands. He advised members that the previous President was also the developer of the development and that this requirement was included in the deed without the residents knowledge.

Mr. Ruane suggested that it would be helpful for members to be provided information with regards to any increase in property taxes for the residents of Persimmon Park Place.

Mr. McGiffin stated that the argument with regards to the costs would be as much in favor of the City taking over responsibility of the traffic islands as it is in allowing the Condominium Council to maintain the islands. If it is not too costly, he felt that by the City assuming responsibility, it would be a demonstration of good faith on the part of the City to a community that has had its share of troubles.

Responding to Mr. Cregar, Mr. DePrima stated that he did not have the cost details associated with the assumption of ownership.

Mr. Ruane relayed concern with the precedent that would be made if Council were to take over responsibility, noting that there are several traffic islands within developments that are the responsibility of the homeowners associations.

Mr. McGiffin reminded members of the uniqueness of Persimmon Park Place and as a result, any precedential value is negligible.

Mr. McGlumphy suggested that members be provided a cost factor analysis and suggested that all developments could prove to be unique; therefore, he cautioned members to consider the potential costs for providing the same service for other developments.

Mr. Cregar suggested that the lawn care service provider for Persimmon Park Place be contacted to determine the costs for extending service to maintain the islands.

Mr. Slavin stated that although he appreciates the focus on cost, there is an assumption that the costs would be minimal and explained that there is a responsibility issue to consider. With reference to the concern of precedence, he was not aware of any other developments within the City that have these types of traffic islands on such narrow streets that have been dedicated to the City. Therefore, it was his opinion that since Council approved the private, sub-standard streets and traffic islands, etc., the City should provide assistance in making the situation better. Mr. Slavin felt that the City should put forward a good faith effort, as Representative Ennis has.

This item was forwarded to Council with no recommendation by the committee.

Mr. Slavin advised members of Council that many improvements have been made by the community of Persimmon Park Place and that Representative Ennis has recently agreed to fund “bricking” the islands, which will significantly reduce the cost of the maintenance. The City has now been requested to assume the responsibility of these islands.

Mr. Slavin moved to suspend the rules to allow Mr. Tolbert, President of the Persimmon Park Place Homeowners Association and Condominium Council, to address members and provide additional background information regarding this issue. The motion was seconded by Mr. McGiffin.

Mr. Ruane relayed opposition since Mr. Tolbert was already given the opportunity to address the committee and felt that there would be no additional information that would be provided that is not already a part of the record.

The motion to suspend the rules to allow Mr. Tolbert the opportunity to address members was carried with Mr. Ruane voting no.

Mr. Tolbert thanked Councilmen Slavin and McGiffin for their support and assistance in resolving issues involving Persimmon Park Place. He advised members that the Persimmon Park Place development was never completed, there is no curbing, the streets are narrow, there is inadequate drainage, etc. If this development was presented to the Planning Commission today, it would be rejected. Mr. Tolbert stated that Persimmon Park Place should not have been allowed to be a private development, the streets should not have been allowed to be narrow, street lights should have been required, snow removal should have been provided, and the police should have been able to issue tickets. He stated that these types of normal services provided to other developments were not provided for Persimmon Park Place and members of Council were not aware of this until recently. Mr. Tolbert stated that the issue is not just regarding the islands, it is about assistance in bringing the Persimmon Park Place community up to standards. When the streets were dedicated to the City, the three (3) entrance islands were included; therefore, it was the residents’ understanding that the City would take full responsibility of the islands.

Mr. Ruane referenced a letter dated November 4, 2005, from Mr. Hogan addressed to Mr. Tolbert, which included a copy of the deed that specifically excludes the maintenance and landscaping obligation for the islands (Exhibit #1). Responding, Mr. Tolbert stated that until recently, the previous manager’s of Persimmon Park Place were the developers which, he explained, was a part of the problem. The previous manager (Mr. Gardner) prepared the deed. Mr. DePrima explained that the City negotiated the exclusion of the islands in the deed.

Mr. Slavin felt that this Council has an obligation and opportunity to correct past actions.

Mr. Ruane alluded to the Council Meeting Minutes of March 22, 2004, and noted that the deed is reflective of the understanding conveyed to the residents at that time. He reiterated his feeling that there are many developments in the City similar to Persimmon Park Place and relayed concern with setting a precedent.

Mr. McGiffin felt that there has been a significant change in circumstances, being that Representative Ennis has been able to facilitate the infusion of funding to change the cost of maintaining the islands by having them bricked. Given this change and the role that Representative Ennis has taken, it was his opinion that to assume responsibility of the islands would be a small act of the City.

Responding to Mr. Salters, Mr. Koenig, Public Services Director, stated that the costs for the City to maintain the islands, 5,000 sq. ft. of area, would be approximately $300-$400.

In response to Mr. Ruane, Mr. Koenig estimated that there are 25 to 35 neighborhood associations throughout the City and the area of open space to maintain would be anywhere from a few acres to 75-80 acres, such as the Village of Westover.

Mr. Koenig advised members that there are only a few traffic islands in developments within the City, traditionally due to the irregular shape of the right-of-way.

Mr. DePrima noted that the planned bricking of the islands is to be accomplished one (1) each year for the next three (3) years. If the City would be responsible immediately for the islands, he noted that there would be additional costs involved for grass cutting expense. Mr. Koenig stated that of the 5,000 sq. ft., there is only 2,000 sq. ft. that would require grass cutting. He estimated that it would cost several thousand dollars for maintenance of the islands during the summer.

Mr. Slavin moved that the City modify the maintenance agreement with Persimmon Park Place so that the City is responsibility for spraying the islands that are bricked, once the bricking is completed year by year, and that the mowing costs, until the islands are completely bricked, will be borne by the homeowners association. The motion was seconded by Mr. McGiffin and failed by a roll call vote of five (5) no and three (3) yes (Mr. Slavin, Mr. McGiffin, and Mr. Hogan).

Update - Verizon Franchise Agreement Negotiations

With regards to the Verizon Franchise Agreement negotiations, Mr. Ruane advised members that there has been an additional telephone conference call with the City’s attorney for the purpose of reviewing the most recent draft agreement and that discussions regarding this issue are continuing.

Mr. Ruane moved for acceptance of the Utility Committee Report, seconded by Mr. Salters and unanimously carried.

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE REPORT - SEPTEMBER 24, 2007

The Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee met on September 24, 2007 with Chairman Slavin presiding.

Grant Application Procedure

Members were provided a letter dated September 6, 2007 from the U.S. Department of Justice regarding police grants, as well as the City’s Grant Application Procedures (#F317) maintained by the Department of Finance. Mrs. Mitchell, Finance Director/Treasurer, advised members that in March 2006, the U.S. Department of Justice conducted an audit of certain police grants and had concerns that the City did not have written procedures for the grant application process. At that time, staff developed the procedure which establishes clear directions for accounting for and administering the funds and resources received by the City through Federal, State, and other Grants. She advised members that this procedure was forwarded to the U.S. Department of Justice, which resulted in the above-mentioned letter which indicated that the procedure adequately addresses their previous concerns. However, it was suggested that the Procedure be reviewed and approved by City Council.

Staff recommended approval of the Grant Application Procedure (#F317).

Mr. Ruane noted that there is no requirement to advise members of Council of grant requests. He suggested that there be a requirement for all grants submitted by any department of the City to go through the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee for Council approval. Responding, Mrs. Mitchell noted that Section 1 of the Grant Application Procedures states “If the City is awarded the grant, a Committee Action Form (CAF) is to be prepared for the Legislative, Finance & Administrative Committee to approve the grant award”. Mr. Ruane stated that his concern is the lack of knowledge of a grant application, not award of a grant, explaining that there are times when Council may not feel it is in the best interest of the City to apply for the grant. As an example, he stated that there may be a grant that provides for an additional employee for one (1) year, with the City to assume continuation of the position, which ultimately costs the City. It was his opinion that Council should determine if they are willing to assume such requirements when the grant application is being made rather than once the grant application has been awarded.

Mr. DePrima, City Manager, advised members that the reasoning for not requiring approval of grant applications is due to time constraints. He explained that there are many times when staff is discovering the opportunity for submitting a grant without enough time before the deadline to go through the committee review process. He assured members that each department is aware of their mission and responsibilities and has the knowledge of whether a grant is within their mission and/or goals set by City Council. Mr. DePrima further explained that staff would not accept the grant (or expend any monies) until it has been approved by City Council.

Concurring with Mr. Ruane, Mr. Slavin explained that the concern is not with the abilities of the department head but rather with the fiscal impact the grant would have on the City’s budget when the grant monies are expended, particularly those with limited term positions and other obligations. He also felt that it would provide an opportunity to review indirect costs and their funding or if revenue would be available that the City would otherwise not have. Mr. Slavin agreed that there are situations when there is not much notice provided for submitting a grant; however, there are many times that ample notice is given. It was his opinion that the Procedure should be amended to address the concerns regarding the approval of grant applications and at the same time, include flexibility within the Procedure to allow staff to submit an application when there is not enough time to submit the grant application to Council for approval.

Responding to Mr. Slavin, Mrs. Mitchell suggested that the Procedure could be amended to include notification to Council based on eligibility and then require approval by Council if the grant is awarded. Mr. Slavin requested that a series of questions be asked when applying for grants, as follows: 1) what are the expected matches and whether the match is a cost share or cash match; 2) what are the indirect costs and how are they calculated and whether they can be charged against the cost share; 3) what are the effects of employees or personnel hired as a result of soft-grant funding; 4) how the City would incorporate a mechanism that would attract the limited term employees; and 5) what is the type of funding and draws that affect the City’s cash flow.

In addition, Mr. McGlumphy requested that members of Council be made aware of where the grant money is coming from, when the grant is awarded, and if there is money allocated in the City’s budget in case the grant monies are not awarded.

The committee recommended approval of the Grant Application Procedure as recommended by staff, with the understanding that staff will develop additional documentation to address concerns relayed by members regarding grants and grant management to be brought back to the committee for their review and recommendation.

By consent agenda, Mr. McGiffin moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation (Exhibit #2), seconded by Mr. Slavin and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.

Comprehensive Plan Update Internship

Mrs. Townshend, Director of Planning and Inspections, advised members that the City of Dover’s Comprehensive Plan is due for Update in September 2008. She stated that staff expects the process to take approximately one (1) year. Staff intends to complete the Update in-house, with a hired facilitator to facilitate the public meetings and a graduate-level planning intern to gather background information, compile data, and assist in drafting the text.

Mrs. Townshend stated that staff will prepare a request for proposals to hire a facilitator and hire a graduate research assistant as an intern through the University of Delaware Institute for Public Administration (IPA). Since this would require a contract with the IPA that excess $2,500, she advised members that the purchasing policy requires that a competitive RFP be done for professional services. Staff requested that Council waive this requirement due to the specialized nature of the need and the public service and planning specializations of the IPA. As a part of its mission, the IPA regularly places graduate students with state and local government agencies throughout Delaware. She advised members that there is no other comparable service or program in the other colleges or universities in Delaware, and an out-of-state college could not effectively provide the service. The research assistant assigned to the Planning Office would have the full resources of the IPA’s professional planners, as well as other professionals with a long history of expertise in public policy and administration. Mrs. Townshend advised members that the City has previously utilized the IPA’s services for other projects.

Staff recommended authorization to hire an intern through a contract with the University of Delaware, Institute for Public Administration. The intern would begin employment with the City on January 16, 2008 and work through May 31, 2008. Mrs. Townshend advised members that staff intends for an intern to be hired during the summer, explaining that $20,000 has been budgeted this fiscal year and $10,000 for the next fiscal year.

In response to Mr. Slavin, Mrs. Townshend stated that it is estimated that the intern will be assigned to work 20 hours per week. She stated that the IPA did not provide an hourly rate for the intern; however, she advised members that the City’s cost will include administrative fees to IPA. Mr. Slavin explained that it has been his experience that there is a large amount of over-head included in the hourly rate charged by the IPA for the intern.

Responding to Mrs. Jones, Mrs. Townshend explained that the reason why an out-of-state college could not effectively provide the service is strictly due to commuting issues as well as the learning curve that would be required. She advised members that the IPA understands Delaware Law, the Planning classes are based on state and local governments, their staff has done a substantial amount of work in Delaware, and they are very familiar with the planning related codes for Delaware, explaining that these codes change from state to state.

The committee recommended approval of staff’s recommendation to approve the expenditure of $10,125 for hiring of an intern through a contract with the University of Delaware, Institute for Public Administration.

Mr. Slavin requested that when this matter is presented to Council, staff provide details regarding the hourly rate that will be provided to the intern and the hourly rate charged by the IPA for the intern. (City Clerk’s Office Note: The Director of Planning and Inspections has provided the following in response to this request: “Of the contract amount, 10% is IPA's administrative cost (managing the contract, supervising the RA, providing support to the RA). The health insurance for the RA is about $300. The actual stipend paid to the RA for the semester is $7,000. There is $1,900 built in for transportation costs to and from Dover. In addition, there is the tuition waiver, which is not factored into this cost.”).

By consent agenda, Mr. McGiffin moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation to approve the expenditure of $10,125 for hiring of an intern through a contract with the University of Delaware, Institute for Public Administration, seconded by Mr. Slavin and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.

Review of Request for Proposals - Pay for Performance (PFP) Policy

During the past Budget Review, City Council indicated a desire to have the Pay for Performance (PFP) Policy and its implementation evaluated to determine whether it is meeting its original purpose. Although this is not a budgeted item, it was felt that the salary savings from the difference in the City Manager budgeted PFP increase and the amount approved by City Council could cover the proposed study. Members were provided a draft Request for Proposal (RFP) outlining the Scope of Work and vendor Qualifications for their review.

Staff recommended approval to proceed with the RFP for Review and Evaluation of the City’s Pay for Performance Policy. Mr. DePrima advised members that the City will have a Web Page dedicated to this RFP, which will allow anyone interested in bidding to have access to the PFP Policy as well as other supporting documents.

As suggested by Mr. McGlumphy, Mr. DePrima assured members that the PAS Study will be included on the dedicated Web Page. Mr. McGlumphy requested that when local salaries are provided, the private salaries be separate from municipalities and that the focus be on municipalities.

Mr. DePrima advised members that when a market study is conducted, the comparison is with other municipalities with the exception of the electric department employees. In response to Mr. McGlumphy, Mr. DePrima stated that when the proposals are received, if the cost is over $25,000, it is required to be presented to Council for approval; however, if it is the desire of members, the proposals could be presented regardless of the cost. He also offered to have Council participation in the selection of the firm.

Responding to Mr. Ruane, Mr. DePrima stated that staff would include a statement to verify that the expectation of the report on the findings would be to include recommendations for improvement as a result of the findings.

The committee recommended approval of staff’s recommendation to proceed with the Request for Proposal (RFP) for Review and Evaluation of the City's Pay for Performance Policy, stipulating that the results will be tempered with corrective action or updates on the City’s procedures.

By consent agenda, Mr. McGiffin moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Slavin and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.

Proposed Ordinance - Abandoned Vehicles

Members were provided a draft ordinance amending Section 106-212 - Parking Limitations, of Chapter 106 - Traffic and Vehicles, Division 4 - Downtown Parking, of the Dover Code.

Responding to Mr. Slavin, Mrs. Townshend, Director of Planning and Inspections, reminded members that the amendment had been requested by Council due to concern of individuals parking vehicles in the downtown area for a substantial amount of time and in an area that parking is constrained. She stated that there currently is no time limit in the downtown parking area for this type of abuse and the Police could not take action until the issue resulted in an abandoned vehicle.

The committee recommended adoption of the proposed ordinance amending Section 106-212 - Parking Limitations, of Chapter 106 - Traffic and Vehicles, Division 4 - Downtown Parking, of the Dover Code.

By consent agenda, Mr. McGiffin moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Slavin and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. (The First Reading of the ordinance will take place during the latter part of the meeting).

Discussion - CAMA Software (Donald Capuano, City Assessor)

During their meeting of September 10, 2007, members considered a request to authorize the purchase of the iasWorld CAMA Software including data table conversation and emulation from Tyler/CLT in the amount of $53,030, and authorized purchase supporting hardware in the estimated amount of $8,000. Due to there being several unanswered questions, Mr. Slavin requested that Mr. Capuano appear before the committee for further explanation.

Mr. Slavin reminded members that the issue was with Mr. Capuano’s request for the purchase of software which was hundreds of thousands of dollars and it was recently learned that the City did not need the software and that an upgrade to the existing version of software would be necessary.

Clarifying, Mr. Capuano explained that the program installed by CLT in 2005 has defects in capacities, such as the retrieval of data, creating reports, statistical information, and equalization process. Having discussed this with the City Manager, it was agreed that in April 2007, staff would search for an alternative program. The City conducted six (6) interviews and visited other communities to evaluate how well these software products would work for the City of Dover. At that time he began to draft an RFP when the City Manager reminded him that they would lose the existing Orion software in October 2007 and there would not be enough time for its replacement. Rather than taking the risk of trying to make the transition with a new company, staff selected a “patch” program. Mr. Capuano stated that he has investigated the “patch” with other communities and has determined that it is a “work in progress” and has not proven to be a long-term success.

With regards to the “patch” program referred to by Mr. Capuano, Mr. DePrima reminded members that the iasWorld CAMA (Computer Aided Mass Appraisal) Software is conversion software being offered by Tyler/CLT, the City’s current CAMA software vendor, to replace the existing Orion CAMA Software. He explained that when the phrase “patch” is used, it typically represents a fix to software that is not functioning properly. He assured members that this software is not a “patch”, explaining that the iasWorld CAMA software is a whole new product by the vendor.

Mr. Capuano stated that the use of the term “patch” is due to the inability of the iasWorld CAMA software to provide the functionality in all the areas he felt required such as market and cost approach; however, he sated that it will serve the City better than the Orion program. He also advised members that the software is not USPAP compliant; therefore, it is not a complete program.

Mr. DePrima advised members that Tyler/CLT met with City staff and provided assurance that the software does have the capability to conduct all three (3) assessment methods (market, cost, and income) and that the software does meet the requirements of USPAP. Unfortunately, he stated that the City Assessor was not in attendance during this meeting when these specific issues were discussed.

Mr. Capuano explained that based on the previous estimates received ($280,000 - $350,000), it would not be possible for a company to provide such a program for $60,000 as a full complement. It was his opinion that the software would have to have omitted at least of 50% of what is required of a full program.

Mr. Slavin reiterated his concern when the initial request was submitted, feeling that the request was not clear on the requirements, and then when he was advised that the same functionality could be achieved at an expense of $60,000 as the City would have with the new system at an expense of $350,000, he became more concerned and felt that this matter deserves more exploration. Mr. Slavin stated that at this time, due to the contradictory reports, etc., he still did not fully understand the issue.

Mr. McGlumphy explained his opinion that the City should invest in a tool that will be sufficient for a minimum of three (3) years.

Responding to Mr. Salters, Mr. Capuano indicated that the City will not have the ability to conduct the reassessment with the current software; however, he stated that the alternative provided (purchase of iasWorld CAMA Software) would allow the City to conduct the reassessment for this year.

In response to Mr. Slavin, Mr. Capuano confirmed that even if the City had budgeted enough money for new software, there would not be enough time for a new vendor to be selected and have completely new software deployed by the end of the current contract. He explained that the lack of planning sufficient time for instituting such software was due to mountainous difficult problems in the Assessor’s Office caused by years of neglect, acts of omission and co-mission both in assessment and management of the Assessor’s Office. As an example, he reminded members that 6,000 building permits were discovered that were never processed. Therefore, the focus for the Office during the past year has been to establish procedures. Mr. Capuano stated that he began working on the purchase of new software in February 2006 and that by April 2006, when staff was ready to issue RFP’s, the City Manager questioned the timing issue for implementation of new software by the October 2007 deadline. As a result, he concurred with the interim solution of purchasing the iasWorld CAMA software. During the next six (6) months to a year, he stated that the Assessor’s Office will determine the quality of the software. He stated that components of the CAMA software that are determined to be needed will cost the City additional money. Mr. Capuano explained that his original observation of this software was that it will not meet the needs of the City of Dover. He also advised members that the training for the new software that will be required will take approximately three (3) to six (6) months. It was his opinion that it would not be realistic to expect sufficient software to cost only $60,000, although it may serve as an interim solution.

As a result of the many conversations he has had with CLT, Mr. DePrima was optimistic that the iasWorld CAMA software will not just serve as an interim solution but will prove to be sufficient.

Considering the Charter requirement for the reassessment, at this time, Mr. McGlumphy relayed concern with the timing factor. As the City moves forward with the use of the software, he requested that staff inform members of Council of any issues. It was his recollection that, during the previous reassessment, there were problems with the software that CLT was utilizing. He requested that staff assure that the commercial properties are reviewed to ensure equity.

Responding, Mr. Capuano explained that the conversion process that occurred during the last reassessment was due to data errors caused by many years of neglect and was not caused by CLT.

As Chairman of the Tax Appeals Committee, Mr. Ruane stated that members are sensitized to the fact that unless the City’s assessment is done to the expectation of the taxpayers, there will be repeated unpleasantness. He questioned if there is a schedule planned for a total property assessment of the City and if it will be met. He stressed the importance of advising taxpayers of this information so that they are made aware of particular dates such as appeal deadlines.

Mr. Slavin requested that staff provide members, in two (2) weeks, with a schedule for the total property assessment, a readiness assessment, and a work plan for the Assessor’s Office. He relayed his disappointment in the delay of the management (internal) audit of the Assessor’s Office.

Mr. Capuano advised members that he proposed, several months ago, a six (6) year reassessment program, for both residential and commercial properties. He has not had the opportunity to finalize this program and although he is prepared to accomplish this, he relayed concern with the ability to have it accomplished in two (2) weeks, along with maintaining his other responsibilities of the office, including the preparation of tax appeal reports. He suggested that the schedule could be accomplished in four (4) weeks.

The committee recommended that the Tax Assessor prepare a schedule for revaluation and assessment to be completed to be submitted to Council in two (2) weeks.

By consent agenda, Mr. McGiffin moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation seconded by Mr. Slavin and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.

Responding to Mr. Salters, Mr. Capuano stated that a requirement of an appealing taxpayer is to have a report prepared for the Assessor’s review for the Tax Appeals Committee. If all these reports are received by the first of the month (when they are due), they will require 20 hours of research for each appraisal report in order to develop a review appraisal for the City. He stated that this requirement could be delayed if the Tax Appeals Committee delayed their meeting scheduled for the review of these reports.

In response to Mrs. Jones, Mr. Capuano indicated that there is no other staff available in the Assessor’s Office to conduct the research.

Mr. Slavin questioned the return on investment for the research required on the appraisal reports. Mr. Capuano advised members that the research is required by law, under USPAP; therefore, there is no other alternative.

Mr. DePrima reminded members that in March 2007, City Council approved a strategic plan for the Assessor’s Office, which included the development of a revaluation/assessment schedule. As a result, the goal for this year was to conduct a revaluation of 1/3 of the residential properties. The City budgeted for a residential appraiser based on Council’s approval. With regards to commercial properties, it was determined that between 2007 and 2010, staff would schedule and budget for all vacant commercial, industrial, and income property and hire an additional commercial appraiser. Once the Assessor’s Office completes the residential appraisals, work will begin on the commercial appraisals. Mr. DePrima suggested that this strategic plan be resubmitted for member’s review.

Mr. Ruane relayed concern with the process for conducting a revaluation of partial properties, noting that the Charter requires a total reassessment.

The committee recommended that staff, based on the schedule for the revaluation, conduct a readiness assessment for the purpose of determining if the City is able to meet the deadline set for the Tax Assessor and that the assessment include IT readiness as well as staff readiness.