REGULAR MEETING
August 9, 1982
The Regular Meeting of Council was held on August 9, 1982 at 7:30 p.m. with Mayor Carroll presiding. Members present were Messrs. Richter, Tudor, Boaman, Carey, Witt, Bonar and Shevock. Councilman Hardcastle was absent.
The invocation was given by Dr. Columbia B. Ricks.
AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS
A request by Councilman Shevock for an agenda addition relating to industry related conferences and City of Dover Employee Handbook was unanimously approved.
APPOINTMENT - DOVER HOUSING AUTHORITY - WILLIAM A. HAYES - SIX YEAR TERM
Mayor Carroll presented the name of William A. Hayes to serve a six year term on the Dover Housing Authority.
By motion of Mr. Witt, seconded by Mr. Carey, Council by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Hardcastle absent), approved the appointment.
ADOPTION OF MINUTES - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 26, 1982
Mr. Richter referred to the Minutes of July 26, 1982 Regular Council Meeting, under the hearing “Public Hearing - Adjusted Electric Rates - Incorporating Oil Cost in Basic Rates and Adjusted Monthly Rates on Private Outdoor Lighting Service and Municipal Usage”. He pointed out that the Minutes do include the adjusted base rates of all classifications affected, but do not reflect the entire booklet submitted by Middle West that includes definitions and regulations.
Mr. Richter moved that the rates, including definitions and regulations be included as a supplement to the July 26, 1982 minutes. The motion was seconded by Mr. Witt and carried by a unanimous roll call vote with Mr. Hardcastle absent.
Mr. Witt moved for approval of the Regular Council Meeting minutes of July 26, 1982 as corrected, seconded by Mr. Bonar and unanimously carried.
PUBLIC HEARING - ALLEY ABANDONMENT - 15' ALLEY NORTH OF EL SOMBRERO RESTAURANT
A public hearing was duly advertised for this time and place to consider abandonment of a 15' alley north of El Sombrero Restaurant on U.S. Route #13. Mayor Carroll declared the hearing open.
There was no one present to speak for or against the alley abandonment and no correspondence.
Mayor Carroll declared the hearing closed.
Mr. Witt moved for abandonment of the alley, stipulating that all necessary easements of the City of Dover be maintained. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carey.
By a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Hardcastle absent), Council adopted the following resolution:
A RESOLUTION VACATING AND ABANDONING A CERTAIN ALLEY SITUATED IN THE CITY OF DOVER:
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER:
Section 1. The Council of the City of Dover hereby vacates and abandons the following alley laid out upon a plot of lands subdivided by Kenneth Smith and Francis Heite, dated April 1946 and recorded in Kent Plot Book 1, page 230:
ALL that certain strip of land in the City of Dover, East Dover Hundred, Kent County, Delaware, lying east of U.S. Route #13, known as the Dover By-Pass, and 150' south of Lotus Street Extended, constituting a portion of an alley of uneven width laid out on a plot of lands subdivided by Kenneth Smith and Francis Heite, dated April 1946, and recorded in Kent County Plot Book 1, page 230;
Bounded on the west by the easterly line of U.S. Route #13, known as the Dover By-Pass, 200' wide; on the north by lots as laid out on aforesaid Smith and Heite subdivision, now of others; on the east by a 25' wide strip of lands of the City of Dover; on the south by lands formerly of Clifford Morris, now of Morris Estates subdivision and others; extending from the easterly line of U.S. Route #13, the alley having a distance of 13.82' at this point, running in an easterly direction a distance of 298.98' as measured along its southerly line, to its intersection with line of lands of the City of Dover, having a width of 13.24' at this point.
Containing 0.092 acres, more or less.
Section 2. Since no person has been deprived of property by the vacating and abandoning of the aforesaid alley no compensation is awarded.
Section 3. This resolution shall be effective upon the filing of a revised plot plan of the said alley.
ADOPTED AUGUST 9, 1982
HEARING - PROPERTY IN VIOLATION OF DANGEROUS BUILDING CODE - EMANUEL BARROS - 229 SOUTH QUEEN STREET
Mr. Roe reported a conversation with attorney, Rick Barros, son of Emanuel Barros, requesting a time period of thirty (30) days in which to demolish the property.
Mr. Roe recommended that the thirty (30) day extension be granted, stipulating that Council authorize his office to proceed with the demolition if the agreement is not adhered to by the property owner.
HEARING - PROPERTY IN VIOLATION OF DANGEROUS BUILDING CODE - PHYLLIS FERGUSON - 341 NORTH NEW STREET
Mr. Roe stated that the above property has been vacant for a long period of time and is owned by an out of state landlord. All notices from the Building Inspector’s Office have been ignored and Mr. Roe noted the absence of the owner at this hearing.
Mr. Roe suggested that the owner be given thirty (30) days to submit plans for correction of the violations or the property will be demolished. Council would be given notice of any plans submitted. He added that notices of violations have been in progress for a period of six (6) months.
The City Solicitor has researched all liens on the property and lien holders have been notified.
It was Mr. Witt’s opinion that the property could be rehabilitated for approximately $2,000, noting that its appearance is not as other properties in the neighborhood.
Mr. Boaman noted that the HUD program is spending substantial funds in the area for rehabilitation of neighboring properties and moved to authorize the Building Inspector to proceed with demolition. The motion was seconded by Mr. Bonar and carried by a roll call vote of six (6) yes, one (1) no (Mr. Witt), with Mr. Hardcastle absent.
HEARING - PROPERTY IN VIOLATION OF DANGEROUS BUILDING CODE - KENNETH B. & SANDRA MIFFLIN - 115 SOUTH KIRKWOOD STREET
Mr. Roe reported that the above captioned property suffered a very serious fire and was 75% destroyed. The property owner has notified Mr. Roe’s office that he will proceed with demolition within thirty (30) days.
Mr. Roe recommended that the property owner be given thirty (30) days to demolish property at 115 South Kirkwood Street; otherwise, his office will proceed with the demolition.
Mr. Witt moved for approval of the Building Inspector’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Bonar and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Hardcastle absent).
HEARING - PROPERTY IN VIOLATION OF DANGEROUS BUILDING CODE - HOWARD C. & MARY STEVENSON - 117 SOUTH KIRKWOOD STREET
Mr. Roe reported contact with Mr. Howard Stevenson who has received an insurance settlement on the property in question and has agreed to demolish the building on 117 South Kirkwood Street within thirty (30) days.
Mr. Roe recommended granting thirty (30) days for demolition by the property owners and authorization for his office to proceed with demolition after the thirty (30) day period.
Mr. Witt moved for the recommendation of the Building Inspector, seconded by Mr. Bonar and carried by unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Hardcastle absent).
MONTHLY REPORTS
Mr. Roe pointed out the Planning Commission members working many hours, operating throughout the year with a total budget of $3,139, returning $1,751 of their budget to the General Fund.
By motion of Mr. Bonar, seconded by Mr. Carey, the following monthly reports were unanimously approved:
General Operating Fund, Cash Receipts for the month of June
General Operating Fund, Budget Report for the month of June
Water/Sewer Fund, Cash Receipts for the month of June
Water/Sewer Fund, Budget Report for the month of June
Inter-Governmental Service Fund, Revenue and Budget Report for the month of June
Electric Revenue Fund, Cash Receipts Report for the month of June
Electric Revenue Fund, Budget Report for the month of June
Electric Improvement & Extension Budget, Cash Receipts & Disbursements Report - June
Municipal Street Aid Fund, Cash Receipts & Disbursements Report - April, May & June
Capital Fund, Cash Receipts Report - April, May & June
Capital Fund, Disbursements Report - April, May & June
LEGISLATIVE AND FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT
The Legislative and Finance Committee met on August 4, 1982 with Chairman Boaman presiding.
Itemized Report from Arrest Revenues - J.P. Court #7
Mr. Boaman noted a memorandum, dated July 22, 1982, from Arthur R. Carello, Administrator of the Courts of the Justices of the Peace, rescinding a former notice that J.P. Court #7 would discontinue any itemized report for arrests and revenue to municipalities. Mr. Carello stated that the court system would continue itemizing arrests and revenue for municipalities as usual.
**License Fees - Video Amusement Machines
The committee recommended that an ordinance be adopted establishing a fee of $100 per video amusement machine in the City of Dover, effective September 1, 1982.
Mr. Witt stated his opinion that video machines placed in small businesses derive an income that would be much less than what was stated as a national average in proposing the $100 fee. Noting that small businesses do not attract a large amount of customers, he thought that the fee was detrimental to the small business man.
Mr. Boaman reiterated his opinion that the owners of the machines place the machines in businesses within the corporate limits of the City without any cost. The businessman pays 100% of other costs such as rent, utilities, and taxes.
By motion of Mr. Boaman, seconded by Mr. Bonar, Council by a roll call vote of four (4) yes, three (3) no (Mr. Richter, Mr. Tudor and Mr. Witt) with Mr. Hardcastle absent, adopted the following ordinance:
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET:
The Dover Municipal Code is amended by deleting the license fees currently imposed upon Coin-Operated Amusement Machine Owners as stated in Section 11-4 and by adding or inserting the following regarding license fees under said Section:
Coin-Operated Amusement Machine Owner:
For each machine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $100.00
ADOPTED AUGUST 9, 1982
City of Dover Code Books - Supplement Costs
The City Clerk requested that the committee consider establishing a cost of $150 per Municipal Code Book to offset the cost of supplements printed throughout the year. Since the City only sells on an average of two to three code books per year, the proposed cost for a Code Book would assist in offsetting the cost of printing supplements and eliminate the necessity of billing for each supplement.
The committee recommended that a charge of $150 be placed on all future sales of the Municipal Code and supplements be furnished at no cost.
Mr. Boaman moved for the recommendation of the committee, seconded by Mr. Carey.
Since the demand for the Municipal Code by the public is so small, Mr. Tudor questioned why 50 original copies were ordered.
Please note that this ordinance did not pass for lack of a majority vote. See Council Minutes of August 23, 1982.
Mr. Willis stated that there is a substantial price reduction on the original printing of the Code, making it advantageous to order a reasonable amount of copies. He also pointed out that copies are furnished free of cost to newly elected councilmen, making it mandatory that available copies are on hand.
A voice call vote on the motion to increase the price of the Municipal Code Book to $150 was unanimous, with Mr. Hardcastle absent.
Proposed Travel Policy
Mr. Boaman referred to a proposed travel policy submitted to the committee that outlines certain procedures for submission of travel expenses, restricting purchasing alcoholic beverages and setting a maximum expenditure of $30 per day other than lodging and travel.
The committee recommended approval of the proposed travel policy.
Mr. Boaman moved that the proposed travel policy be adopted to include all City employees and salaried appointed officials; however, the policy provisions would not include special local functions such as League of Local Government meetings. Local governmental functions will be under the jurisdiction and review of the City Manager.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Witt and carried by a unanimous roll call vote, with Mr. Hardcastle absent.
False Alarm Ordinance
Mr. Boaman submitted an ordinance to cover negligence in energizing alarm systems in private businesses that mandates police response. The ordinance provides for a fine for each false alarm transmitted during the calendar year.
By motion of Mr. Boaman, seconded by Mr. Bonar, Council by unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Hardcastle absent) adopted the following ordinance:
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET:
Chapter 7.5 is hereby added to the Code of Ordinances, City of Dover, as follows:
FALSE ALARMS TO POLICE.
Sec. 7.5-1 Definitions. For purposes of this Chapter, the following words and phrases shall have the meanings respectfully ascribed to them by this section:
Alarm System. An assembly of equipment and devices arranged to signal the presence of a situation requiring urgent attention and to which police are expected to respond.
Alarm User. Any person, firm, partnership, corporation, or other entity or any agent, officer, or employee thereof on whose premises an alarm system is maintained within the City.
False Alarm. The activation of an alarm system through negligence of the alarm user causing the City Police to respond. Negligence does not include, for example, alarms caused by hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, mechanical failure, malfunction, or improper installation, provided, however, that in the event that during the course of the calendar year an alarm user has three mechanical failures, malfunctions, or improper installations causing a false alarm, then the third time such mechanical failure, malfunction, or improper installation within the calendar year shall constitute negligence.
SEC. 7.5-2
Every alarm user shall maintain its alarm system in such a manner as to minimize the number of incidents of false alarms to the police.
Sec. 7.5-3 Violation. When there is a false alarm signal eliciting notification to and a response by the City of Dover Police Department when a situation requiring a response by the Police Department does not in fact exist, but is in fact negligently caused by the alarm user, then the alarm user shall be fined $25.00 for each false alarm transmitted during the calendar year. Such fine shall be paid directly to the City of Dover Police Department within thirty (30) days.
ADOPTED AUGUST 9, 1982
Accrual of Vacation While on Terminal Leave - Police Pension Plan
The committee considered a proposal presented to the Police Pension Board that would allow accrual of vacation time during terminal leave. It was the recommendation of the committee that accrual of vacation time, while on terminal leave, not be allowed.
Mr. Boaman moved for the recommendation of the committee, seconded by Mr. Bonar and carried by unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Hardcastle absent).
Retirement Pay-out Procedures - Lump Sum Payment
The City Manager explained that retiring personnel now receive a weekly check for accrued vacation and sick leave, with effective retirement not beginning until this accrued time is exhausted. To date, no policy has been established for a lump sum payment of accrued vacation and sick leave. Staff has analyzed the economic impact involved in a lump sum payment and recommends that this be an option of the employee at the time of his retirement rather than receiving a weekly check for accrued vacation and sick leave. In the case of a lump sum payment for accrued time, Mr. Bartolotta stated that the retiree would receive pension benefits immediately.
Mr. Boaman moved that a policy be approved, allowing lump sum payment for accrued vacation and sick leave. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carey and carried by unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Hardcastle absent).
Police Retirement - New Employees
The committee discussed a retirement plan for new employees, noting that the current Police Pension Plan pertains only to existing police officers. At the time the current Police Pension Plan was adopted (January 11, 1982) it was stipulated that new officers would be hired under a 25 year retirement plan, said plan to be enacted before new hiring occurred.
Prior to the formulation of a new 25 year plan for future officers, Mr. Boaman suggested a meeting with the State Pension Committee Chairman, Ernest Danneman, to determine if the City is eligible to join the new State Police Pension Plan and how restrictive the plan is in terms of contracting in case the City wishes to resign their affiliation due to undesirable changes that might be adopted in the future. Legislation by the General Assembly would be necessary before the City would be permitted to join the State Police Pension Plan.
The committee also recommended that the City Solicitor immediately initiate the formulation of a City Police Pension Plan in case the State Plan is unacceptable.
Mr. Boaman moved for the recommendation of the committee, seconded by Mr. Carey and unanimously carried.
Mr. Bartolotta stated that Mr. Pike, a representative of E.H. Friend, will be present to speak before both pension committees on August 25th and invited all Councilmen to attend.
Resolution - County Wide Reassessment
By motion of Mr. Richter, seconded by Mr. Boaman, Council by unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Hardcastle absent) adopted the following resolution:
WHEREAS, the Mayor and Council of the City of Dover are very concerned that a county wide assessment of real property situated in the County has not been undertaken in 16 years; and
WHEREAS, Delaware statutes require that the Board of Assessment of Kent County shall annually make assessment of real property in the County and keep the assessment current and, further, revise all valuations and assessments so that property is assessed at its true value in money, meaning its current fair market value; and
WHEREAS, it is apparent that the Board of Assessment has not followed this statutory duty and that, as a result of the same, real properties are not being assessed at the true value or fair market value and that gross inequities exist in the assessment of properties and the corresponding payment of real property taxes; and
WHEREAS, the failure of the Board of Assessment for Kent County to keep its assessments current as required by law is further complicated and the problems are compounded by the trend of increase in real property values throughout the County resulting in even greater inequities in the real property taxation of property owners.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET:
1. That the Mayor and Council deem it to be in the best interest of the citizens of the City of Dover and residents of Kent County and the City of Dover that the Board of Assessment for Kent County undertake a general and complete reassessment of all real property in Kent County and a revision of all appraisals for said real property to reflect the true value in money or fair market value as required by law.
2. That the Mayor and Council respectfully request the Levy Court for Kent County to direct the Board of Assessment for Kent County to undertake immediately such a general reassessment of all property in Kent County to adjust and correct patent and gross inequities in the present system of real property taxation and to bring the functions of the Board of Assessment regarding assessment of real property in accordance with the statutes of the State of Delaware.
3. That the Mayor and Council hereby direct the City Clerk to deliver sufficient copies of this resolution to the Levy Court for Kent County requesting that the same be placed upon the agenda by the Levy Court and given due consideration and written response as promptly as possible.
ADOPTED AUGUST 9, 1982
Resolution - Duplicate Services - Kent County/City of Dover - Local Service Function Budget
Mr. Witt moved for approval of the following resolution, stipulating transmittal of the resolution to other municipalities in Kent County. The motion was seconded by Mr. Bonar and carried by unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Hardcastle absent).
WHEREAS, the City of Dover provides to its residents many local service functions, which functions are duplicated since Kent County furnishes similar services and functions to residents of Kent County such as planning, zoning, engineering, assessments, mapping, code enforcements, and parks and recreation; and
WHEREAS, the City of Dover also provides to its residents many other local service functions which are not furnished by Kent County such as police protection, fire protection, health inspection, licensing, street maintenance, street cleaning, street lighting, snow removal, trash collection, ambulance and paramedic services, and library; and
WHEREAS, these local service functions provided by the City of Dover are financed almost exclusively by taxation of real property within the limits of the City of Dover; and
WHEREAS, Kent County also assesses and collects real property taxes from residents of the City of Dover and does not offer any relief from County taxation because of local service functions provided by the City of Dover which are financed by the same taxpayers; and
WHEREAS, this double taxation of property owners in the City of Dover for similar or the same functions is inequitable, unjust, and in violation of the equal protection of laws; and
WHEREAS, the City of Dover has sought to have the Levy Court for Kent County to give recognition to the local service function concept and to give tax relief to residents are furnished; and
WHEREAS, New Castle County has adopted the local service function concept and gives due recognition and relief to taxpayers in municipalities where local service functions are furnished; and
WHEREAS, the City of Dover deems it in the best interest of residents of the City of Dover and other residents of other municipalities in Kent County furnishing local service functions to have the Levy Court for Kent County recognize the local service function concept and grant tax relief accordingly.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET:
1. That the Mayor and Council urge the Levy Court for Kent County to take immediate action to give recognition to the local service function concept by adopting a local service functions budget or by granting relief to the residents of the City of Dover and other municipalities for County taxation recognizing and based upon local service functions provided by the City of Dover and other municipalities.
2. The Mayor and Council hereby direct the City Clerk to furnish the Levy Court for Kent County with adequate copies of this resolution asking that the same by placed upon the agenda for the next meeting of the Levy Court and, further, asking that immediate action be taken and written response by requested to resolve the inequities presently existing regarding double taxation of residents of the City of Dover.
ADOPTED AUGUST 9, 1982
Resolution - Ambulance and Paramedic Services
By motion of Mr. Bonar, seconded by Mr. Witt, Council by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Hardcastle absent) adopted the following resolution:
WHEREAS, the City of Dover furnishes ambulance and paramedic services for residents of the City of Dover, which services are financed and paid for almost exclusively by the City of Dover; and
WHEREAS, services are also provided outside of the City limits of the City of Dover in many parts of Kent County; and
WHEREAS, these services provided outside of the City limits of the City of Dover are provided basically from revenues received by the City from taxation of its residents and not from revenues received from taxation of nonresidents other than a nominal grant received from Kent County; and
WHEREAS, furnishing of ambulance and paramedic services is essential to the health and welfare of residents of Kent County and the City of Dover; and
WHEREAS, the furnishing of these services exclusively by the City of Dover is increasing in area throughout Kent County and is becoming an increasing financial burden upon the City of Dover and its residents; and
WHEREAS, the City cannot financially continue to provide these beneficial and humanitarian services on a County wide basis without financial assistance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET:
1. That the Mayor and Council deem it essential that ambulances and paramedic services be rendered in the future to residents of the City of Dover and to residents of Kent County for the public health and welfare.
2. That the Mayor and Council hereby request the Levy Court for Kent County to take over the operation for ambulance and paramedic services on a county wide basis.
3. That the Mayor and Council, in the alternative, request the Levy Court for Kent County to contribute financial assistance to the City of Dover by rendering full reimbursement for calls outside corporate limits so that residents of the City of Dover are not required to bear the complete expense of furnishing ambulance and paramedic services outside the limits of the City of Dover.
4. That the Mayor and Council direct the City Clerk to furnish the Levy Court of Kent County with adequate copies of this resolution asking that the same be placed upon their agenda for urgent action and written response.
ADOPTED AUGUST 9, 1982
Proposed Ordinance - Off-road Motorcycles
The Legislative and Finance Committee proposed that an ordinance be established, requiring licensing, a muffler system, and written approval of the property owner to operate on any land within the City of Dover an off-the-road motorcycle.
Mr. Boaman stated that the purpose of this matter is for referral to the City Solicitor.
Mr. Witt suggested that the ordinance stipulate insurance coverage in case of liability.
Mayor Carroll agreed that the family of a child riding on someone else’s property should be required to have insurance coverage in case of injury or property damage as a result of the operator.
Water and Sewer Billings - Discount
Noting that the water and sewer account is now an enterprise fund and not a part of the General Fund and rates are calculated on a cost-of-service basis, the committee recommended that the City consider eliminating a discount on water and sewer bills.
The committee was informed that discounts to consumers amount to approximately $60,000 or $70,000 annually.
The committee recommended that the matter be referred to the Utility Committee with a recommendation from the Legislative and Finance Committee to eliminate discounts on water and sewer billings and the establishment of a grace period for outstanding bills, effective 1983/84 budget.
Mr. Boaman moved for the recommendation of the committee, seconded by Mr. Bonar.
Mr. Witt objected to the elimination of the discount, pointing out that the water and sewer account shows a surplus for year ending 1982 and expressed his opinion that elimination of discounts would slow down payments. He suggested instead, increasing rates and maintaining discounts.
Mayor Carroll pointed out that the surplus in the sewer and water account for fiscal year 1981/82 was partly due to postponement of needed capital improvements on the system.
A vote on the motion for referral to the Utility Committee for consideration of elimination of discounts and the establishments of a grace period, approved the recommendation by a vote of six (6) yes, one (1) no (Mr. Witt), with Mr. Hardcastle absent.
Mr. Boaman moved for approval of the Legislative and Finance Committee Report as submitted, seconded by Mr. Carey and unanimously carried.
PROPOSED INCREASE IN MEMBERSHIP - CIVILIAN PENSION BOARD
Mr. Bartolotta informed members of Council that it has been suggested by a unanimous vote of the Civilian Pension Board to add an additional civilian member. This would be an amendment to the existing ordinance that stipulates two civilian members.
Mr. Witt moved that the existing provisions of the civilian pension ordinance, be amended to stipulate three civilian members, the additional member to be elected by a majority of the civilian employees for a three year term and each member thereafter be elected for a three year term, as their terms expire.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Carey and unanimously carried by a roll call vote, with Mr. Hardcastle absent.
CITY OWNED PROPERTY - CHARLES DRIVE
The City Manager referred to a triangular parcel of land off Charles Drive that is dedicated open space, recorded on a plot plan. The land has been maintained for the past 25 years by Mr. Kenneth Brown who has requested that the City deed the property to him, said land being contiguous to his property.
On May 24th, Council considered Mr. Brown’s request and referred same to the Planning Commission for a public hearing.
On July 19th, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing, with no one present to oppose, and voted to remove the plot plan as dedicated open space and deed the property to the City of Dover, thereby allowing the City to dispose of the land.
The City Manager recommended to abandon the property and deed it to Kenneth Brown with the provision that no structures can be erected on said property and a 10' easement across the front be maintained by the Electric Department; in addition, the Brown’s are to be responsible for all costs of transfer.
Mr. Richter moved for the City Manager’s recommendation that would deed the property to Kenneth Brown with the abovementioned restrictions. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carey and unanimously carried.
CROSSING GUARDS - CAPITAL SCHOOL DISTRICT
Mr. Bonar moved to remove the matter of crossing guards for the Capital School District from the table, seconded by Mr. Carey and unanimously carried.
Mayor Carroll recognized Mr. Jeff Reed, President of the Capital School District Board of Education.
Mr. Reed reiterated his statement in the letter to City Manager Bartolotta where he requested that the City reconsider their stand concerning placement of crossing guards at needed intersections. He stated that the Board feels that the responsibility of crossing guards lies with the City for students who are required to walk to school.
Mr. Reed stated that the question of responsibility of the guards has been presented to the School Board attorney who has advised the Board that the responsibility of crossing guards within a municipality has been ruled on by various court cases. The court’s history indicate that the governing body of a municipality is responsible for crossing guards. The Capital School Board is willing to go to court to determine the responsibility based on their attorney’s findings.
Based on Mr. Reed’s statement, and assuming that the City continues a stand that the school district is responsible for furnishing school crossing guards, Mr. Richter wondered if this means that no crossing guards will be present at the time that school opens in the fall.
Mr. Reed answered, “That is right”, and the School Board plans to notify all families within the school district that there will be no guards, requesting that the family assume the responsibility of safety for their children.
Mr. Reed stated that it is unfortunate that some children, such as in the area of Governors Avenue and Waples Avenue, are required to walk to school due to the hazard and distance. He felt that the State of Delaware should look more closely at what children are eligible to ride a bus and at children who are not allowed this privilege. He noted that New Castle County has overhead walkways where hazardous roads and streets are located. These overhead walkways are constructed by the State and suggested that the City of Dover might approach the State of Delaware for similar installations.
In reviewing the circumstances that led to the City dropping any responsibility for school crossing guards, Mayor Carroll informed Mr. Reed that in April 1980 the City appropriated approximately $25,000 to fund the program. There were discussions with the Board on June 10, 1980, July 18, 1980 and August 25, 1980, and up until one year ago. All of the aforementioned discussions informed the School Board that the City was phasing out any funding for the school crossing guard program. Mayor Carroll stated that recently, City Manager Bartolotta again notified the School Board that no funding would be available from the City for fiscal year 1982/83.
Questioned by Mayor Carroll, Mr. Reed stated that legislation presented to the General Assembly that would give the School District the right of taxation was initiated by the chief school officers and was not authorized by the Board of Education.
Mr. Bonar asked if the Board of Education of the Capital School District did indeed endorse legislation and Mr. Reed answered in the affirmative.
Mr. Reed stated that the School Board has made their feelings clear for the past two years; that the responsibility of school guards lies with the City, but offered to work out any problems that might arise. If the City will not assume the responsibility of crossing guards, the Board is willing to clarify the matter legally since it is the Board’s feeling that past decision of the Courts favor the School District. After the matter is settled legally, Mr. Reed offered the help of the School Board in an advisory capacity.
Mayor Carroll referred to an offer by the Modern Maturity Center to fund the school crossing program, wondering if the School Board had given this any consideration.
Mr. Reed stated that he assumed that the offer was made to the City of Dover and not to the School District. He stated the Board’s opinion that any crossing guards hired would not be on the School District’s payroll but would be the responsibility of the City of Dover.
Mr. Boaman stated that proposed legislation discussed by the City of Dover and the Capital School District School Board would have placed the responsibility of school crossing guards on the County in the same manner that the responsibility is placed in New Castle County. The legislation proposed by chief school officials, or the School Board, was not the same legislation discussed.
Mr. Boaman stated that the entire issue of withholding payments has been ignored by the Capital School District Board. The City of Dover self insures for unemployment compensation, resulting in the fact that a school crossing guard works for the City nine (9) months and the remaining three (3) months receives unemployment compensation from the City. If the School District employs the crossing guards, the guards cannot collect unemployment compensation. Mr. Boaman stated that the City does not want to be an employer of record to protect the taxpayers. It was his opinion that the offer from the Modern Maturity Center to fund the crossing guard program should be explored, but the City of Dover still does not wish to be the employer of record.
Mr. Boaman reiterated Mr. Witt’s suggestion that the door be left open for further discussions with the School Board.
Mr. Boaman inquired of Mr. Reed, if the City initiated an agreement and a method of funding, continuing the training program and maintaining a backup system for the crossing guards, would the School District assume the role of employer of record?
Mr. Reed stated that he would first have to check with the School Board’s attorney and explore necessary insurance coverage.
Questioned by Mr. Richter, Mr. Reed stated that the Board might consider further discussions on the matter but will proceed to clarify the situation and policy.
In answer to Mr. Reed, Mr. Bonar stated that he felt the Board’s stand to take legal action would be a waste of time. He added that the Board has sat around since 1980 and now, three weeks prior to the opening of school, the Board wishes to proceed with litigation in court. The man-hours and legal fees will probably exceed the amount necessary to fund the crossing guard program.
After further discussion, it was agreed that Mr. Bartolotta and Mr. Reed would set up a time to discuss the Modern Maturity Center’s offer of funding the crossing guard program with Mr. Robert Bonniwell.
Mr. Bonar moved that the Legislative and Finance Committee, along with the City Manager, work with the President of the School Board and other members of the School Board that are designated to work out some reasonable solution to the payment and assignment of responsibility for the school crossing guard program. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carey and unanimously carried.
EMPLOYEE HANDBOOK - COUNCILMAN SHEVOCK
Mr. Shevock pointed out the total uselessness of the current Employee’s Handbook that has been changed from time to time but has never been reprinted to incorporate these changes in policy. Existing copies only contain handwritten notes that vary depending upon who possesses the Handbook.
He moved that the City Manager rewrite the Handbook as soon as possible so that it is understandable to everyone. The motion was seconded by Mr. Boaman and unanimously carried. It was noted that when the Employee’s Handbook has been completed, Council approval will be necessary.
INDUSTRY RELATED CONFERENCES
Mr. Shevock moved for referral to the Legislative and Finance Committee the matter of industry attended conferences by City employees, suggesting that no more than two (2) conferences will be permitted yearly, restricting time off for conferences to ten (10) days. Any days exceeding the ten (10) day period will be deducted from the employee’s vacation time. The motion was seconded by Mr. Boaman and unanimously carried.
Mr. Witt moved for adjournment, seconded by Mr. Carey and unanimously carried.
Meeting Adjourned at 9:25 P.M.
WILLIAM H. WILLIS
CITY CLERK
All orders, ordinances and resolutions adopted by City Council during their meeting of August 9, 1982, are hereby approved.
CRAWFORD J. CARROLL
MAYOR
August 16, 1982
db
ATTACHMENT TO COUNCIL MINUTES OF AUGUST 9, 1982
RESIDENTIAL SERVICE CLASSIFICATION
AVAILABILITY
This rate is available throughout The City of Dover electric service area for household and related services in a single private dwelling and incidental service outside of the home through the same meter, provided such incidental service does not exceed 20 KW of connected load.
CHARACTER OF SERVICE
Secondary voltage, 60 cycle, alternating current, single phase service.
Summer Billing Months Winter Billing Months
Monthly Rates June through October November through May
First 15 kwh, per kwh .1798 .1798
Next 30 kwh, per kwh .1165 .1165
Next 105 kwh, per kwh .0907 .0907
Next 350 kwh, per kwh .0745 .0745
Next 500 kwh, per kwh .0735 .0651
Over 1,000 kwh, per kwh .0735 .0625
MINIMUM MONTHLY BILL
The minimum monthly bill shall be $2.70
SEASONAL SERVICE
Where as customer takes service regularly for less than twelve months of the year, the monthly bill as calculated in accordance with the standard rate table will be increased by twenty-five percent (25%) before the application of the Fuel Adjustment Clause and any utility tax imposed by governmental authority. Bills will not be prorated for periods of less than one month.
FUEL ADJUSTMENT CLAUSE
All kilowatt-hours billed under this rate shall be subject to the Fuel Adjustment Clause included in this schedule.
PUBLIC UTILITY TAX
In addition to the charges provided for in this service classification a surcharge will apply in accordance with any tax imposed by governmental authority upon sales of electricity.
RULES AND REGULATIONS
The General Rules and Regulations of The City of Dover for electric service shall apply to service rendered under this service classification.
COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL SERVICE CLASSIFICATION
AVAILABILITY
This rate is available throughout the City of Dover electric service area for commercial and industrial purposes through a single meter.
CHARACTER OF SERVICE
Secondary voltage, 60 cycle, alternating current, single or three phase service. Other voltages may be applicable where available and at the option of the City.
MONTHLY RATES
Demand Charge
First 20 kwh no charge
All over 20 kw, per kw $2.50
Energy Charge
First 15 kwh, per kwh $0.1798
Next 30 kwh, per kwh 0.1165
Next 4,955 kwh, per kwh 0.0907
Next 5,000 kwh, per kwh 0.0745
Next 5,000 kwh, per kwh 0.0651
Over 15,000 kwh, per kwh 0.0625
DETERMINATION OF DEMAND
When the customer’s usage has exceeded 5,000 kwh for two consecutive months or when the City has reason to believe the customer’s demand is in excess of a 20 kw a demand meter will be installed.
The billing demand will be the maximum fifteen minute demand during the month, determined either by an integrating demand meter, or a lagged thermal demand meter.
In case of fluctuating loads, such as welders, X-ray machines, elevators, etc. - - - the demand of which cannot readily be measured - - - the billing demand may be established from manufacturer’s rating or determined by other suitable methods.
Where the power factor is found to be less than 90%, Dover reserves the right to base the billing demand on 90% of the kilowatt amperes instead of on the kilowatts.
MINIMUM MONTHLY BILL
The minimum monthly bill shall be $2.70 for single phase service and $8.00 for three phase service.
The minimum demand charge shall be based on 60% of the greatest billing demand established during any month of the 12 month period ending with the current billing month.
SEASONAL SERVICE
Where a customer takes service regularly for less than twelve months of the year, the monthly bill as calculated in accordance with the standard rate table will be increased by twenty-five percent (25%) before the application of the Fuel Adjustment Clause and any utility tax imposed by governmental authority. Bills will not be prorated for periods of less than one month.
FUEL ADJUSTMENT CLAUSE
All kilowatt-hours billed under this rate shall be subject to the Fuel Adjustment Clause included in this schedule.
PUBLIC UTILITY TAX
In addition to the charges provided for in this service classification, a surcharge will apply in accordance with any tax imposed by governmental authority upon sales of elect