[0:02] Everything.
>> Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, and
[0:05] happy new year.
>> Thank you.
[0:09] » This is the town council meeting,
Monday, January 5th, 7 p.m. Please join
[0:14] me in the pledge of allegiance
[0:20] to the flag of the United States of
America to the republic for which it
[0:25] stands. One nation under God,
indivisible, with liberty and justice
[0:31] for all.
>> Thank you. Please be seated.
[0:43] » First of all, we'll do the uh the roll
call. Uh Miss Khan
[0:47] » here.
>> Mr. Silva,
[0:49] » present.
>> Miss Story
[0:52] » here.
>> Miss Ryder Fox
[0:54] » here. Bob McKe present. Mr. Burke
>> present.
[0:58] » Miss Sander
>> present.
[1:00] » Mr. O'Neal
>> present.
[1:02] » Mr. Mason
>> present.
[1:04] » And Mr. Preston
>> present.
[1:08] » Matt Davis is is absent this year.
>> May I have a motion please to adopt the
[1:14] agenda?
>> So move Mr. Mayor.
[1:19] » Have a second.
>> Second. All
[1:21] » in favor say I. I. I. Any opposed?
[1:27] Motion.
[1:30] Okay. Want to highlight to the evening.
We'll get right to it. Swearing of of a
[1:35] new chief of police.
[1:48] » Absolutely.
[1:57] David Moyer having been duly appointed
and confirmed.
[2:01] » David Moyer having been duly appointed
and confirmed
[2:05] » as chief of police for the town of
Millsboro.
[2:08] police for Millsboro
>> do solemnly swear
[2:12] » or affirm that
>> do solemnly
[2:15] » swear
>> swear or affirm
[2:18] » I will support obey and defend the
Constitution of the United States
[2:23] » I will support obey and defend the
Constitution of the United States
[2:26] » the Constitution and laws of the state
of Delaware
[2:29] » constitution and laws of the state of
Delaware
[2:32] » and the ordinances of the town of
Millsboro
[2:34] » and the ordinances of the town of
Millsboro
[2:37] » I will faithfully, impartially, and
diligently
[2:40] » who will faithfully, impartially, and
diligently
[2:44] » discharge the duties
>> discharge the duties
[2:47] » of the office of the chief of police
>> of the office of the chief of police
[2:51] » according to the best of my ability.
>> according to the best of my abilities.
[2:55] » I will uphold the highest standards of
integrity. I will uphold the highest
[2:59] standards of integrity,
>> professionalism,
[3:02] » professionalism,
>> and ethical conduct
[3:05] » and ethical conduct
>> in the performance of my duties
[3:08] » in the performance of my duties
>> and will lead the Millsboro Police
[3:12] Department
>> will lead the Millsboro Police
[3:14] Department
>> with fairness
[3:17] » fairness,
>> accountability, and respect.
[3:19] » accountability and respect.
>> I will protect the rights, safety, and
[3:23] well-being.
>> I will protect the
[3:28] Sorry. Safety and well-being
>> of all residents, visitors
[3:33] » of all residents, visitors
>> and members of the community
[3:36] » and members of the community
>> without bias or prejudice
[3:40] » without without bias or prejudice.
>> I will strive to enhance public trust
[3:44] » I will strive to enhance public trust
>> through transparent leadership
[3:48] » through transparent leadership,
>> community engagement
[3:51] » community engagement
>> and dedication to justice.
[3:54] » and dedication to justice.
>> So help me God. No,
[3:58] » congratulations.
[4:30] That was a tough act to follow. But uh
one more
[4:36] oath of office for K9 handler
>> and bandit.
[4:50] » Yeah.
Does the dog have to repeat that?
[4:55] » So, this is Millsboro's first ever
police. We've never had one before. Um,
[5:02] this was a project I can't take credit
for. Our prior chief, Callaway, he
[5:06] initiated this project. Um, and Corporal
Justice was selected as the handler for
[5:11] this. He has completed his training
through the Delaware State Police and um
[5:16] they're already um ready to go to work
and we're we're proud and ready to swear
[5:21] them in as our first ever history of
Millsboro uh police handler or K9
[5:27] handler and police.
>> Okay, we're all ready.
[5:32] I Corporal Cody Justice
>> Corpal Cody Justice
[5:36] » do solemnly swear
that I and Bandit K9
[5:42] will faithfully serve the town of
Millsboro
[5:44] » faithfully
>> and the Millsboro Police Department
[5:48] » Police Department
>> with loyalty, courage, and dedication.
[5:52] » Loyalty, courage, and dedication.
>> We will protect life and property
[5:58] » life and property.
>> I will assist my canine and fellow
[6:01] officers.
>> My canine and fellow officers
[6:04] » and uphold the law to the best of my
training and ability.
[6:10] We will serve with integrity,
>> remain steadfast in the face of danger,
[6:17] » danger,
>> and carry out my duties with honor and
[6:20] pride.
We promise to use our skills to keep our
[6:25] community safe.
[6:28] to stand watch when others cannot.
>> And to serve as a symbol of trust
[6:36] » symbol
>> between the police and citizens of
[6:39] Millsboro.
>> symbol of trust of the citizens and the
[6:43] citizens of the sorry [laughter]
I accept this oath freely and proudly. I
[6:50] accept this freely and proudly
>> from this way forward
[6:55] as long as I'm able to serve.
So help me God. Congratulations.
[7:14] [laughter]
>> He's the star of the show. Sorry, Moyer.
[7:28] Okay, very good.
>> Any uh public comments tonight?
[7:34] » None, sir.
>> Nothing online.
[7:37] Okay, move right along. Uh secretar's
report.
[7:44] I'd like to make a motion that we adopt
the minutes from the 1st of December,
[7:50] 2025 town council meeting. Can we pause
just one second? We'll just let some of
[7:55] these uh folks filter out.
[8:13] overflow.
>> Yep.
[8:15] » Is Is there anyone in the overflow room?
There's some seats available in the main
[8:19] room.
[8:35] » I think they're coming up. Sorry.
We just saw him around the corner.
[9:05] Yeah.
>> Okay. I I think we're good. All right.
[9:09] Mr. Silva has made a motion. to uh to
accept the meeting minutes. Do we have a
[9:14] second?
>> A second.
[9:17] » All in favor say I.
>> I.
[9:19] » Any opposed?
>> Motion passed.
[9:25] Uh treasurer's report. Mr. Mason,
>> I make a motion that we pay the
[9:30] designated bills out of the appropriate
accounts as presented.
[9:36] » You have a second, please.
>> I'll second.
[9:39] All in favor say I.
>> I. I.
[9:42] » Any opposed? Motion passed. Thank you.
>> Millsboro Fire Company update. Or did I
[9:50] skip? No. Fire Company. Sorry. Mr.
O'Neal.
[9:53] » Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, unfortunately,
we closed out uh
[9:58] 2025 with 700 fire calls. the last one
coming in I think at 11:57
[10:06] uh p.m. on on the 31st which pushed us
to 700 which is real real close to uh
[10:12] our biggest number. I think last year it
was like 7:04. Um the EMS calls were
[10:17] right around 5,000. I don't have the
exact count yet but we're right around
[10:21] 5,000 EMS calls. So, our our guys are
extremely busy, which makes it uh uh
[10:27] even more uh important that we see uh uh
some of our title health and BB
[10:32] healthcare um partners move into town.
So, we're really looking forward to that
[10:36] to help us out. Uh again, our our junior
program, actually, they're training
[10:40] tonight on uh some of the ice rescue
suits that we have. So, again, we're
[10:44] very very fortunate to have a good
junior program and those guys are
[10:47] working hard tonight uh along with a
residential fire alarm that we just had.
[10:51] So, um, it's our report for tonight,
sir. Thank you very much.
[10:55] » Thank you and your staff very much.
>> All right. Greater Millsboro Chamber of
[10:59] Commerce. Uh, Mr. Burke will fill us in.
>> All right. Uh, we received an update
[11:03] from the chamber today. Uh, Nadian sends
her, uh, happy new year wishes. Uh,
[11:08] they've had six new members in the past
month, including the new coffee shop,
[11:13] uh, Lanni's Bruise and William B. Civil
Son's monuments, both right here in
[11:17] town. uh busy working on our annual
wellness fair which will take place
[11:21] Saturday, February 14th from 10:00 to 2
at the Indian River Senior Center. This
[11:26] is free and open to the public. We have
some great vendors lined up and do have
[11:29] some sponsorship and vendor spots still
available. Contact Naen at the chamber
[11:33] for more information. On April 24th,
they'll host the first grill and groove
[11:38] featuring live classic rock music,
dancing, barbecue, and raffles. This
[11:42] will be held at the Millsboro Fire Hall
and we'll be making a donation to the
[11:46] fire department as a result of the
event. Please save the date and come out
[11:49] and enjoy a fun evening while supporting
a very worthy cause. Uh they will be
[11:53] partnering with the town to celebrate
our country's 250th birthday for our
[11:57] annual Stars and Stripes taking place on
June 27th. This will be a great event.
[12:03] Tomorrow they have the monthly coffee
connect from 8:00 am to 9:30 a.m. at
[12:07] Avid Hotel and their popup event,
holiday vendor event at the Chamber went
[12:12] really well. Uh thanks to the town for
the amazing lights on the building. Many
[12:16] compliments were received and we're
hoping that this sets a nice trend
[12:19] downtown. And that's from Naen of the
chamber.
[12:23] » Very good. Thank you.
All right, police department's report.
[12:27] Chief Moya,
>> let me first off start by saying thank
[12:33] you um for um appointing me the chief of
police. I hope to not let you guys down
[12:39] and make you guys very proud. Um I
didn't get a moment to say it up there
[12:42] um but it means a lot that that
happened. So thank you again. I look
[12:48] forward to working with each and every
one of you guys very closely. Um so um
[12:54] we'll start off by going through the
enforcement data. um that was provided
[12:58] in your packet. So, uh just a caveat to
this, I was informed after I created the
[13:04] report um that the statistics had not
been updated since December 12th. Um
[13:11] there was a computer. So, I used a lot
of the states design programs and they
[13:15] found a a glitch in their error that the
reporting system stopped updating as of
[13:20] December 12th. So, some of these uh
numbers are not accurately reflected um
[13:25] towards the end of the year, but as you
can see based on from December 12th, um
[13:31] we're we're not too far off from
previous year's numbers. Um and I I took
[13:36] the liberty of putting in their
percentages of um where if if we're in
[13:42] going up or down on each one of the
crimes.
[13:50] Uh the good news is is uh there's no uh
reported accident collisions at that
[13:56] Laurel Road and Delaware Avenue um in
the past month which is you know another
[14:02] positive insight that uh some of the
traffic uh measures that the council has
[14:07] taken in regards from Delot seem to be
improving that intersection. Um
[14:13] we'll we'll still see and we'll continue
to monitor it as trafficking increases
[14:17] throughout the summer. Any
[14:23] questions on um enforcement data that I
can answer for anybody?
[14:29] » One quick one, Chief. Um
the rape numbers from 24 to 25 went up
[14:36] significantly. I think it's percentage
is actually wrong. Looks like
[14:40] significantly more than that. But
somewhere else in the report
[14:44] um it looked like the classification of
and other crimes
[14:49] um
sex offenses
[14:53] went down significantly. I wonder if
there was definitional change there or
[14:57] » so yeah um and I spoke um with this a
little bit about um at our pack meeting
[15:03] um and I was able to afterwards draw
five years worth of data. So we
[15:07] fluctuate up and down um over the last
five years. This is I would say the
[15:12] highest number and partly because of
that what I would say is our victim
[15:16] advocate um is catching crimes that
otherwise wouldn't have been labeled a
[15:22] rape. She's catching them. She's
advocating for these victims and
[15:26] catching incences that we maybe the
officer either charged inappropriately
[15:30] or maybe there's additional evidence
that was presented to her by the victim
[15:34] that increases into a rape charge. Um,
and so it it's a it's an idea of the
[15:40] system working. Um, obviously I don't
like to see the numbers at 26. Um, but I
[15:46] what I will say is that we're getting to
more of these victims. Um, reporting is
[15:51] going up. We're getting the education
out there as far as the rules of consent
[15:56] um and what constitutes a rape and what
um and not and and a lot of these rapes
[16:01] are we are uh federally funded through
VAWA violence against women which
[16:07] specifically deals with domestic
violence and a lot of times in domestic
[16:10] violence rapes are under reportported um
so we're actually uh I think in this
[16:16] avenue a lot of these rapes are domestic
related and being reported So, it's
[16:22] unfortunate, but it it's it's actually a
positive thing that we're able to help
[16:26] more victims.
>> Thanks.
[16:29] » I have a different question. Just for
clarification, when I looked at the
[16:32] numbers, you have down at the bottom,
you have burglary, theft, auto theft,
[16:38] and all others. What What defines all
others? What's what's the catchment? I
[16:42] mean, what are some of the things?
>> Are you under part two crimes or
[16:46] » Yes. No, part one.
>> Part one.
[16:47] » Part one. All others. um
>> like what would be some of those that
[16:51] you would define?
>> So those are your going to be your
[16:56] higher level felonies. Um and
so for instance, you have other sex
[17:03] crimes. Sex crimes can be a misdemeanor.
Um but there may be other felony level
[17:07] sex crimes whether it be um continuous
sexual abuse of a child or
[17:13] um child abuse first degree whatnot.
those all fall under the all others. So
[17:19] they they're considered a part one
crime. Um but the way the system again I
[17:23] I draw these numbers from the state
system called uh crime view and the way
[17:28] the system labels it I guess they're not
going to list out every single one. They
[17:32] list out the meanings that people are
most.
[17:34] » Well that does make sense since you have
the advocate now. Yes. You're going to
[17:38] get much more. So that makes sense.
Thank you.
[17:41] » To piggyback on that question.
>> Okay. Uh, the weapons is a part two
[17:45] crime. Does that ever get recategorized
depending on what's involved to a part
[17:51] one that's not under one of those
categories?
[17:54] » If the weapon was used against a person,
I believe it would move into a part one
[17:58] crime. If it's just simple possession,
it can be a felony, but be under
[18:02] » like a possession of an illegal weapon.
>> Correct.
[18:04] » That would be a part one. [snorts]
>> Um, possession of an illegal weapon. I
[18:08] don't believe um part one crimes are
typically going to be labeled as
[18:13] felonies against another human being.
Okay.
[18:15] » Um whereas possession of like we've had
recently obliterated serial number. Yes,
[18:20] it's a felony but it doesn't it against
an individual.
[18:24] » Okay.
>> Any other questions?
[18:30] » All right. Um uh second on the uh list
is just uh clarification on the
[18:36] expansion in uh jurisdiction for the
Milsboro Police Department. Um I know it
[18:42] was released in the media um Milsboro
has achieved or with the permission of
[18:47] the Department of Justice received uh
statewide jurisdiction. This was kind of
[18:53] something that's been in the works a
long time with the former chief as far
[18:56] as trying to clear up some boundary
issues as to where we can and can can't
[19:00] enforce um uh
traffic violations in areas that
[19:06] obviously have a nexus to the town of
Millsboro, affect the residents of
[19:09] Millsboro. Um so, you know, we worked
with the Department of Justice. We the
[19:14] first step in that was granting us uh
statewide jurisdiction. out. Even though
[19:19] it says statewide jurisdiction, there is
it is limited and we still probably will
[19:24] have to work out uh language on that
going forward. Um but as of right now,
[19:29] we have that statewide jurisdiction, but
it is limited um into the sense that it
[19:34] needs to have a nexus to Millsboro and
the safety of our residents that live in
[19:40] the town. Any questions on that?
or the uh is Delaware State Police
[19:46] involved in that?
>> So, we initially tried to develop anou
[19:50] with the Delaware State Police. Um
>> and the law allows two different
[19:54] avenues. One develop anou with another
jurisdictional agency. Um for instance,
[19:59] if uh another town needed our assistance
with with policing the nearby town, we
[20:05] see this commonly with other towns. They
would develop anou. um that was
[20:10] ultimately supported by the Cussus
County Administration but then denied um
[20:15] later on. Um so we put in a request with
the Department of Justice and the
[20:20] Department of Justice granted it. And
again, like I said, um we may have to
[20:23] fine-tune this process as we go along.
We want to make sure that everybody's
[20:28] happy and that everybody's working in
agreement. And I want to make sure that
[20:31] this is very limited in the
jurisdictional powers. Gotcha. And
[20:34] clearly defined. Thank you, sir.
>> Any other questions?
[20:41] Um, recruit Justin Harvey has completed
his field training and is now on full
[20:45] duty. He's doing great actually as well.
Um, we we just calculated his fourth
[20:51] quarter stats from his time on FAO. He's
he's he's doing phenomenal. So, we're
[20:56] really proud of him. We're looking to
fill three vacancies. Um, and we are
[21:01] projecting full staff of 21 officers um
by the end of 2026. Um, so we're excited
[21:07] about that. Um, Autumn Potter, I know
I've said this in the past, but she is
[21:12] graduating February 19th, 2026,
um, the State Police Academy, and we
[21:19] would love to have each and every one of
you guys there. If you want to come, if
[21:22] you do want to come, please send me an
email and I'll make sure you get on the
[21:25] list for all the information regarding
us carbon up there or whatnot.
[21:31] The Blue Santa project gifts was a
success this year. We $4,500. we were
[21:36] able to help four families um in
conjunction with the Grace United
[21:39] Methodist Church. So, we're really proud
of that. Um it was a good time and Santa
[21:44] even made an appearance.
[21:48] And then as most of you guys were there,
I I just wanted to put on the record the
[21:52] awards um from our awards um ceremony
that we held on December 12th. Mer
[21:58] accommodations, which consists of any
officer that uh received five um what we
[22:03] call adamoids, but they're letters uh
positive in nature regarding their
[22:08] performance either by civilians or um
other people that they work with. Um so
[22:14] the following officers um received merit
accommodations. Um Sergeant Sabrowski,
[22:19] Senior Corpal Bullock, Sergeant Ekki, uh
Detective Corporal Milner, Sergeant
[22:24] Rogers, Corporal Justice, and Corporal
Shockley all received merit
[22:29] accommodations. Um
life-saving accommodation, uh patrolman
[22:34] Gavin Mullen received a life-saving
accommodation. DUI enforcement. Uh
[22:39] patrolman or patrol woman Lacricia
Bradley received that for having written
[22:43] to most DUIs. Um in 2025
um sergeant accommodations were given to
[22:50] patrolman Gerald Foreman and Corporal
Cody Justice. An exceptional performance
[22:55] accommodation was given to Corporal
Dallas Milliner and patrolman Gavin
[22:59] Mullen. This year we included a rookie
of the year. An officer has to still be
[23:05] on probationary status to receive this.
And um patrolman or patrol woman again,
[23:11] Lacricer Bradley received rookie of the
year, officer of the year um which is
[23:16] our most prestigious annual award went
to PFC Justin who is currently working
[23:22] as our sexual assault domestic violence
investigator.
[23:29] That concludes my report. Unless you
guys have any questions, I'll turn it
[23:33] back over to you, Mayor.
>> Chief, just one comment. Um, and kudos
[23:38] to to your entire organization for the
uh the stop on 1219 where he took a
[23:43] couple guns off the street.
>> That was uh
[23:46] » heads up.
>> That's a prime example of that what
[23:50] we're trying to do on 24 working. Um
especially in light of most recent
[23:54] events. Um, I think it's imperative that
our police are being proactive and
[24:00] trying to stop the bad guys from hurting
the good guys. Um, and that's a prime
[24:05] example of our officers out there doing
just that. Um, we don't know what they
[24:08] were intending to do, but based on the
facts of that case, which I'm sure
[24:12] everybody read in the news, um, it it's
obvious that it wasn't meant for good.
[24:18] Right.
>> Exactly.
[24:19] » Thank you for that.
>> Congratulations.
[24:21] » Thank you, Chief.
[24:26] Okay, next. Uh, sewer and water. Mr.
Rich Plaque.
[24:35] » Happy New Year, council.
>> Happy New Year.
[24:37] » Thank you very much. Uh, we are looking
to uh seek award uh for bid for the
[24:44] Millsboro Force main project, the
engineer record century engineering.
[24:49] Andrew Jacobitch is representing them.
Uh they have reviewed all of the bid the
[24:54] bids received. George and Lynch Inc. uh
submitted the lowest bid in the amount
[24:58] of 5 million471,97744.
[25:04] Uh their bid was reviewed and found to
be complete representative
[25:09] and uh complete responsive and their
qualifications to be exemp uh excellent
[25:18] for the scope of work proposed. Uh Cent
Century Engineering has recommended
[25:23] award of to George and Lynch, Inc. Uh
pending concurrence for the funding
[25:30] agency USDA. As previously discussed, uh
the town is moving uh to pre-purchase
[25:37] materials in the amount of uh
1,673,133.81
[25:46] to be provided to the contractor for
installation. So, um, staff recommends
[25:52] the following motion, uh, be made by
council, uh, to approve the award, uh,
[26:00] for the town to approve the award of the
Millsboro Force main project to George
[26:03] and Lynch, Inc. in the amount of
5,741,97744
[26:11] contingent upon the USDA
um concurrence and and Delta utility
[26:18] permit approval prior to the contract
execution
[26:22] uh through a change order in the amount
of uh 1,6
[26:29] uh 673,133
[26:34] uh dollars. 81 as a result of the
materials purchased by the town with
[26:38] USDA
uh concurrence and agreement from the
[26:42] contractor has been made in that regard.
>> Is there any particular reason why the
[26:48] town is buying the materials versus the
contractor? Yes, we had ARPA funding set
[26:53] aside for that and due to some of the
time restraints uh with the government
[26:58] shutdown and uh we had to allocate those
funds and uh make that purchase ahead of
[27:05] time due to uh the next available uh
meeting for approval being now in
[27:12] January. We had a December 31st deadline
and with the government shutdown that
[27:18] prevented us from being able to execute
earlier. Okay. And then how does how
[27:22] does this fit into the rest of our
system, the components? I mean, this is
[27:27] » this will allow us to convey uh raw
waste water from our biggest pump
[27:32] station 7A on route 24 to what will be
the new wastewater treatment plant. um
[27:38] which will uh aid in our ability to
treat effectively the waste water from
[27:44] that side of town and then also give us
the ability to reuse uh treated
[27:50] wastewater affluent for the purpose of
uh future uh irrigation and repurposing
[27:58] through that uh regard
>> the effluent's going back to the pumping
[28:03] station
>> so yeah so from it it would be
[28:07] transmitted from the from the pumping or
from the pumping station to
[28:12] [clears throat] the roll untreated is
going from the pumping station to the
[28:16] treatment plant and then the treated has
the ability to flow back in that uh
[28:21] general direction for parks and other
opportunities that come up.
[28:25] » Does does this contract or proposal have
a start date and a completion date for
[28:30] this phase of it?
>> So it's all
[28:33] it it will be starting based on a
concurrence.
[28:37] USDA with the USDA. So, we're
anticipating a start date uh very
[28:42] shortly uh this month.
>> Yes.
[28:45] » And the and the materials are already
acquired. They're somewhere just waiting
[28:49] to be
>> the the purchase the the transaction has
[28:52] has started. Yes. In order to ensure
that we're able to utilize the uh
[28:57] different subsidized funding for this
broad.
[29:04] I'll make a motion to approve the
contract as presented.
[29:09] » We have a second.
>> I'll second.
[29:12] » All in favor say I.
>> I.
[29:14] » I.
>> Any opposed?
[29:18] » Motion passed.
>> Thank you.
[29:27] » Okay. The mayor's report.
Mr. Matt Hall. Um, first you're going to
[29:32] talk us through the audit report.
[29:40] » Actually, just step up for a moment. Um,
while we wait for uh Lindsay's on the
[29:45] from PKS uh is on online um and she will
be presenting the PowerPoint and and we
[29:55] can take any questions.
[30:00] Okay, I'm gonna go ahead and share my
screen. Um, but like I said, um, I'm my
[30:07] name is Lindsay Keane. I'm manager at
PKS. Um, and have been for the past
[30:10] couple years for the town's audit. Um,
with me as well is the partner on the
[30:15] for the town's audit, Ashley Stern. Um,
but I'll be doing most of the talking.
[30:21] I'll go through the the presentation.
Um, so let me just see if I can share my
[30:25] screen real quick.
[30:45] take a second to pop up, but
[30:53] you should be able to see it now.
>> [clears throat]
[30:57] » Um so like I said I've um prepared this
PowerPoint just to kind of go over the
[31:02] audit results and some of the financial
highlights um for fiscal year 2025.
[31:08] Um so first I'll go through um the
reports that we issue. Uh so the uh main
[31:15] report that we issue is our independent
audit report. Um and this is uh always
[31:20] the first couple pages of the financial
statements. Um this is where we issue
[31:24] our opinion on the on the um financial
statements um which is the main
[31:28] objective of an audit. Um so again for
2025 we've issued what's called an
[31:33] unmodified or a clean opinion. Um and
this is the highest level of assurance
[31:37] that we can give as um auditors that the
financial statements are not materially
[31:42] misstated. Um so good report for the
town again this year.
[31:49] Uh the second report that we issue is in
accordance with government auditing
[31:54] standards.
Um it is uh a report on internal control
[32:00] uh over financial reporting and on
compliance and any other matters. So a
[32:05] little different than the um auditor's
report. It's not an opinion report. Um
[32:09] but it's where we would identify any
instances of non-compliance um any
[32:14] deficiencies or weaknesses in the town's
internal controls. Uh so we did not
[32:20] identify any instances of non-compliance
um that we would be required to report
[32:24] here. Uh we also uh removed a couple
deficiencies that have been reported in
[32:29] the past. So there was nothing that we
reported this year. Um so there was one
[32:34] related to the timeliness of bank wrecks
and um it was a one-time um issue last
[32:40] year uh that we had to report. Uh so we
had just found a couple issues um you
[32:45] know we recommend um bank wrecks for all
bank accounts be reconciled within about
[32:49] 15 days um following the close of the
month. Um there was a couple months that
[32:55] were it wasn't a every single month last
year. Um there were a couple that were
[32:58] delayed. Um so we had to report that. Um
but in our testing this year, we did not
[33:02] find any issues um with that. So we we
removed that this year. Um the second
[33:08] one was related to uh the financial
statement preparation. Um this one has
[33:13] been in there for a long time I think.
Um so uh just with this year um there
[33:20] were some different circumstances.
Obviously a assistant finance director
[33:23] was hired. Um so this provided Matt with
some additional help. Um [clears throat]
[33:28] as well as I know he keeps up with the
um any new government auditing standards
[33:33] um that would be required to be
implemented. Um so that helps as well.
[33:37] Uh you know it's still outsourced to us
um as auditors that you know we assist
[33:42] with preparing the financial statements.
Um but we think, you know, if the town
[33:46] could or had the time to prep to prepare
them that they could. So that's kind of
[33:51] what that um was saying in the past. Um
but we went ahead and removed that um
[33:56] this year.
[34:02] Um so here is the um statement of
revenues expenses uh for the general
[34:08] fund. Um so the general fund is the
primary operating fund of the town. you
[34:12] know, it reports activities um for the
general administration, you know, just
[34:18] um the you know, expenses to operate the
town and run the town. Um it also
[34:24] includes public safety um which includes
police and fire um parks and wreck and
[34:28] then streets um or public works. Uh and
the activities are you know financed
[34:33] primarily through taxes and fees, grants
and service charges. Um so for 2025
[34:39] there was an increase in the fund
balance um before the other financing
[34:43] sources of 3,368,000.
Uh there were also transfers um out to
[34:49] the enterprise fund since all the cash
is held in the the general fund. Um
[34:55] uh as well as there was uh lease
proceeds. So this isn't true proceeds.
[34:59] Um there was a lease standard a couple
years ago that was implemented. Um so
[35:03] any new leases that are implemented
during the year this is um you know just
[35:07] how that has to be recorded. It's a
capital asset to the town and then the
[35:10] other side is um proceeds from lease
assets.
[35:15] Um so after those uh two uh sources the
uh general fund fund balance increased
[35:22] 1,552,000.
[35:26] Uh so revenues overall increased 457,000
due to an increase in the property
[35:31] taxes. Um property tax revenue increased
about 337,000.
[35:36] Um tax rates stay the same but the
assessable base increased. Uh there's
[35:40] also an increase in interest income of
125,000.
[35:44] Um permits and variances increased
326,000 and then all the impact fees um
[35:50] which includes police, ambulance, fire,
trans transportation and storm water.
[35:54] and then new the new parks and recck fee
fees. Um overall that all increased
[36:00] 498,000.
[36:03] Uh expenses went down quite a bit. Um
about 2,209,000.
[36:08] This was largely due to the capital
outlay. Um the police building and all
[36:14] its related expenses was that project
was completed in um fiscal year 24. So
[36:20] that capital outlay line um went down
quite a bit because of that.
[36:30] Um [clears throat] so here's a breakdown
of the fund balance. Um you know the
[36:34] fund balance is uh an accumulation of
the revenues over expenses year after
[36:39] year and it's really you know a very
important measure um for the financial
[36:43] health of the town. Uh it's reported in
categories based on how spendable it is.
[36:49] Um so it's mostly made up of restricted
amounts um which are limited to uh how
[36:55] they can be spent um from state and and
local laws. [clears throat] Uh and then
[37:01] the unassigned portion represents
amounts available to be carried forward
[37:04] for future purposes and it's really just
can be used for for general operating
[37:08] expenses um and is available for
emergencies.
[37:13] Uh so the governmental fund balance
ended at 16,586,000.
[37:19] Um of that amount 14,176,000
is non-spendable or restricted um by
[37:26] law. Uh leaving an unassigned fund
balance of 1,924,000.
[37:33] [clears throat]
Uh so based on the average expenses um
[37:39] our average daily expenses for 2025
they're about 20,000 or 21,000 um per
[37:45] day. So that makes up about 92 um 92
days or 3 months um for the town is set
[37:51] aside in this unassigned fund balance.
Um it's recommended to have at least 60
[37:56] um so it's good that that the town is is
over that um recommended amount.
[38:05] » [cough]
>> Uh so [clears throat] here's a breakdown
[38:06] of um where the money comes from. Uh so
total revenues in the general fund were
[38:13] 10,986,000.
Uh the largest of that is obviously
[38:17] taxes and fees. Um they make up about
78% of the total general fund revenues.
[38:26] Um
uh like I said it increased 457,000
[38:30] about 4% from 2024
um due to the taxes and fees and then
[38:36] there was also an increase in um impact
fees and the building fund fee. Um there
[38:41] was offset by some decreases in the
transfer tax revenue.
[38:53] Uh so here's a breakdown of um the
expenses by department.
[39:00] Uh so the total expenses were 7,618,000.
Uh largest areas are um was public
[39:08] safety for in 2025 that make up about uh
51% uh with the next largest being
[39:14] general and administrative. Um so those
are are typically the two largest areas
[39:18] or departments that we'll see for most
towns.
[39:23] » [clears throat]
[39:26] » Um like I said the uh capital outlay
went down quite a bit. Um public safety
[39:31] also increased 748,000 due to a
combination of um salaries, employee
[39:37] benefits and the pension expense. Um in
addition the collection of the ambulance
[39:42] and fire fees that revenue went up.
Therefore that money is passed through
[39:46] to the um fire department. Uh so those
expenses went up as well.
[39:56] Uh here's kind of a different look um
into the same the general fund expenses.
[40:01] Um so fiscal 24 was a little bit skewed
with the percentages um just due to the
[40:07] capital outlay costs being so high. Um
uh the largest expense in 2025 was the
[40:13] operating expenses uh made up 36%. Uh
this kind of just includes everything
[40:18] not in the other categories. So, repairs
and maintenance, insurance, uh dues and
[40:23] donations, office expenses, utilities,
you know, everything. Um, like I said,
[40:29] not in in the other categories. Uh, and
then the second largest type um is the
[40:34] salaries at 33%.
[40:42] Uh, so here's a look at the water fund.
Uh, so the water fund had a net
[40:46] operating income of 286,000.
uh compared to income of 90,000 in 2024.
[40:53] Uh the charges for services increased
181,000 or 10%.
[40:59] Uh expenses overall increased 11,000
uh due to an increase in uh salaries and
[41:06] related costs. Um it was offset by a
decrease in the supplies and
[41:11] professional services.
[41:15] Uh so in the other uh other income um
that includes uh assessment and
[41:21] annexation and connection fees that was
1,31,000.
[41:25] Uh the contributed assets is um was
1,834,000
[41:31] and that's the valuation of the
plantation lakes uh streets that was
[41:36] donated to the town.
Uh, and then there was $841,000
[41:42] transferred in from the general fund to
cover um the cash that was spent or to
[41:48] cover the the expenses.
Um, so overall there was an increase in
[41:53] the opposition uh of 6,327,000.
[41:59] Uh, and one new item this year, it's
labeled as the special item, uh, the
[42:03] capital bond proceeds that's recorded as
receivable this year. Um, because it's
[42:08] related to the costs that were, um, it
was requested for reimbursement for the
[42:12] Plantation Lakes cost. Um, was requested
in September 2025. Um, I um, it has been
[42:18] reimbursed already in fiscal year 26.
Um, but we went ahead and recorded that
[42:22] in 25 because all the costs for that
project were in 25 in prior years.
[42:33] » [clears throat]
>> Uh and now the sewer fund. So the sewer
[42:35] fund had an operating loss of 1,980,000
um compared to a loss of 873,000 in the
[42:43] prior year. Uh there was an increase in
charges for services of 128,000 or 4%.
[42:50] Uh expenses increased 1,163,000
or 27%. Uh this really due to uh some
[42:59] increases in repairs and maintenance and
um salaries and related costs.
[43:06] Uh so the assessment annexation and
connection fees were 2,232,000.
[43:11] Uh the capital grants line item
includes um two Delaware Community
[43:17] Reinvestment Fund grants um for 772,000
and 550,000 um since that money was
[43:23] spent that was recognized as revenues
this year. Uh it was used for the pump
[43:28] station 4 project uh and the remainder
260,000
[43:33] um is uh ARPA money that has been spent
um on the white farmer project.
[43:41] Uh the contributed assets again is from
um Plantation Lakes and that was
[43:46] 4,16,000 for the sewer fund. Uh and then
transfers in from the general fund were
[43:52] 1,27,000.
So that led to or ended with a increase
[43:57] in the net position of 6,673,000
for 2025.
[44:07] Uh so here's just a breakdown of um the
sewer fund and the water funds net
[44:11] position at the end of the year. Um this
one's broken down a little differently.
[44:14] There's only three categories. Um the
total net position between u both funds
[44:20] was 87,377,000.
[44:24] Uh of that
uh 74,572,000
[44:30] is invested in all the town's capital
assets. Uh and then there's 8,221,000
[44:36] that is restricted for construction and
debt service. Um so that's all the
[44:40] impact fees of that are collected but
have not been spent yet. Uh and that
[44:44] leaves uh the unrestricted balance that
can be used for general operating
[44:48] expenses at 4,584,000.
[44:57] So that was a lot of information. Um if
there's any questions, please let me
[45:01] know. Um but just you know to conclude
the town is definitely in in good
[45:06] financial position. Um the books and
records are are in good order. Um you
[45:11] know we didn't have any significant
difficulties and and performing the
[45:15] audit this year. Um you know we just
really appreciate the staff Matt and
[45:19] Andre's you know hard work and in
getting us everything that we need. Um
[45:24] everyone's very cooperative, responsive,
you know. So overall another very good
[45:28] audit for the town.
[45:40] Obviously,
[45:48] we just got this tonight. Um, would you
be available if we had questions next
[45:52] month once we've had a chance to go
through all this?
[45:55] » Yes, definitely.
>> Okay.
[46:08] » So, Matt, maybe you can answer this.
Yeah. On the um on the net position
[46:12] there, the total 4 point almost $4.6
million that can go back into general
[46:17] operating expenses. How does that
compare to
[46:21] to last year?
>> Uh which page are you on?
[46:24] » Um page 11,
[46:31] the very last column there.
>> Last page, last column.
[46:34] » I think she said there the 4 point
almost $4.6 million. It goes back into
[46:37] general operating expenses or operating
funds.
[46:41] » That's the unrestricted um unrestricted
total.
[46:45] » I I I honestly do not know that number
off the top of my head. I'm not sure,
[46:48] Lindsay, if you know what the restricted
one was last year. I don't have that.
[46:52] » I think it's on page eight.
>> Oh, okay. If we look in the actual audit
[46:56] itself,
>> I didn't see that.
[46:59] » Can try and pull that up.
[47:06] So, Ron, if I'm reading this properly,
this year is four,
[47:11] let's see here, 4,583,700.
[47:17] » Last year was $1,281,382.
>> Okay, gotcha. Page eight. All right, I
[47:24] see that now. Yep.
>> Thank you.
[48:22] We need to make a motion to accept the
auto report.
[48:25] » We do. [clears throat] I'll make a
motion to accept the auto report.
[48:30] Is there a second?
>> Second.
[48:35] All in favor say I. I.
>> I.
[48:39] » Any opposed.
>> Motion passed.
[48:42] » And if any questions develop too, just
uh like Bob stopped by today and had
[48:46] some questions based off of the
information I had sent out last week. Um
[48:49] I'm always available to to go over
anything uh either by phone by stopping
[48:54] in.
>> Anything.
[48:56] » The the one thing I noticed, Matt, that
may make it easier to review. So, if we
[49:00] had another column showing the
difference between the prior year and
[49:05] this year
>> and a percentage,
[49:07] » that would be helpful
>> because the one item that that stuck out
[49:11] was uh I guess it's the uh maintenance
and repairs.
[49:15] » Mhm.
>> Where it was two and a half times what
[49:18] it was last year.
>> Salaries are up. I know we we hired more
[49:21] positions, but as far as the work,
that's breakdown maintenance or
[49:26] » Yeah. So, I I I I can speak at least to
that one real quick. a huge one in this
[49:30] year in this last year for the repairs
and maintenance. I'm assuming you're
[49:33] talking about the sew work fund.
>> Yes.
[49:34] » Uh yes. So that was um there was a
planned repair and maintenance on the
[49:38] ribs out at the white farm. So that goes
into repair and maintenance because it's
[49:42] not really doesn't classify as a capital
object uh capital asset, but it was uh
[49:48] like don't quote me off the number off
the top of my head, but it was like
[49:51] $300,000 to do the sand and all that
stuff per
[49:56] » All right. Now Zo
>> Rich Rich I see you in the back there.
[50:00] » Um
right will there be a linkage between
[50:03] the asset management program that you're
doing in I works and the financial
[50:07] system we start to look at capital
assets replacement and that kind of
[50:13] thing. Will there be a direct linkage
between those two programs
[50:17] » projection for the budgets? But in
regards to I don't know we'll have to
[50:25] look into that. Yeah, there won't
necessarily be a direct linkage in terms
[50:29] of like your fixed assets and your
depreciation schedules and finance
[50:32] because it's a completely different
thing than his repair and maintenance
[50:35] schedule. At a certain point, we can't I
um when you repair it, it may extend its
[50:40] useful life, it may not. So, it depend
mean those criterias for the financial
[50:44] world are different than if we put a car
on the book for 10year value. he may be
[50:50] able to keep it on the road longer, but
at the end of the 10 years, it's off our
[50:53] it's off of our books as a depreciation.
It's still there because we own the
[50:58] asset, but it might not be
it doesn't necessarily his repairs to
[51:03] even though he might keep it for another
five years if it's still running. So it
[51:08] doesn't have a direct link from
>> that standpoint, but more from the
[51:12] budget standpoint of being able to feed
the budget numbers to say, "Hey, I know
[51:16] I'm going to have to be replacing this
many trucks in these years." So yeah,
[51:20] it's not going to be like they're not
directly tied, but they are going to be
[51:23] tied in.
>> He's going to be able to give me much
[51:26] more accurate numbers. Same with water.
They're going to be give more accurate
[51:30] numbers on, hey, I know I
>> I know I'm going to have to replace one
[51:33] car this year, two cars next year, one
the following. Same with pumps and stuff
[51:37] like that. They're going to be able to
start producing those and we'll be able
[51:40] to project out further uh and better for
the budgeting process.
[51:44] » Yeah. Oh, exactly. Exactly. He's see
he's seeing an asset that's that's in
[51:48] here. It's the end of its useful life.
Correct.
[51:50] » You know, have to budget for it. So,
it's going to help in the budget
[51:52] process.
>> Correct.
[51:53] » Yeah. Very good. Thank you.
[52:01] Okay, Matt. Supplemental tax billing.
[52:12] All right. This is the uh third quarter
supplemental tax assessment. This is for
[52:20] um
building permits that were finaled or
[52:23] coed between uh October and December of
2025. And this would be build at a rate
[52:31] of 50% since we're at 50% of the year
when this is going out. And um as in
[52:36] previous uh motions by council, uh this
would be to bill for only assessments
[52:42] over $5 for the supplemental tax bill
itself. Uh so that would come out to
[52:48] we'd be sending out a total billing for
$26,451.36.
[53:00] So I would just need a motion to do the
supplemental billing for 50%.
[53:04] » All moved.
>> We have a second.
[53:08] » Second.
>> All in favor say I.
[53:10] » I.
>> I.
[53:12] » Any opposed?
>> Motion pass. Thank you.
[53:15] » Right. Thank you.
[53:21] » Okay.
Conditional use application submitted by
[53:25] Tim NY for the property located at 102
East Dupont Boulevard, Millsboro,
[53:30] Delaware 1 19968, formerly known as tax
map and parcel number 133-17.17-19.00
[53:43] Mr. Nay here.
[53:48] » It's incorrect.
>> Incorrect. Okay. should be 1 19966
[53:52] for
>> All right. The zip code on that 1 19966
[53:55] not
>> 1 19968.
[54:02] » Anyone here to speak to that?
[54:20] extension.
>> They informed the building department
[54:23] that they wanted to be on the agenda at
this moment.
[54:27] » Okay.
>> Do they have a test?
[54:30] » The details are in the application that
Mary, do they necessarily have to be
[54:33] here to present?
>> Yeah,
[54:34] » that is up to the town council to the
chair. That's why I pass. See,
[54:39] » I'll make a motion to approve it.
>> Second.
[54:45] All in favor say I. I. I.
>> Any opposed?
[54:49] Motion passed. Thank you.
[54:54] This all
[54:58] » okay.
Lucky resoning request.
[55:02] » It's kind of a
>> from MR to HC.
[55:08] » Approval, disapproval, or seek
additional information. Reopen record
[55:12] concerning resoning request.
[55:16] The applicant has has come to the
podium. I don't know that you
[55:19] necessarily need her for anything right
now though, right?
[55:29] » So, this is back on your agenda because
no decision was made um at the
[55:34] conclusion of the public hearing um when
you closed the public hearing and then
[55:38] tabled it. So now it's back and the
different options are listed on the
[55:43] agenda of what you might do because
there no was no clear direction at the
[55:48] end.
>> Has there been a change in the previous
[55:54] application or just
>> No, it's the same application and it's
[55:57] based on the same information that was
presented to you at the public hearing
[56:00] that was held a couple months ago, but
no decision was made. You deferred
[56:05] making a decision until a later date. So
here we are again. Um,
[56:10] now one of the things you'll see on your
agenda is that it talks about a future
[56:14] land use map amendment. Right now,
legally speaking, you could not approve
[56:19] the resoning because the reasoning
wouldn't align with your future land use
[56:23] » map in your comprehensive plan and it's
required to by law. So when that
[56:29] happens, and it has happened before in
other situations,
[56:32] um you need to pursue a future land use
map amendment with the OSPC.
[56:39] Um and that process has to play out
before you can make a final 100%
[56:44] decision to reszone if that's what you
decide you wanted to pursue. Um, if
[56:50] based on the information you received,
you're not inclined to approve the
[56:54] resoning, then you don't need to worry
about the future land use map amendment.
[56:58] Um, it's only if you're going to you you
want to move forward with saying yes to
[57:02] the resoning, um, that you would need to
do that before
[57:06] there you could 100% make that resoning
legal.
[57:29] What's your pleasure? Council,
[57:34] » unfortunately, I make a motion. I I I
feel you exactly what you're where
[57:38] you're coming from and your rationale
and your reasoning, but based on the
[57:41] testimony we had previously on this, um
I don't think anything has changed with
[57:46] that. So, I would uh make a motion to
decline um change in zoning.
[57:55] » Is there a second?
[57:58] » Second.
>> All in favor say I.
[58:03] » I. I. Any oppose?
[58:08] Sorry, motion not approved.
[58:19] Gadence Academy preliminary site plan
for property located at tax map at
[58:23] parcel 133-17.09-12.01.
[58:32] Mr. Christenberry,
[58:36] » he said motion motion.
Should that be correct
[58:42] in the minutes that
the double negative?
[58:47] » Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Was that true?
[58:53] This starts on a
[59:04] after the town lakes, right?
[59:13] » This is after town.
>> Yeah, there's leg on it, but or no page
[59:17] numbers.
The scissor went down.
[59:28] This one
[59:53] Good evening, council. I'm Kristen Barry
with Axium Engineering in Georgetown,
[59:57] Delaware. Uh, Cadence Academy has
previously been known as the Giggle Bugs
[1:00:03] Daycare. The owner wishes to create a
significant expansion because the need
[1:00:10] the demand for daycare in this area is
significantly higher than the supply and
[1:00:16] he has enough land to make a pretty
substantial addition to the project. Uh
[1:00:23] this first sheet on the site plan is our
demolition plan kind of shows what's
[1:00:27] going to be removed. You scroll down
just a little bit. There you go. So the
[1:00:31] uh the parking lot area here will be
removed and then scroll down to page two
[1:00:38] and that's where the addition would come
in and the parking lot will be expanded
[1:00:43] over this way here.
We have been working with your staff and
[1:00:48] your consultants to bring this plan to
you today. They wanted us to get a delta
[1:00:53] approval before we came before you. That
was received last month. They did
[1:00:58] determine that the existing entrance is
sufficient for the addition that's that
[1:01:04] is proposed. So no significant changes
in the entrance are being proposed. The
[1:01:08] fire marshall has approved the fire lane
layout. Uh conservation district I met
[1:01:13] with them. They agreed that the prior
phase has 36 inch diameter pipes under
[1:01:20] the parking lot that absorb all the
runoff from the first phase. It appears
[1:01:24] though they were sized uh contemplating
this addition. They were they were
[1:01:28] designed by another engineer about 10
years ago. But based on our preliminary
[1:01:32] analysis, uh the conservation district
did agree that the pipes are adequately
[1:01:38] sized. So having said all that,
I I think we we're we're on the verge of
[1:01:44] being ready for final site plan
approval. So, if there's any questions
[1:01:47] that council has, I'd love to go ahead
and discuss them tonight if we can, just
[1:01:52] to see if we can move this project
forward as quickly as possible, but
[1:01:55] there's a there's a slight chance we
could have this open in time for the uh
[1:01:59] fall 2026 school year. Uh, but only if
we can move it along uh relatively
[1:02:05] quickly. Uh, the outstanding items that
I'm aware of is getting a formal
[1:02:10] approval from the conservation district.
The other formal approvals from the
[1:02:13] state agencies have been issued. uh the
town taking our utility plan that was
[1:02:17] put together and submitting it to Dell
DOT to get permission to bring a water
[1:02:21] line under State Street which is
maintained by Dell DOT. So that would
[1:02:25] need to be reviewed by your engineer and
approved for submitt to to Delta. Um and
[1:02:32] then we owe you all a landscaping plan
and a lighting plan. I'm not aware of
[1:02:36] anything else that's outstanding to move
this toward final fugal unless uh you
[1:02:42] all feel there's something that wasn't
addressed in the preliminary that you
[1:02:45] need to know more about and if you
[clears throat] do have anything in mind
[1:02:48] on that I'd love to know tonight so we
can come back very soon and wrap this
[1:02:53] up. Uh something that the county has
done and I don't know Miss Shrider Fox
[1:02:57] if town's able to do it. The county will
often take a preliminary approval and
[1:03:02] empower the staff to issue final
approval if it's deemed that the project
[1:03:06] is close enough to final. But I don't
know if that Millsbro is in a position
[1:03:10] to do that or not. If they are, I'd ask
that you'd entertain a motion allowing
[1:03:14] the staff to issue a final approval if
you find that everything we have
[1:03:17] presented is satisfactory.
>> That has not been the practice of the
[1:03:20] town's bills for in the past.
>> Okay.
[1:03:26] Are there any other questions? Uh, our
packet does include the state agency
[1:03:30] approvals. I think the fire marshall I
sent in after the fact. I didn't see it
[1:03:34] in there, but I do have a copy if you
all would like to see approval from the
[1:03:37] fire marshall, but the Delot approvals
in there. The meeting minutes from
[1:03:40] conservation district are in there. The
utility permit that's been prepped for
[1:03:45] your review before submitted to Delot is
in the package that you have.
[1:03:51] We do have to do a utility permit
because the building expansion, it
[1:03:56] requires not only that the new building
be sprinklered, but that the existing
[1:04:01] building be sprinkler because the state
has adopted a requirement that any
[1:04:05] commercial daycare does have sprinkling
uh for fire safety. And so we're going
[1:04:11] to bring a 6-in line under State Street
to connect sprinkling for both the
[1:04:16] proposed expansion and the existing
facility.
[1:04:22] There's currently a for sale sign out
there now, right? But there's
[1:04:26] » I think that's for the vacant parcel to
our south.
[1:04:30] » Uh the owner is here. If you'd like him
to testify that he's not trying to sell
[1:04:34] the property, I'd be happy to invite him
up.
[1:04:38] » I just No, that's correct. And then just
also add in the past that it was a
[1:04:43] preliminary approval by
>> give you a name
[1:04:47] » Quinn Johnson uh property owner not the
managing partner or of Cadence Academy
[1:04:52] but uh this also for history sakes was
actually precoid a preliminary plan for
[1:04:57] a separate building had come through
council was approved but then of course
[1:05:01] was put on uh the brakes because of
COVID and all the situations like that
[1:05:06] and instead of coming to the town again
working with uh Jamie and the others uh
[1:05:10] staff, it was deemed that an addition
would be a better fit uh for everything
[1:05:16] uh versus a whole separate building. And
so that's why we kind of changed
[1:05:20] direction if anybody was following it
initially, why it's not a separate
[1:05:24] building and made it into an addition to
accommodate no additional needs for uh
[1:05:29] entrance, fire safety, any of those
things.
[1:05:36] I look in the packet I see that both
ACOM and uh Reddantis has recommended
[1:05:43] approval for uh
>> correct for the revised plan we
[1:05:48] submitted
>> preliminary site plan.
[1:05:50] » Yeah.
[1:06:03] We have a motion for preliminary uh plan
approval.
[1:06:05] » So moved. Have a second.
>> Second.
[1:06:08] » Second. All in favor say I.
>> I.
[1:06:11] » I.
>> None opposed.
[1:06:14] » Thank you. Approve.
>> Thank you.
[1:06:31] Okay, next one is uh annexation
committee appointment for the
[1:06:34] application submitted by Adrien
Mobileilia with property located tax map
[1:06:38] and parcel number 233-5.00-11.00
[1:06:45] on Handy Road, Millsboro 1 1996.
And we're looking for a motion to
[1:06:52] appoint a three-member annexation
committee to review and make a
[1:06:55] recommendation regarding the annexation
request.
[1:06:59] » I'll make a motion.
>> Second.
[1:07:02] » Okay. All in favor?
>> I I.
[1:07:06] » Any opposed?
Okay. That part is approved. Now we're
[1:07:12] looking for nominations for members of
that committee.
[1:07:33] I'll nominate Mary [laughter]
and myself.
[1:07:38] Oh, yourself. It's too
>> I am on every committee.
[1:07:41] » You raised your hand. I wanted to pick.
You stuck your hand.
[1:07:44] » I see him behind me. I not think
Kimberly.
[1:07:48] [laughter]
[1:07:51] » Okay, I'll modify my nomination for
Kimberly, Ron O'Neil, and myself.
[1:07:57] » Did I nominate myself?
>> I'll second all these nominations.
[1:08:04] » The second
[1:08:08] » I was just going to say that
>> time.
[1:08:12] » All right. All all in favor say I to the
nominations.
[1:08:15] » I
none
[1:08:16] » opposed.
Thank you. Motion passed.
[1:08:22] » Okay. Next. Town lakes resident
residential plan community amended
[1:08:27] preliminary uh subdivision.
Um Mr. Davidson and Mr. Hut.
[1:08:45] Good evening. I think most of you know
me by now, but for the record, my name
[1:08:49] is David Hut, a local attorney in
Georgetown with the law firm of Morris
[1:08:54] James.
This evening, I am representing a Tapco
[1:08:58] Townlakes LLC, which is the new owner of
the property outlined in yellow on the
[1:09:03] screens around the room. And of course
that is the location where a Tapco uh
[1:09:09] Town Lakes community will be located in
the future. Before going further, you
[1:09:13] can see on the left, you probably can't
read it from where you are. There is a a
[1:09:16] project team that's listed and that's
listed. I know that town council is
[1:09:20] familiar with the Town Lakes project,
but there are some new faces here. Uh so
[1:09:24] I thought we take the opportunity this
evening to introduce them with Papco
[1:09:30] and the standing in the back is Russ
Powell, the chief operating officer.
[1:09:34] Sitting down about midway back is Jeff
Cox, another individual with Patapco.
[1:09:39] And then some familiar faces to you be
Mark Davis and of course with Penoni
[1:09:42] which remains the project engineers and
sitting in the back another professional
[1:09:47] engineer with Penoni Curtis Eden who are
part of the team.
[1:09:53] I know that the the council is familiar
with the town lakes project, but I
[1:09:56] thought it might be helpful this evening
as I introduce some new faces just to
[1:10:01] describe some of the key milestones that
have happened along the way. First, uh
[1:10:06] in February of 2023,
73 acres was annexed into the town's
[1:10:13] municipal limits. And for those of you
who uh weren't here at that time in 2023
[1:10:19] and didn't participate in that vote,
that 73 acres was combined with an
[1:10:22] existing 58 acres that was already
within the municipal limits, creating a
[1:10:27] 131 acre parcel that you saw outlined in
yellow. In the original 58 acres was
[1:10:34] annexed into the town uh in 2007, sort
of as the part of that peninsula
[1:10:39] crossing uh whole conglomerate of of
land that existed there at the time.
[1:10:44] this 73 acres was added. Both the 58 and
73 acres had a zoning classification of
[1:10:50] MR, the town's medium density
residential zoning classification. As
[1:10:54] you can see, in March, a month later, uh
the town did vote to modify the zoning
[1:10:59] classification slightly for the combined
131 acres. And what that was, there was
[1:11:04] an RPC overlay over top of the MR
district. So that 131 acres still has
[1:11:09] the MR underlining zoning classification
but now has an RPC overlay on top of it.
[1:11:15] You can see there was a board of
adjustment approval in October of 2003.
[1:11:21] Thereafter uh in November of 2023 there
was preliminary RPC site plan approvals
[1:11:27] and you'll see that plan in a moment.
And then just this past year in in March
[1:11:32] of 2025, um Town Lakes community
received preliminary subdivision plan
[1:11:38] approval. And you can see there was some
waiverss related to some street
[1:11:42] requirements at that time. And then to
bring it full circle to Tapco Town Lakes
[1:11:47] LLC, uh it closed on the property in
June of this past year. [clears throat]
[1:11:53] As you likely saw from the
from the uh initial screen when the
[1:12:02] property was outlined in yellow, many of
you will recognize the location. I know
[1:12:06] you're familiar with it. This 131 acres
is located on the west side of Handy
[1:12:11] Road. Handy Road being the diagonal road
at the upper right hand corner of the
[1:12:15] images on the screen. And the
intersection that you can see just going
[1:12:19] off the paper uh is uh Town Center
Boulevard. That of course runs from
[1:12:24] Handy Road to Route 113.
This is also across the street from
[1:12:29] Handy Road. If you were to go on to Town
Center Boulevard on your right, would of
[1:12:33] course be uh where the new Weiss
Supermarket is under construction.
[1:12:40] The image that's shown on the screen is
that preliminary site plan and
[1:12:44] preliminary subdivision plan that
received approval in March of 2025.
[1:12:50] And you can see on that that there's a
total of 450 mixed uh use units. Um 330
[1:12:58] of those were single family detached
sort of the bottom two/irds of the
[1:13:02] screen where the label is located. And
then in the upper right hand corner of
[1:13:06] the community, 120 apartments were
approved. Those 120 apartments, as you
[1:13:12] can see, are in five buildings. One
parallel to Handy Road and then four
[1:13:16] parallel to the road as you enter the
property.
[1:13:21] Some of you may recall that there were
representatives from the Tapco. I know
[1:13:24] Mr. Powell was one of them who's
standing in the back this evening. There
[1:13:28] were representatives from the TAPCO here
during the town process of approving uh
[1:13:32] the preliminary subdivision plan and
they were here as part of the due
[1:13:35] diligence uh to determine basically if
they wanted to purchase the project.
[1:13:39] During those meetings, one thing that
town council made clear u was that one
[1:13:45] of the least favorite parts of the town
lakes community uh was the 120
[1:13:50] apartments uh in uh the upper right hand
corner that you see on the screen. So
[1:13:54] then you can see uh the detail on the
right hand side of the screen.
[1:13:59] Tapco listened carefully during those
meetings uh has worked with the town
[1:14:04] staff and the town consultants uh since
then uh and specifically asked the
[1:14:08] penoni team to remove the proposed
apartments uh and to put town homes uh
[1:14:14] in their place.
The this evening's application is in
[1:14:19] front of the town council basically
because ATAPCO wants the town council to
[1:14:23] confirm that it has accomplished what
the council wanted with respect to
[1:14:27] substituting the town home housing for
the apartment townhouse apartment
[1:14:33] concept that the town uh saw before.
With respect to the site plan, you can
[1:14:40] see that the site plan looks largely the
same. You can see the 330 single family
[1:14:44] detached homes again at the bottom two/3
and then you can see the excerpt showing
[1:14:50] the upper right hand portion there. Uh
and the resulting work that Penoni did
[1:14:56] to develop the town home section
resulted in 415
[1:15:01] total units. That's a reduction of 35
total units from the 450 that were com
[1:15:07] the combined apartments and single
family homes. So now instead of 450
[1:15:12] units, there'd be a total of 415 units.
As you can see that that's because the
[1:15:17] number of multif family units or the
town home units is 85, which of course
[1:15:22] is 35 than the 120 apartments. In the
image on the screen, rather than there
[1:15:28] being five uh buildings, there are 16
buildings that would comprise uh those
[1:15:33] 85 town homes, ranging with a number of
units in them from four units uh to
[1:15:39] seven units in each of the various
buildings.
[1:15:43] Like the eye doctor always says, you
better one or better two. On the left
[1:15:47] hand side of the screen, you can see the
old version of the site plan. on the on
[1:15:52] the right hand side you can see the
proposed uh site plan for this evening.
[1:15:57] Again they look very similar um but as
you can see instead of five apartment
[1:16:02] buildings you can see the 16 uh town
home groups of town homes that are shown
[1:16:07] there for the total of 85 units. Some of
the other features that I wanted to
[1:16:12] point out is that as you come in the
community, uh the images, the town homes
[1:16:16] that you see that are parallel to
Atlantic Flyway, the entrance, those
[1:16:20] would actually have fronts onto Atlantic
Flyway. So, what you're seeing there are
[1:16:25] rear loading uh town homes for the ones
that are parallel to Atlantic Flyway,
[1:16:30] the same as the ones that are directly
across from them on the screen. uh on
[1:16:34] the ones on the outer perimeter of the
town home area are front loading. So
[1:16:38] there'll be both front loading and rear
loading uh town homes uh that are
[1:16:42] proposed to be substituted for the
apartments.
[1:16:46] One of the benefits of uh reducing the
number of units by 35 in the apartment
[1:16:52] section is that it resulted in a
reduction of 33% of the traffic on a
[1:16:58] daily basis uh from the multifamily
section of the community. Uh and on a
[1:17:02] Saturday it resulted in a 28 28%
reduction uh in the vehicles uh per day
[1:17:09] in each of those sections.
In addition, as you saw in the
[1:17:14] rendering, and this is a little bit more
of a closeup of that, uh, the amenity
[1:17:19] area was also reoriented. Uh if we were
to go back two slides, you would see
[1:17:23] that the clubhouse amenity was on the
other side where the tot is and those
[1:17:27] things were switched and that was
because there was parking that where the
[1:17:31] nearest town home building is. But with
the rearrangement and substitution of
[1:17:35] the town homes for the apartments, it
was thought that it'd be better to
[1:17:39] reorient the amenity center so that the
building would now be on the the
[1:17:44] southern side of it rather than the
northern side. The amenity package has
[1:17:48] remained the same. There's no difference
in it other than sort of mirroring or
[1:17:52] flipping uh the various features of that
amenity area.
[1:18:02] As I mentioned a few minutes ago,
[clears throat] town council this
[1:18:05] evening is being asked by a tapco uh to
approve the revised preliminary site
[1:18:10] plan and corresponding revised
preliminary subdivision plan that
[1:18:14] substitutes the 85 town homes for the
120 apartments.
[1:18:19] In section 210-20, the Millsboro Code
describes the RPC district as an overlay
[1:18:25] zone uh that is superimposed over top of
the underlying zoning for that
[1:18:30] [clears throat] piece of property, which
in this case, as was mentioned, is the
[1:18:32] MR district. The purpose of an RPC is to
encourage large-scale developments as a
[1:18:38] means of creating a superior living
environment through unified developments
[1:18:41] and to provide for the application of
design ingenuity while protecting
[1:18:45] existing and future developments and
achieving the goals of the comprehensive
[1:18:49] plan. I know that uh your consultants
for and AECOM have reviewed this
[1:18:55] application uh and you have in front of
you what I think the town typically
[1:19:00] refers to it as clean review letters uh
with the exception of of one item and
[1:19:05] it's not that it's not a clean item,
it's just an item that gets put to the
[1:19:09] town council for it to make a decision
on and that relates to the sideyard
[1:19:16] setback or and separation distance for
the distances between uh the town homes.
[1:19:21] In section 210-20 subsection C, it talks
about the fact that an RPC is a
[1:19:26] superimposed district over top of the
underlying zoning classification. And it
[1:19:32] goes on to state housing types, minimum
lot requirements, maximum height,
[1:19:37] minimum yard requirements, and accessory
uses, and accessory signs shall be
[1:19:41] determined by the requirements and
procedures set forth in this section,
[1:19:45] referring to the RPC section of the
code, uh, which shall prevail over
[1:19:49] conflicting requirements of these
regulations or ordinances governing the
[1:19:53] subdivision of lands. This means that
the town council is authorized to create
[1:19:59] a zoning code essentially for each RPC
application uh that comes in front of it
[1:20:04] with respect to things like pipe setback
accessory uses that may be permitted
[1:20:10] within the boundaries of uh that RPC
district. Essentially, I often describe
[1:20:16] the RPCs as having an individual zoning
code unique to just that area uh that's
[1:20:22] described with a meets and bounds
description.
[1:20:26] uh AECOM's review letter uh explained
that if this were not in an RPC uh that
[1:20:32] there would be a required set sideyard
set act of 20 ft for each of the town
[1:20:36] home buildings which creates a 40 foot
separation distance uh between each of
[1:20:41] the buildings. What is proposed on the
site plan you see on the right hand side
[1:20:45] of the screen right now uh is a 10 yard
10 foot rather sideyard setback for a
[1:20:50] separation distance of 20 ft between uh
the town home buildings that exist on
[1:20:56] the site.
the standard that the co RPC code sets
[1:21:01] forth for when town council considers um
items like this, the bulgaria
[1:21:07] requirements and establishes that zoning
for the specific RPC uh is and this is
[1:21:12] an exact quote from the section H is
that the town council shall ensure an
[1:21:17] appropriate relationship between those
things. As I talked about at the
[1:21:22] beginning for an RPC, the purpose of an
RPC is to allow for design ingenuity and
[1:21:27] unified developments. When you look at
the uh totality of the community,
[1:21:36] you can see on the left hand side of the
screen that predominantly this is a
[1:21:43] single family detached uh community. In
fact, it's 79 and a half almost 80% of
[1:21:48] the units in this community are single
family detached. And it was thought by a
[1:21:53] tap code that it was would create a
better unified development uh and a
[1:21:58] better product for the town uh and for
uh the future town lakes residents of
[1:22:04] that community as well as the town uh
for there to be smaller footprinted
[1:22:09] buildings. the town homes that are
proposed uh the 85 town homes versus the
[1:22:14] five uh buildings with 24 units each
with the apartments. It was felt like
[1:22:20] that was more in keeping the town homes
would be uh two-story town homes as you
[1:22:24] enter in off the community. So you'd
have those 85 town homes on the right as
[1:22:29] you come in and then you would go back
in drive back into uh the single family
[1:22:33] detached section of the community. While
I'm not a land use planner, that's Mr.
[1:22:39] Davidson's job. Um, it creates a it's a
better civic design and land use design
[1:22:44] uh with um and landscape architecture.
It creates a smaller feel for the
[1:22:49] community uh as one would enter it.
The other thing to note is that this is
[1:22:56] not an attempt to obtain more units.
This is not an attempt to somehow for
[1:23:01] this this part of the code. the
applicant could comply with those
[1:23:05] sideyard setback requirements uh and
still keep the 85 units. What they would
[1:23:11] do is rather than having the 16
buildings with varying groups from four
[1:23:15] to seven units in each, they would just
have eight buildings uh and they would
[1:23:20] all have basically 12 units and with one
of the buildings being slightly
[1:23:23] differentized. So those will be much
larger buildings similar in scale to the
[1:23:28] apartments uh that uh are being proposed
to be removed uh from the community. In
[1:23:35] addition uh the office of state marshall
routinely approves uh this separation
[1:23:40] distance uh between uh town home
structure and multif family structures
[1:23:45] uh of this nature. That was in the
Penoni response letter uh to the AECOM
[1:23:50] uh comments.
As was as was mentioned, that is the one
[1:23:55] item that AECOM noted that is up for the
town uh to decide as I indicated that is
[1:24:01] a part of an RPC uh is to establish
those types of bulk area requirements.
[1:24:07] And essentially this evening before
TAPCO invests a significant amount of
[1:24:11] additional money um in fully engineering
the plans that you see on the screen
[1:24:17] substituting the town homes for the
apartments. It wanted to get this
[1:24:21] council's approval for two things.
First, u the ability to substitute the
[1:24:26] 85 town homes for the 120 apartments on
the RPC site plan and preliminary
[1:24:31] subdivision plan. And then secondly, uh
to for there to be a 10-yard uh side 10-
[1:24:38] foot sideyard setback uh between the
town home buildings, creating a 20 foot
[1:24:43] separation distance for the town homes
in this uh RPC district.
[1:24:49] That is uh the presentation this
evening. Certainly, if you have any
[1:24:52] questions, I'm happy to to answer them
as as is Mr. Davidson and the uh
[1:24:57] representatives from Attachment.
>> I I have about three or four questions.
[1:25:02] Starting with the apartments, were they
uh proposed to be designed to be
[1:25:08] two-bedroom apartments, three-bedroom?
Did you get into that level of detail
[1:25:12] yet? Versus the town houses. Are there
three bedroomedroom?
[1:25:16] » As Mr. Davidson, if there was a number
of apartments.
[1:25:18] » So, I'm just trying I'm just trying to
get a feel for the number of occupants
[1:25:22] in in each scenario.
>> So, the the apartments were designed to
[1:25:26] be two and threebedroom apartment uh
buildings and then the town houses are
[1:25:30] three and four bedroom. Okay. So, the
one thing you haven't mentioned in the
[1:25:34] presentation is parking. So, we talked
about reduction in number of units and
[1:25:39] all, but what what what about regard to
parking? The plan that you see on the
[1:25:43] screen complies with the town's parking
requirements. And as you know, the town
[1:25:48] requires two units per unit. Two parking
spaces per unit rather. And then when
[1:25:54] you there's sort of a multiplier that's
in your parking code. Uh, and when you
[1:25:58] have a certain number of units, you have
to add more parking. So, what what that
[1:26:02] translates to for the Town Lakes
community is that there has to be three
[1:26:06] parking spaces for every unit, whether
it's single family, detached, or the
[1:26:10] town homes. And on the screen, that is
representative of that. And as you may
[1:26:14] recall from the uh the presentation and
when the preliminary subdivision plan
[1:26:21] was approved, I'm going to walk away
from the microphone. There were car
[1:26:26] parks that are throughout the single
family section in various sections and
[1:26:30] you can see that same concept is carried
through in the town home section. And so
[1:26:35] AECOM did have a comment about the
parking and it was confirmed then that
[1:26:40] the adequate amount of parking three
parking places for each unit is provided
[1:26:44] throughout the whole community town
homes and the single pen.
[1:26:48] » Two in each unit and one in overflow. Is
that how it just is being split up
[1:26:54] » more or less? I don't know that it's
always exactly that, but yes, that's the
[1:26:57] concept.
>> So, I did I hear you correctly? The
[1:27:00] gentle I apologize for not knowing the
name. The gentleman just said that the
[1:27:03] apartments went from two to three
bedrooms, but the town homes are now
[1:27:08] going to increase to three and four
bedrooms. Did I hear it correctly?
[1:27:12] » That's what Mr. Davidson said.
>> Yeah. So, you are increasing the living
[1:27:16] in each the
>> number of bedrooms.
[1:27:18] » Yeah. to
you're not increasing the parking. So if
[1:27:24] you're increasing the number of
bedrooms, I'm thinking you're going to
[1:27:27] be increasing the number of occupancies.
Correct.
[1:27:30] » Parking the parking would have been at a
scale. So the parking when there was
[1:27:33] there when when there was 120
apartments, there still would have been
[1:27:37] three parking places for it was it's the
same ratio.
[1:27:40] » It's the average
>> and and the bigger question is what
[1:27:44] happens at the intersection of Handy
Road? Is there any plan to have a
[1:27:48] traffic signal because you have the
Weiss that's opening this summer and you
[1:27:53] have this 415
units coming in as well. So, is that in
[1:27:58] anyone's plan at this point?
>> Mr. uh Davidson uh with Penoni. They've
[1:28:04] had I know they've had meetings on the
traffic so I'll let him address that
[1:28:08] specific. So, back when back when the
peninsula crossing was design uh when it
[1:28:13] was um designed and approved for the
entrance intersection, as you know, the
[1:28:19] town lakes project already has the
entrance built to the property. The
[1:28:23] right turn lanes, the left turn lanes
have been built, but when that
[1:28:27] intersection was designed and
constructed, it was constructed for a
[1:28:31] future traffic signal to be determined
by Delta. That's a Delta's discretion.
[1:28:36] But all the conduits, all the entire
intersection there at Town Center
[1:28:41] Boulevard, Handy Road, and then now the
Atlantic Flyway that has been designed
[1:28:45] and constructed to for future traffic
signal at whatever time Delot deems
[1:28:51] necessary.
>> When when's the last time that anyone
[1:28:55] looked at the volume on on Handy Road
and that intersection? It's quite a few
[1:28:59] years now. Well, we we're in the process
of counting traffic currently with the
[1:29:04] we have counts set up for the next in
the next month or so to go out there and
[1:29:08] count traffic. Um, as as we discussed
back at the preliminary subdivision
[1:29:14] hearing that we were going to look at
the traffic scenario and what the
[1:29:18] existing traffic is currently happening
out there at community at that
[1:29:23] intersection and within the shopping
center as well as what we're proposing
[1:29:27] for this uh for this development.
And one thing to note u to the mayor is
[1:29:33] that those those types of details are
what typically is accomplished after you
[1:29:38] have that preliminary subdivision
approval from north as it works towards
[1:29:42] final subdivision sign approval and and
uh with respect to traffic as you saw
[1:29:47] there's actually reduction the IT manual
says I mean despite the number of
[1:29:50] bedrooms being different that there's
actually a reduction because of the
[1:29:54] overall reduction in the number of units
a fairly substantial reduction in
[1:29:58] traffic from this section
of the community. But the goal here
[1:30:02] tonight is just to get the council's
blessing, if it's willing to provide it,
[1:30:06] uh to the 85 town homes with the
modified setbacks and separation
[1:30:11] distances between those buildings so
that the final subdivision of move
[1:30:16] forward to that final subdivision plan
approval with approvals from Belbot
[1:30:20] where those types of things about
lighting of an intersection and other
[1:30:24] things with storm water and the state
fire marshall can all become finalized.
[1:30:28] so that the town can see the the final
site.
[1:30:30] » Yeah, I understand and appreciate that.
I just I'd like to have it on the
[1:30:34] record. We're trying to be proactive
with regard to traffic management and to
[1:30:37] stay ahead of the curve rather than do
the full build out. We wiss opens up and
[1:30:41] then we have traffic [snorts] locked up.
>> Do you know if at any point since I
[1:30:46] guess this started in 2008 um did Delta
require any money paid into the fund to
[1:30:53] for that traffic signal? Did did anybody
pay any money in
[1:30:58] » that exceeds my knowledge of the history
of the project? Mr. Davidson's been
[1:31:01] around so with that length of the
project. I wasn't picking on your age.
[1:31:05] [laughter]
[1:31:07] » So during the Yes. So the developers of
the prior developers of Peninsula
[1:31:13] Frosting paid into there's a traffic
signal agreements that were part of the
[1:31:19] traffic impact study that was completed
back in 2008. The construction of the
[1:31:23] [clears throat] two traffic signals on
113 were paid for by the developers of
[1:31:27] the Peninsula crossing. And again, the
intersections with the with the traffic
[1:31:32] signal agreements
um uh that were uh
[1:31:38] with the design of the intersection
there for Handy Road, the traffic signal
[1:31:42] agreements covered uh future payment for
that signal to go in. And again, that's
[1:31:47] at Delta's full discretion of when that
traffic signal does go in.
[1:31:51] » Okay. So when we have our discussions
with DOT uh we could say hey they paid
[1:31:55] into the fund for this particular
intersection and they wouldn't call us
[1:31:59] liars.
>> Well not paying into the fund paying in
[1:32:02] for an agreement to pay for the future
traffic signal. So if the agreement
[1:32:07] stated and I don't know I don't recall
what that agreement is off the top of my
[1:32:11] head. Um, but if the agreement stated
that they had to fully construct that
[1:32:17] intersection to receive a full traffic
signal in the future, that's satisfied.
[1:32:22] If the signal agreement and sometimes
signal agreements state that it if and
[1:32:27] when a traffic signal does go up that if
you're part of that agreement, then you
[1:32:32] have then an additional funds will have
to be contributed at a later date.
[1:32:36] » Okay. So, Peninsula Crossing Shopping
Center funded or paid for that?
[1:32:41] » That is correct. They did.
>> I have a question about the the the town
[1:32:46] home setback and parking. Are you are
the town homes each have room in their
[1:32:52] drives for two cars? How far are they
off the the uh sidewalk or anything? I
[1:32:56] can't see from this drawing. It's so
small.
[1:33:00] Um,
>> so each
[1:33:01] » and you count are you counting a garage
as a parking spot or
[1:33:04] » No, no, we're there are there is a
onecar garage. So these are 24 foot wide
[1:33:10] master down twotory with you know three
and fourbedroom style town homes. So
[1:33:16] these the parking aisles for this is so
there'll be one parking stall in front
[1:33:20] in some of these setbacks. One parking
stall will be uh in front of the garage
[1:33:25] and then we're designing a second stall
next to it. Okay.
[1:33:28] » So, the driveways will be wide enough to
be able to handle two. In a few of these
[1:33:32] parking scenarios with the setbacks the
way we have on there, you can almost you
[1:33:38] you'll be able to stack two cars in
front of the garage and one car off of
[1:33:43] the side. So, the driveways actually
will have three cars will be able to
[1:33:47] park three cars within their own
individual driveways within their own fe
[1:33:52] simple lot. And then we have the
additional parking spaces throughout the
[1:33:56] townhouse project to be able to
accommodate the additional foot.
[1:34:00] » So that kind of the overflow parking for
the town houses and like you got like 16
[1:34:05] at each end. And is there some in the
middle section there?
[1:34:08] » That's correct. Right there in the right
there in the middle
[1:34:11] » and that's overflow as well.
>> That is correct.
[1:34:13] » How many spots are in there? Do you
know?
[1:34:15] » Another 16.
>> So we got 32 plus 16.
[1:34:21] Correct. And then the rest are like
three in a driveway to come up to the
[1:34:26] 85.
>> There'll be three in the driveway. There
[1:34:28] also be parking that's in the amenity
center. So nothing is throughout.
[1:34:33] » Okay. Where's the amenity center?
>> We have 72 spaces within the amenities
[1:34:37] as well.
>> Okay. So that would be overflow for the
[1:34:40] » it'll be for some of the single families
as well as the towns,
[1:34:45] » the single family detached across the
street. So we we've kind of positioned
[1:34:50] these car parks and these parking spaces
throughout this entire development so
[1:34:54] that there's individual parking areas
that will be able to accommodate individ
[1:35:00] all the individual houses. We did put
everything in one end or what not. We
[1:35:04] try to space this thing out and then
we're we're going to prepare a you'll
[1:35:08] see on on the one color rendering we do
show an example of one of the car parks
[1:35:13] but these are going to be uh these are
going to be landscape features. We're
[1:35:17] not just looking at it without put down
a bunch of pavement striping and calling
[1:35:21] in parking spaces. We want to landscape
these and make these a a landscape
[1:35:25] feature within the development.
>> Okay.
[1:35:28] » So, my question is a little different.
Um the 14 acres of dedicated
[1:35:34] property that's supposed to go to the
town. How does that change the access uh
[1:35:39] if any with your new design? Does it
>> it was already conveyed to the town.
[1:35:43] » Okay.
>> That sort of thing. Yes. What we what we
[1:35:46] did is we did maneuver a couple of
single family detached lots so that the
[1:35:51] 14 acres that dedicated will have easier
access.
[1:35:54] » Okay, that preliminary plan we it was
kind of awkward.
[1:35:58] » Very awkward. Yeah,
>> we reposition that so that it'll be a
[1:36:01] little bit easier access for the town
>> through through the new the design.
[1:36:06] » That's correct.
>> Okay,
[1:36:08] » that's the access point and the the
parcel's actually where it is.
[1:36:14] It looks tireless.
[1:36:17] » So, it looks like the access to the park
is going to be between two homes.
[1:36:25] » Yeah, there's I think [snorts] there's
greater than 50 ft there.
[1:36:29] » So,
>> so you're going to have public access
[1:36:33] coming in and through the main.
>> Yes.
[1:36:42] » I'm sorry. Can you go back to that? What
was that? And maybe I wasn't paying
[1:36:46] attention what you were talking about
there, but the access to the park is
[1:36:49] between
[1:36:52] » you see the car park.
>> Okay. Okay.
[1:36:54] » Across from east,
>> right,
[1:36:56] » is a rightway that leads into
that town.
[1:37:04] » But that had really no impact on the
town apartments versus town homes.
[1:37:09] That's in front. That's um part of the
uh part of actually the original
[1:37:15] agreement with the prior developer with
respect to conveying this piece of
[1:37:20] property to the town. And what Mr.
Davidson was referring to was there was
[1:37:25] the connection for the land was floating
out there and now it is immediately
[1:37:29] adjacent to the town so that it's it
could be annexed into the town. It's not
[1:37:34] presently annexed in the town. with the
land being immediately adjacent to the
[1:37:38] town's boundary. It could now be annexed
into the town. In addition, uh this is
[1:37:43] the site plan had been revised so that
there's a more natural entrance uh into
[1:37:48] it. Uh before it was it was somewhat
awkward. And so those are the changes
[1:37:52] that have occurred in the single family
home system.
[1:37:59] » So let's go back to the setbacks a
little bit. You were talking about you
[1:38:02] can get two cars in there in a driveway.
Your idea of a car versus mine might be
[1:38:07] a little bit different. What What is
that setback in footage? Can you tell me
[1:38:12] that
[1:38:16] » behind the sidewalks there? They're
greater than 25 ft long.
[1:38:21] » Okay.
>> And the width that you said would
[1:38:26] accommodate three
>> in some in some cases. If you look at
[1:38:30] some of the setbacks for some of these
town houses, if it's um we can there's
[1:38:35] uh there's the ability to be able to
park at least three cars in some of the
[1:38:40] drives, not all. Okay. Just in some
>> and that's widthwise, not front to back.
[1:38:45] » That's front to back. That's stacking
two cars in front of those and then
[1:38:49] » parking two cars in tandem.
>> That's correct.
[1:38:52] » And then having another one off to the
side.
[1:38:54] » That is correct.
>> And still not hanging over the
[1:38:58] sidewalks. not hang over the side. We
ensure that nothing's going to hang over
[1:39:03] this.
>> So, this is the town parcel here.
[1:39:05] » The town parcel is what you're return
referring to as a park.
[1:39:08] » Yeah.
>> Is that
[1:39:10] » Yeah. 14 acres.
>> Okay.
[1:39:11] » That's a name the town gave it. That's
not
[1:39:14] » Yeah. To be determined.
>> To be determined. Right.
[1:39:18] » And that
was You say there's a rightaway there
[1:39:22] that properties don't actually touch.
>> They do now. They do. Now, if you were
[1:39:26] to look at the conveyance, the
conveyance
[1:39:33] shoes.
So you can see that
[1:39:37] » you had it
>> the proposed park is now immediately
[1:39:41] adjacent
>> to the land. Okay.
[1:39:43] » The land and then you can that area
there is
[1:39:46] » the drive entrance
>> right.
[1:39:48] » How wide is that? That's you said over
>> it's either 50 or 60 ft
[1:39:53] » wide. Okay.
[1:39:57] It's no less than.
[1:40:06] » Do you know when that 14 acres when
there was discussion about dedicating
[1:40:11] that to the town? Was that back in 2008
or was that a more recent
[1:40:18] » that history last 2006?
2005
[1:40:22] » and 2005
>> the first 53 was annexed into the town
[1:40:28] there was talk about so if you look at
if you I don't know I have if you look
[1:40:34] at your future land use map front
portion of
[1:40:38] where the town homes are shown shows
that as being designated as a commercial
[1:40:43] area. Mhm.
>> So one of the So one of the things that
[1:40:47] the developers then the owners of the
property profered to the town that is if
[1:40:52] as they were developing Peninsula
Crossing Shopping Center that if they
[1:40:56] could have that back section which I
think was 10 or 15 acres I can't
[1:41:02] remember how much of that was back then.
If we they could have that as a
[1:41:05] commercial designation not zone
commercial but as a designation on the
[1:41:09] future land use map. Then what the town
asked for was for the since there was a
[1:41:14] total of 300 acres for the entire parcel
that if the developer would be willing
[1:41:20] to dedicate land for future use by the
middle and they agreed that's the 14
[1:41:24] acres. Okay.
>> It was never determined where that 14
[1:41:27] acres was going to be. So within this
plant within their application
[1:41:33] as they were getting the approvals they
prepared in they stated that's the 14
[1:41:37] acres they did finally lock it down and
that's where it's the dedication and
[1:41:42] that's what's been
>> and did you say it's already been
[1:41:43] dedicated?
>> Yes it is.
[1:41:44] » Okay.
>> I do like this proposal much better than
[1:41:49] what was presented before. Um could you
refresh our memory the lot sizes for
[1:41:55] single family homes? What are they going
to be?
[1:41:58] M
>> yes
[1:41:59] » square foot for the
>> 6,000
[1:42:02] » the lot
>> minimum
[1:42:05] » the minimum lot is 6,000 square feet
>> heavily detached yes
[1:42:09] » and the town homes is
>> somewhere around 2800 square ft
[1:42:15] » they're all fe simple
>> 24 ft by 120
[1:42:27] » I I know We're jumping the gun here a
little bit on some things here and I may
[1:42:30] be, you know, way ahead of myself here,
but um I expressed a lot of concern when
[1:42:36] this first came out that there is one
way in and one way out of this
[1:42:40] development.
Um you're looking at was it 415
[1:42:46] I believe now total units.
>> That's correct.
[1:42:49] » So you're dumping let's say 850 cars out
on Handy Road through that one entrance.
[1:42:56] And it's nice that you've got the right
hand and left hand turn lanes and all
[1:43:00] that kind of stuff.
Any road, I don't know if you've been on
[1:43:03] that road lately or not, is a is a very
undeveloped two-lane road and it has
[1:43:09] potholes along the side of it that you
can drop one of your cars into that
[1:43:12] you're getting ready in your in your
your driveway there.
[1:43:16] What can we do or what can be done? And
I know that's a statemaintained road,
[1:43:22] but has there been any thought put
together as far as
[1:43:27] maybe taking care of some of that road?
I mean, it's part of the final
[1:43:32] subdivision or final subdivision plan
approval process. There will have to be
[1:43:38] conversations with DELDOT. You have to
get letters from DELDOT indicating what
[1:43:43] has to occur on Handy Road. what and
that and those requirements are things
[1:43:48] that will come out as those meetings and
such occur with with Delba and looking
[1:43:53] at those and as Mr. Davidson indicated
there is some studying that's about to
[1:43:57] occur with respect to and I'm sure
that'll go a great deal informing
[1:44:02] whatever requirements that Delt may have
but at this moment um that that would be
[1:44:07] unknown other than the known is that the
traffic from 415 is substantially less
[1:44:14] than the traffic from the existing 450.
Um, I mean,
[1:44:19] » but you're still dumping a lot of cars
out there on a on a basically
[1:44:23] undeveloped two-lane road.
>> Correct. But I mean, I think just so
[1:44:27] that that everyone's on the same playing
field. If the town council prefers the
[1:44:33] apartments, that's already approved.
This is just is this a is this concept
[1:44:38] something that the town council thinks
is better for the town of Milsboro? And
[1:44:43] then with respect to the separation and
and sideyard setbacks, that that's the
[1:44:47] question this evening. And if the town
council says no, then the 450 unit plan
[1:44:52] will continue forward. Again, that
wouldn't be a Tapco's first choice on
[1:44:56] this for the reasons that I said
earlier, but that that's I mean, that's
[1:44:59] the question that exists for the the
town council here this evening.
[1:45:15] this just to get some of the history.
So, this um development
[1:45:23] um the application was for it to be
zoned
[1:45:27] um medium residential
with an RPC overlay.
[1:45:34] um apartments
and town houses are both in our high
[1:45:41] residential density um communities.
Um
[1:45:50] this is a rhetorical question. I'm sure
you're not going to be able to answer
[1:45:54] it. I just every time this comes to
council I wonder why
[1:46:01] it was presented as medium residential
and the use I'm seeing is
[1:46:10] is high
>> but the the reason is is because the RPC
[1:46:16] district allows for apartments and town
homes irrespective of whether it's an MR
[1:46:21] or HR is the underlying zoning
classification that's set forth in
[1:46:25] section 210-20-20.
[1:46:29] And so that that's why that's allowed.
But the underlying uh density doesn't
[1:46:35] your density is still based on the
underlying zoning classification that
[1:46:39] you have for that. And so that that's
why there can be multif family housing
[1:46:46] like apartments or town homes within
something that has an MR designation but
[1:46:50] also has that RPC designation on top of
it.
[1:46:54] » I I think that thing is terrible. Um
I've said it before that I really think
[1:46:59] we need to look at that RPC thing
because it's like it's like a bait and
[1:47:04] switch. Um but that's just me waxing
philosophically.
[1:47:10] Um
[1:47:16] » well actually actually we did
>> last month you know we voted to increase
[1:47:22] the lot sizes and setbacks and of course
it wouldn't affect this development
[1:47:25] because we're grandfathered in.
>> No I had
[1:47:27] » and I'm not sure maybe Jamie knows was
the RPC even in effect in 2007.
[1:47:33] » I wasn't here.
>> Yeah. I don't even think you recall. I
[1:47:37] don't even think RPC was in effect when
an initial approval was given on this
[1:47:40] development.
>> There were RPC there were some in town
[1:47:43] like yes.
>> History back that far back though.
[1:47:52] » I like the plan much better. So I'll
make a motion to approve the preliminary
[1:47:56] state of plan.
>> I I agree with you. I I definitely like
[1:48:00] it better. I second that.
All
[1:48:03] » in favor say I.
I I
[1:48:05] » Any opposed?
>> Oppose.
[1:48:11] Go
>> in. Roll call, please.
[1:48:13] » Yes.
>> Did the motion include the setback
[1:48:17] request?
>> No.
[1:48:19] » Um as proposed.
>> Yes. Your your motion was to approve
[1:48:26] » the revised preliminary plan that was
presented tonight.
[1:48:29] » As presented tonight, right? That would
include those other
[1:48:33] » the RPC that we're working on now
changes.
[1:48:35] » Okay. Um, Councilwoman Dilva, yes or no?
>> Yeah.
[1:48:41] » Councilwoman Khan, yes or no?
>> No.
[1:48:45] » Mr. Davis is absent. Uh, uh, Councilman
O'Neal, yes or no?
[1:48:50] » And again, a question. This is only for
the townhouse versus the apartment
[1:48:54] building section, right?
amending
[1:48:58] » this site plan for the entire site plan
>> including the setbacks
[1:49:03] » right
>> that and Mr. Hut you you also explained
[1:49:08] that there was um switching the
amenities not the package but the
[1:49:12] » right
>> yeah where they're looking
[1:49:14] » layout
>> so there are some other minor changes
[1:49:16] throughout the
>> the layout lift but the the the changes
[1:49:20] Mr. there any that are what I would call
substantive changes are the 85 town
[1:49:25] homes in place of 120 apartments and
then those sideyard setbacks.
[1:49:31] » No.
>> Uh Councilman Mason, yes or no?
[1:49:37] » Yes.
>> Councilman Presley, yes or no?
[1:49:40] » Yes.
>> And Mayor McKe, yes or no?
[1:49:44] » Yes.
Okay,
[1:49:46] » so we have four yes votes and two no
votes. The motion passed.
[1:50:10] » Next item is employee handbook
amendment. Vacation sick time. Mr.
[1:50:14] Burke.
>> Yes. Uh council. um included in the
[1:50:17] packet. Uh we had initially brought this
before council. Uh it was initially
[1:50:22] posted on September 25th and brought to
council. Um and the reasoning at that
[1:50:28] point in time was in anticipation of the
uh filling of the chief of police
[1:50:32] position. Um but we've noticed and this
has happened over the last year or so
[1:50:37] that when we're looking to find more
tenure employees, experienced employees
[1:50:42] like level three and four wastewater
operators, uh finance assistant finance
[1:50:47] directors. Um we have heard over and
over again that um they would not be
[1:50:53] willing to leave their current employer
um because two weeks vacation wouldn't
[1:50:59] fit what they have come accustomed to in
their in their career. Uh we also are
[1:51:04] having now with the paid family medical
leave act um there are employees that
[1:51:08] were going to be taking advantage of
that uh that new law and they're going
[1:51:12] to be out for uh up to three months and
I do have a large scale that wouldn't
[1:51:18] qualify for any of those benefits. Um so
I'm trying to make the benefits package
[1:51:22] more robust for the employees across the
board um so that we can be competitive
[1:51:28] when we're out in hiring and retention.
It's not just for hiring, it's for
[1:51:31] retention as well.
>> Um, you know, we we we're growing to
[1:51:35] what are we up to 543
>> 53 employees.
[1:51:38] » Um, you know, I know when we're looking
for new recruits for police and that is
[1:51:42] something that will set us apart. Um,
and uh, you know, so I'm asking for
[1:51:48] council's consideration again for this.
And we are still um you know we're
[1:51:52] waiting on the payroll study which will
be part of um you know down the road but
[1:51:57] um the longer we wait the more
opportunities we met with uh skilled um
[1:52:01] you know tenure employees from other
other uh municipalities or other other
[1:52:06] industry. And um you know I I wouldn't
ask if I didn't think that it was uh it
[1:52:12] would be a good benefit to give and help
us out there. We're getting ready to go
[1:52:15] to rural water in February to try and
recruit more water and wastewater
[1:52:19] operators. And this will help us to fill
in for those level three and four
[1:52:24] operators um which are hard to find.
They don't usually leave their uh their
[1:52:28] current municipalities. Um but we would
like to add to our uh you know our ranks
[1:52:33] here so that down the road when we have
retirements we have to have a level four
[1:52:37] operator especially with the new
wastewater plant coming online. We're
[1:52:40] going to be running simultaneously two
plants. So, um, the more skilled, uh,
[1:52:44] wastewater operators we have, the
better, as well as water and other other
[1:52:48] departments. Um, but that is my request
and I'd be happy to answer any
[1:52:52] questions.
>> I have a couple questions. Um, is there
[1:52:55] a a a carry forward of certain number of
hours per year that employees allowed to
[1:53:00] carry if they don't use their vacation
time? Is it a use it or lose it?
[1:53:03] » Yeah. No, there is there is a policy for
that. There's two policies. There's one
[1:53:06] for the collective bargaining unit and
then there's one for the uh non uh union
[1:53:11] employees as well. And to tell
>> Civilians are 56 hours 56
[1:53:18] » 56 for civilians. I know that one. The
other one it's
[1:53:22] » 84. Sorry.
[1:53:30] » Do you have about an idea of how many
vacancies you currently have that you're
[1:53:34] trying to fill?
>> Uh yes. We have uh how many officers
[1:53:38] looking for? Three officers. Um we have
uh industrial electrician position which
[1:53:44] has been tough. Industrial maintenance
position which that's another one. Um we
[1:53:48] want to have someone so we don't have to
outsource all our maintenance on high
[1:53:51] level um equipment and we don't uh we
had an initial run of applicants and we
[1:53:57] just couldn't even pay and other
benefits. We couldn't touch the people
[1:54:01] that had that kind of skill set. Um
there also is um what else do we have?
[1:54:07] » Streets.
>> Streets. That's right. We're looking to
[1:54:10] do a streets uh department uh build that
over time. Um so we're going to be
[1:54:14] looking for someone at like an assistant
director level for that position. Um and
[1:54:19] uh we have some candidates in mind, but
their their their benefits package and
[1:54:24] people have shown interest. Obviously,
we would go to a full posting and
[1:54:27] process, but their their benefits uh
their their years of service have, you
[1:54:32] know, equal to too many uh multiple
weeks, four plus. Um, so some people
[1:54:37] will be willing to take a week, you
know, cut in and vacation, but two weeks
[1:54:41] is, you know, to go from four weeks to
two weeks is just not something that
[1:54:45] they would consider. So we kind of knock
ourselves out of the running at that
[1:54:49] point in time.
>> I think another big thing, too, is not
[1:54:51] just the recruitment, but retention that
when we lose a water operator or sewer
[1:54:56] operator, it's not an easy position to
fill. also for losing them because they
[1:55:00] can go somewhere else and get
>> more time off. It's not
[1:55:03] » you don't have flexibility to bring
somebody in and start them with service.
[1:55:07] They got to earn the service from the
town manager.
[1:55:09] » They have to earn the service and we've
consulted with several um HR attorneys
[1:55:13] about this and it and I think the last
time we talked about this. It's not
[1:55:16] typical for um the town manager to
negotiate that at the time of hire. We
[1:55:22] want to have a standard um you know grid
uh that we can put into our personnel
[1:55:28] manual which is what we have right now
[1:55:36] » and that's total of vacation sick
personal
[1:55:40] » this is just vacation
>> okay how much
[1:55:42] » sick time is 96 hours per year you
>> and that's acred the vacation you can
[1:55:48] take or
>> it's it's frontloaded but it's acred so
[1:55:50] you get access to at the beginning of
the year on January 1st, but if you
[1:55:55] leave before the year is complete, then
it's you have to it's pay
[1:56:01] » for deduct
last time.
[1:56:07] » So 96 hours per employee for sick and
personal.
[1:56:24] Sick. Sick. There's no carryover.
Correct.
[1:56:27] » Yes, you can carry it over up to
civilian up to 480 hours.
[1:56:32] » So once you get to 480 hours, then the
town will pay you pay you
[1:56:37] um a quarter of anything over 480 hours.
So there is an incentive to not use all
[1:56:47] their sick time.
>> Is that something they could sell back
[1:56:51] at at like retirement?
>> When they retire, they can um buy back
[1:56:55] or they get paid out half up to 480. So
the maximum that amount that any retiree
[1:57:02] would make would be 240 hours.
>> That's a pretty good plan.
[1:57:09] » I'm not going any make it to work.
And just, you know, with the water and
[1:57:15] sewer, we're competing with the private
sector, too. Artisian and Tidewater,
[1:57:19] which already their pay is is
significantly higher. Um, their benefits
[1:57:23] package when they're private. So, it's
it's it's a whole different ball game.
[1:57:28] » So, the way I'm reading this is it's
basically adding
[1:57:34] » um a week vacation
to, you know, every category, right?
[1:57:40] Across the board for all employees. Um,
this would go into effect for
[1:57:48] now for January 26th when we were doing
the budgeting
[1:57:54] for the year. Did you know do we have
the the wiggle room for this?
[1:58:00] » Matt, do you want to comment on that?
>> Uh, I mean, any payouts happen in
[1:58:04] September. So, we've already surpassed
payouts for FY2.
[1:58:10] No, I'm talking about now we're going to
give every employee an additional week
[1:58:15] vacation.
>> Any any payouts on those vacations would
[1:58:19] be at the end of this calendar year.
>> Okay. So, you're saying if they don't
[1:58:22] use their vacation and they just get
paid out. So, during the course of the
[1:58:27] year, the immediate consequence, I
guess, would be productivity downtime.
[1:58:34] Correct.
>> Yes.
[1:58:36] » Yeah. And that's and then we're also
>> but you're gonna what you're gonna your
[1:58:38] your loss in financial is going to be if
you have to hire another employee
[1:58:41] because you got too many people on
vacation.
[1:58:42] » Right. Yes.
>> And then we're also competing family
[1:58:46] medical act which that's a whole other
variable that we can't we can't deny
[1:58:50] that vacation that that request and
that's something they come in and and
[1:58:53] apply for and by state law we have to
>> I think it would be really beneficial if
[1:59:00] if um if you guys could track
um the usage of of family medical leave
[1:59:07] in conjunction with the the vacation
time And so that we would have an a
[1:59:13] better idea going into not this budget
cycle but the following budget cycle how
[1:59:17] many manhour we're actually losing. Um
for example could somebody take their
[1:59:23] [clears throat] six weeks of family and
medical leave and then take another four
[1:59:26] weeks of vacation on top of so that you
know that gives them 10 weeks of of off
[1:59:31] time. You know
>> don't you have to use the the vacation
[1:59:34] up as you're taking family medical
leave?
[1:59:36] » No.
>> And and we can always deny vacation. We
[1:59:39] we can't deny the other. Right.
>> We have more control over the vacation
[1:59:44] time. And I have, you know, I've heard
several times since, you know, we
[1:59:47] already have, I believe heard one
employee on paid medical, uh, right now,
[1:59:52] uh, which would be for 12 weeks. And
I've already heard from staff that, you
[1:59:56] know, aren't in the age bracket or don't
have the family situation where they
[1:59:59] would ever be able to take that and
they're paying into that plan. Yeah.
[2:00:02] » Um, and they're they're contributing as
well. So, so that's that's, you know,
[2:00:07] that's the feedback on the retention
side. Uh, but it is also helpful with
[2:00:10] recruitment when we're looking to get
people mid-level or higher in their
[2:00:13] career with experience.
And we've got a couple years before the
[2:00:17] new wastewater plants built, but you
can't wait till the last minute to
[2:00:20] recruit those people because we have to
get them trained on both plants. Have we
[2:00:24] looked into
giving
[2:00:28] I if somebody worked for say Ocean View
and they had
[2:00:34] six nine years there coming here
is there a way that we can give them
[2:00:42] » the years of service equivalent? We
haven't at at this point.
[2:00:46] » Um
>> why wouldn't you want to give them a
[2:00:49] comparable package? Say they moved
closer and they don't want to commute.
[2:00:52] Wouldn't that be more beneficial?
>> I don't have the authority to pick and
[2:00:57] choose what people are are getting for
their
[2:01:00] » That's a slippery slope.
>> No, I just didn't know if we've ever
[2:01:03] looked into giving credit um you know
for
[2:01:08] » from the police department side if if I
I
[2:01:11] » the the union contract would
>> Yeah, you're coming up. Yeah.
[2:01:15] » Yeah. So the union contract would
prohibit that we we
[2:01:18] » we we have lateral transfer in there,
but to prevent a lateral from coming in
[2:01:24] and jumping a current employee, the
union contract has put in stipulations
[2:01:28] preventing that. So I think that the
most they get like a two-year credit.
[2:01:32] » The the other is like a PSC that Ashley,
you know, rightly mentioned is that the
[2:01:36] the lunch breaks are different here than
other towns. Some towns get an hour. Um
[2:01:41] we don't get a paid a paid lunch break
either.
[2:01:44] It's an unpaid rate.
>> So every, you know, every town's package
[2:01:48] is is a unique benefits package. It's
kind of hard to go apples to apples, but
[2:01:52] this is one thing that we've heard and
and all our department heads can that
[2:01:55] have been in these interviews can can uh
echo my sentiments that this we we've
[2:01:59] heard this, you know, numerous times
from people that were really qualified
[2:02:03] and we were excited, but then they just
either already have two plus weeks of
[2:02:08] vacation planned, they go the same
vacation every year, and they just
[2:02:10] wouldn't want to have a change to their
their lifestyle.
[2:02:14] » If I could add something, please. Um, so
you know, we talked about retention and
[2:02:20] I think recruitment in the police
department is we've hired plenty of
[2:02:24] people, but since I think 2017 or 2018,
we got authorized for 21. We've never
[2:02:30] seen 21. Um, and it's because we keep
losing officers. And and I say losing
[2:02:34] officers either through other uh they go
to other agencies or they retire at 20.
[2:02:40] And um it doesn't benefit the police
department to have an an officer retire
[2:02:45] at 20. I mean they're they're most
experienced and whatnot. Um so I think
[2:02:51] you know we have a burnout factor
happening. Um and and there's been other
[2:02:56] agencies across the country that have
implemented uh spaticals for police
[2:03:01] officers where they get a month off
mandatory after three years to prevent
[2:03:04] that burnout. I don't think that that's
the case here. But I do think that
[2:03:08] additional time off um any public
service employee whether it be police or
[2:03:13] um over here at town hall experiences
burnout based on the the nature of the
[2:03:18] job. Um and I think at least in the
police department I have statistical
[2:03:23] evidence to show that there there is
burnout. There's a mental health issue
[2:03:26] and that more time off could help
benefit that as well as other avenues
[2:03:30] that I hope to address later on. But I
mean I I support this and not I don't
[2:03:35] need the time off. So, I mean, it
doesn't really benefit me. I see it more
[2:03:39] as something that could help us
long-term retain employees that have the
[2:03:46] experience and stuff that we want to
see, the expertise that we want to see
[2:03:49] continue to move this town forward.
Thanks, G.
[2:04:03] motion.
>> I'll make a motion to approve the
[2:04:06] recommended for requested change to the
U vacation policy.
[2:04:13] Second
>> second.
[2:04:15] » Second that.
>> All in favor say I.
[2:04:18] » I.
>> I. Any opposed?
[2:04:22] » Motion passed.
>> Thank you very much. the employees watch
[2:04:25] this and they they appreciate
>> that a lot. Thank you.
[2:04:30] » Okay.
>> Chief of police contract approval. Mr.
[2:04:35] Burke.
>> Yes. In your packet um after the uh
[2:04:39] employee handbook change is the
employment agreement for the uh newly
[2:04:44] pinned
police. Um,
[2:04:49] this has been reviewed by our town
solicitor, myself, uh, and, uh, Chief
[2:04:55] Moyer. Um, and, uh, we believe that
everyone is satisfied at this point, but
[2:05:03] we're open for any questions. Um, any
clarifications. There is one typo on
[2:05:08] page nine of the contract. Mayor McKe's
last name could have a capital K in it.
[2:05:13] I apologize. uh that will be corrected
if it is approved.
[2:05:18] » Usually it's my name that's spelled
wrong on
[2:05:22] » you know your brain fills in the gap
sometimes. So
[2:05:25] » um and then if you did notice and I
think I put this out when I I sent this
[2:05:29] out um the address for the chief for
safety purposes listed as the city and
[2:05:34] and and state.
>> I I think I just heard Chief Moyer say
[2:05:39] they didn't need any time off,
>> right? Yeah.
[2:05:43] So we could strike that clause.
>> Um, so that would mean that Moyer's zip
[2:05:49] code is incorrect too in this contract.
There you go.
[2:05:52] » Oh, it should be what is
7 73.
[2:05:55] » 73.
>> I do have a question in regards to
[2:06:00] section 8 termination
um, paragraph 4 and paragraph five.
[2:06:07] I don't know how
maybe somebody explain to me how these
[2:06:11] two paragraphs work together. It it's
seems like one contradicts the other. Um
[2:06:17] paragraph four says if the town
terminates the police chief's employment
[2:06:22] without cause the town shall provide 6
months of salary payment. Okay. And but
[2:06:26] then you go to number five. It says if
the town uh terminates
[2:06:33] uh without cause
so that it doesn't jeopardize his
[2:06:37] pension, then we have to pay him for 20
years.
[2:06:42] » The the reason that was in there was uh
so this is a five-year contract. In
[2:06:47] three years, I've satisfied my uh
20-year,
[2:06:50] » right?
>> So then it's just a six month seance,
[2:06:53] » right? I I don't think I I thought about
that too that it doesn't really affect
[2:06:56] you, but are we making it I mean to me
that's kind of dangerous to have it in
[2:07:00] for any future contract. G give you an
example. We hire somebody to say we
[2:07:05] didn't hire the best candidate in Chief
Moyer. We hire somebody from Connecticut
[2:07:09] or something and he comes in and he
signs a 5-year contract. After year
[2:07:14] four, we say,
you know, we're not happy with you. We
[2:07:19] don't have a cause, but we're not happy
with you. We're on the hook for paying
[2:07:23] him for another 16 years.
>> No,
[2:07:28] » that future person has that same
provision.
[2:07:30] » Each one contract was tailored to
>> right
[2:07:33] » the new chief's situation just like it's
not exactly the same as the previous
[2:07:38] contract that you had with Chief Pal.
>> Okay, that was a question.
[2:07:42] » There some differences. There's a lot in
there that's substantially the same,
[2:07:45] maybe even identical in certain
respects, but there are some tweaks here
[2:07:49] and there in order to address the
current way of the land and his
[2:07:53] particular situation. But you make a
very good point that that would be
[2:07:56] something that would need to be in
everybody's minds um at that future time
[2:08:02] to just not carve and copy. It is a very
abnormal clause and I wouldn't have put
[2:08:08] it in there had I um reached this
position at a 20-year mark. That that
[2:08:14] clause I wouldn't have even included in
there. Um but uh as the former chief
[2:08:19] said at this level there's only one way
and that's out the door at this point
[2:08:23] because there's no more promotion. So um
I want to ensure that I at least reach
[2:08:27] my uh retirement uh age which is the 20
year mark. So that's why that was in
[2:08:33] there. It's it's abnormal for um other
clauses and the clause essentially goes
[2:08:39] away once I hit my 20-year mark,
>> right?
[2:08:42] » It'll be legally it won't have any
meaning
[2:08:47] » along those lines to it. I had asked
about a probationary period and and
[2:08:52] again that's tailored to the individual.
So here Chief Moyer has been with this
[2:08:56] department for 17 years. So he's proven
himself over 17 years. There's no reason
[2:09:01] for a probationary period. uh if we
hired someone from Connecticut or
[2:09:05] wherever else even though it's a chief
level we may have considered a
[2:09:09] probationary period of the level
>> I I I thought that was the reason this
[2:09:14] is individually tailored but it it
struck me as weird and you know
[2:09:19] » this was boiler played for for move the
forward and then when we look you know
[2:09:22] you had mentioned about six months and
as being acting chief since August um we
[2:09:28] have had the luxury of having
>> um you know chief Moyer basically
[2:09:33] performing the job to the last 6 months.
Yeah. Um
[2:09:36] » and and I tried to uh you know work with
Jamie and and develop a contract that is
[2:09:42] in theory never green clause. We don't
have to continue to try to negotiate a
[2:09:46] contract. It's it the benefits and
everything are automatically built in to
[2:09:51] sustain further and prepare for budget
cycles.
[2:09:55] » I make a motion to approve the
employment agreement between the town of
[2:09:58] Milsboro and Chief David Moyer as
presented. with a few clerical changes.
[2:10:05] » I'll second.
>> All in favor say I.
[2:10:08] » I.
>> I.
[2:10:09] » Any opposed?
Congrats,
[2:10:13] » Chief.
[2:10:16] » You're having you're having a good year.
I'm telling you, that's like three
[2:10:18] things.
[2:10:22] » Good for you.
[2:10:26] » Okay.
>> Next, get your get your hands ready.
[2:10:30] Right. Establish a parks committee and
appoint members.
[2:10:34] Here we go. All right. So, this is for
the uh 10acre park, the town park that's
[2:10:40] part of the new Plantation Lake South
development.
[2:10:43] » I I'll put my hand in for this. Uh so,
we're looking for volunteers for
[2:10:48] » I volunteer for that.
>> You're in. Okay.
[2:10:50] » I'll volunteer for that since it's my
neighborhood.
[2:10:52] » Perfect.
>> All right. Um second those nominations.
[2:10:58] » Second. Second.
Well, not to be technical, but don't we
[2:11:03] our revised procedures? We've got to
vote to establish. Is this a new
[2:11:07] committee?
>> It's a new committee.
[2:11:08] » So, then we have the vote to establish
and then and then vote the member
[2:11:12] » seated. Yeah.
>> To establish a new committee. So,
[2:11:15] » I'll make a motion to establish new
parks committee.
[2:11:17] » Second.
>> Second. All in favor say I.
[2:11:20] » I.
>> I. None opposed.
[2:11:23] » Okay.
>> I'll make another motion. and
[2:11:25] nominations for the committee. Myself,
Mary, and LeBron
[2:11:30] need a second for that.
>> Second.
[2:11:34] » All in favor say I.
>> I.
[2:11:36] » I.
>> Any opposed?
[2:11:39] » Don't move. Thank.
[2:11:51] » Okay.
No, I don't have a time.
[2:11:55] » Next is a resolution proposing a public
hearing to be held on Monday, February
[2:12:00] 2nd, 2026 at 7 PM at Mills Town Center.
And this has to do with the uh changes
[2:12:07] to the chapters and zoning regarding
swimming pools.
[2:12:11] So, we're just looking for a resolution
to go ahead and arrange for that public
[2:12:15] hearing.
>> Some moved.
[2:12:19] » Second.
>> Second.
[2:12:20] » Second.
[laughter]
[2:12:23] » Yep. All in favor say I.
>> I.
[2:12:25] » I.
>> None opposed.
[2:12:27] » Motion passed.
>> All right. The next item is another
[2:12:32] resolution proposing a public hearing to
be held on Monday, February 2nd, 2026 at
[2:12:38] 7 p.m. And this has to do with uh the
highway commercial district uh thereby
[2:12:44] allowing
adding mobile food vendors,
[2:12:49] which we talked about at last last
month's session.
[2:12:53] So, do we have a uh a motion for that
resolution?
[2:12:57] » Some moved.
>> Second.
[2:13:00] » All in favor say I.
>> I.
[2:13:02] » None opposed.
Thank you.
[2:13:08] Okay. Next one is an ordinance to amend
the town code of the town of Millsboro
[2:13:12] by reviewing chapter 70 building
construction.
[2:13:17] uh adoption of standards by reference
amendments to remove old outdated
[2:13:22] information replace with current updated
information.
[2:13:26] And I believe uh Amy going to talk about
this a bit.
[2:13:33] [laughter]
[2:13:40] » Yeah.
Um but since this is chapter 70, you
[2:13:43] don't have to do um a public hearing for
these. But it looks like he's gone
[2:13:49] through and this is just kind of
standard um information that updated
[2:13:54] anything that's underlined. Um and he's
crossed out some sections. Um this is
[2:13:59] all under the uh building construction.
>> So this looks like kind of general
[2:14:05] information that needs to be
>> right. Um I I actually drafted the
[2:14:10] ordinance, but it's based on everything
that Mark Wellington had previously
[2:14:14] submitted
uh about this particular chapter 70 um
[2:14:19] to the charter and code review
committee. I believe it went to you guys
[2:14:22] before where he just wanted to update
some of the references to the
[2:14:27] international residential code etc. Um
and then add some more clarifying
[2:14:32] language in certain spots. Um, so this
is his brainchild in terms of that's his
[2:14:38] area of expertise, but um, I I worked
with him on this draft ordinance and he
[2:14:44] I to my knowledge has reviewed it and
said that it looks okay.
[2:14:49] » When would be the effective date if
somebody's in the middle of a a project?
[2:14:56] um
you know when would the change take
[2:14:59] place if there were differences between
one code and and the other?
[2:15:06] » Well,
>> and as and as an active permit,
[2:15:10] » I would assume it's when you issue the
new a new permit.
[2:15:13] » Yeah. if it's already been reviewed.
>> I I I think that there's probably likely
[2:15:19] not a high probability that that's going
to happen simply because some of the
[2:15:22] language in your existing code refers to
the International Residential Building
[2:15:27] Code as of such and such date as
amended, but it's like a really old
[2:15:32] date. And so he wanted to update things
to more accurately reflect
[2:15:36] » the current codes and dates and how
things are titled.
[2:15:40] » But because of some of the language in
your existing chapter 70, there's a good
[2:15:44] chance that a lot of what this is this
cleanup that's happening here
[2:15:48] » um wouldn't affect anyone anyway because
it is those international codes that
[2:15:53] pretty much everybody
>> No, I know. But it's just we're talking
[2:15:55] about adopting a 2021 code whereas now
we have a 2003 code.
[2:16:02] We've uh they're already we're already
>> Yeah, we always adopt the newest the
[2:16:07] newest
language and the code.
[2:16:10] » Okay. I just wanna
>> you know I don't want somebody to you
[2:16:14] know get bad news
>> in midstream. Good point.
[2:16:18] » I I think Mr. Wellington would be the
best person to speak to that because he
[2:16:22] sees the permit applications and knows
what's out there. But from a legal
[2:16:26] perspective, it's the fact that the
existing chapter 70 does refer to in
[2:16:31] certain places as amended captures these
updated versions.
[2:16:35] » He's just cleaning it up.
>> No, I understand that. This is chiefly
[2:16:38] housekeeping.
[2:16:42] » Well, and Jamie, if I've misdescribed
anything because I know you've spoken
[2:16:46] with him or Ashley asked. I think it's
just giving him a leg to stand on if
[2:16:49] something is challenged that he's
actually abiding by the code for people
[2:16:54] get confused.
>> Historically, we've always adopted the
[2:16:57] most recent code. That's that's
something that's been that way the years
[2:17:00] I've been here and just continuation of
that.
[2:17:06] » Okay. Make a motion that we adopt it.
>> You have a second.
[2:17:11] » I'll second. All
>> in favor say I. I.
[2:17:15] » Motion pass. Thank you.
[2:17:19] All right. Do we need to
end the session to go into public
[2:17:24] hearing?
>> Well, no. Um, just you just need to open
[2:17:27] the public hearing. So, you can have a
motion to open the public hearing.
[2:17:31] » Before we open the hearing, if you don't
mind, I'd like to make just a couple
[2:17:34] clarifying comments and then after the
period's over, make a few more. But if
[2:17:41] that's okay. Okay. Um just want to
clarify what what this is and what it's
[2:17:47] not. Um this is a very moderate proposal
u that would delay approval for up to 6
[2:17:54] months for new residential applications
um of 10 or more residences. Um
[2:18:02] what is what the basic purpose behind it
is to allow the council time to
[2:18:07] understand and implement any new
legislation that comes down this cycle.
[2:18:12] Um, and that would concern our budgets.
It would concern our employees, our
[2:18:17] zoning, uh, building regulations, and
any other actions that, uh, they may
[2:18:22] take against home.
>> What it's not is is any attempt to limit
[2:18:29] affordable housing. In fact, I think
it's just the opposite. Um, it would
[2:18:33] clarify um, after whatever they do, it
would be able to identify what
[2:18:39] affordable housing looks like in
Millsboro. We don't have that
[2:18:42] information right now. Um, it will not
affect any existing residential
[2:18:47] developments. The gentleman is here
tonight, Town Lakes. It doesn't affect
[2:18:50] him whatsoever. They're all specifically
exempted. Um, and there's no effect on
[2:18:56] commercial establishments. Again, it's a
very moderate proposal. It just buys the
[2:19:00] council time to find out what new
legislation is coming down the pike in
[2:19:04] the next couple of months. So, back to
you, Mr. Mayor.
[2:19:09] » All right. Thank you for the
clarification.
[2:19:15] » I'm sorry. So again, it would be on 10
or more
[2:19:19] [clears throat]
>> 10 or more homes
[2:19:22] » homes and development.
>> So somebody's got acre land and want to
[2:19:26] build a home owner have no effect on
them.
[2:19:29] » Want to build nine homes on it wouldn't
have any effect on
[2:19:35] » I I have a clarifying question. Um, if
an application has been submitted but
[2:19:39] hasn't actually reached the town council
for preliminary approval, are they
[2:19:44] exempt um, from this as well? If they've
already submitted an application and the
[2:19:48] town has started reviewing it.
>> Well, I'm I'm sure we could decide that,
[2:19:51] but do we have anything like that
pending?
[2:19:54] » You do have one I think at least one
project that has submitted an
[2:19:57] application, but it hasn't reached you
for preliminary approval yet. What
[2:20:02] » it's still being worked on, but it has
been submitted to the town. Well, in my
[2:20:07] opinion, I mean, the council can think
otherwise. In my opinion, this would
[2:20:10] pertain to them. If it hasn't reached
this level yet and and for approval,
[2:20:18] but it's something we can decide in the
resolution or the ordinance.
[2:20:27] Um,
[2:20:30] and keeping in mind the earliest this go
effect would be next month anyway.
[2:20:35] We have to draft the ordinance and vote
on it.
[2:20:49] Any further comments?
[2:20:53] Have a motion to open a public hearing.
>> Make motion to open the public hearing.
[2:20:59] » Second.
>> Second. All in favor say I.
[2:21:02] » I. Any opposed?
[2:21:07] Okay. Public session is now open.
Anyone's interested in speaking
[2:21:12] » one at a time, just approach the
microphone and state your name, address,
[2:21:19] » we do have a
there. They want to write their names so
[2:21:23] that
>> Lauri Walsh 27806
[2:21:27] Rona Rapids Landing
[2:21:32] » just write your name there. So,
>> okay.
[2:21:34] » Um, I wasn't going to speak tonight, but
I just saw the town in action limiting
[2:21:41] affordable housing.
That developer offered to keep rental
[2:21:46] apartments on his plan
and rental apartments are affordable
[2:21:53] because renters do not have to come up
with a down payment. They can afford to
[2:21:59] rent. All they usually have to come up
with is one month's deposit.
[2:22:04] I think the town is deliberately
avoiding allowing affordable housing in
[2:22:11] this area and putting a moratorum in
place after approving
[2:22:19] switching from apartments to town houses
is like sneaking something under the
[2:22:23] radar.
Thank you.
[2:22:47] Good evening. Um, I live in Dover. Do
you need to know that information?
[2:22:52] » You could just sign your name.
>> Okay.
[2:22:55] » And print your name. Excuse me.
>> Okay. Well, um, good evening, mayor and
[2:22:59] members of the Millsboro Town Council.
My name is Katie Gillis. I'm the
[2:23:02] executive officer of the Homebuilders
Association of Delaware. I'm here to
[2:23:06] urge you to reject any proposal of a
moratorum on affordable housing
[2:23:12] applications. In a time when
affordability has reached historic lows,
[2:23:16] halting the production of affordable
housing is counterintuitive.
[2:23:20] Pausing new projects further limits
supply ultimately increases rents and
[2:23:24] home prices in the area and raises
development costs, further exasperating
[2:23:29] affordability.
When the pause ends, fewer homes get
[2:23:33] built and fewer families are served.
That is the opposite of what our
[2:23:36] communities in Delaware need right now.
Affordable housing is also an economic
[2:23:40] issue. Construction creates local jobs
and completed housing helps employers
[2:23:45] keep workers who need to live where they
work. When housing options are
[2:23:50] constrained, workers face longer
commutes or forced to leave the area
[2:23:54] altogether, which hurts local businesses
and strains public services. I ask you
[2:23:59] to consider the message that you might
be sending to your teachers, to your
[2:24:03] nurses, to your service workers who live
here, uh, who work here, but who cannot
[2:24:08] afford to live here. I also want to flag
a serious legal concern. A moratorium
[2:24:13] that targets or disproportionately
affects affordable housing could expose
[2:24:16] the town to risk under the fair federal
fair housing act. I'm saying could I
[2:24:20] don't know that for sure. Affordable
housing disproportionately serves
[2:24:23] families with children, people with
disabilities, and communities of color.
[2:24:26] And policies that limit access to
housing for these groups, even
[2:24:30] unintentionally, can have significant
legal consequences. Across Delaware and
[2:24:35] the region, many local governments are
doing the opposite of imposing
[2:24:38] moratoriums. They are actively
re-evaluating zoning, permitting, and
[2:24:42] development standards to figure out how
to make housing more attainable for
[2:24:45] their residents. Mills should be part of
that conversation, not moving in the
[2:24:49] opposite direction. Thank you very much.
I appreciate the time tonight.
[2:25:13] » Good evening. My name is John Warner.
I'm the president of the Home Builders
[2:25:16] Association of Delaware. We're in the
middle of a housing crisis and every
[2:25:20] expert agrees this has been largely
caused by a supply s shortage and
[2:25:24] specifically a supply shortage in the
types of units that we need for
[2:25:27] affordability including apartments and
town homes. With that in mind, it is
[2:25:31] unconscionable to consider a moratorum
that not only exacerbates this issue but
[2:25:35] causes significant economic harm not
just towards the people employed uh in
[2:25:40] the construction industry but also the
members of local community and all
[2:25:43] aspects of the local economy. This
proposal is particularly egregious
[2:25:47] because as proposed is blatantly illegal
for a moratorum uh to be legal, it must
[2:25:52] be for a legitimate public purpose. The
stated reasoning here is vague concerns
[2:25:57] uh regarding affordable housing
regulations that don't even exist. They
[2:26:01] haven't been drafted. They haven't been
promulgated. The affordable housing
[2:26:03] production task force of which I was a
member of the zoning subcommittee that
[2:26:07] report was produced in April. The
governor's task force with work came
[2:26:10] out. Nothing exists at all. there is the
potential vague threat that exists at
[2:26:15] any given time for regulation to occur
that has existed
[2:26:20] forever. Um, and yet that is being
profered as the basis for this. It's
[2:26:26] illegal. That's not a legitimate public
purpose. And the Homebuilders
[2:26:30] Association of Delaware will absolutely
challenge this in court were this
[2:26:34] moratorium to take effect.
That being said, it has always been our
[2:26:39] position to work with municipalities and
localities and we've shown that in the
[2:26:42] past. We've worked directly with Sussex
County and formed the land use reform
[2:26:45] working group and we work with other
organizations to try to address the
[2:26:49] pressing needs that they're feeling from
the strains of development while also
[2:26:53] trying to address the needs of society
as it relates to affordable housing. Our
[2:26:57] association welcomes that opportunity to
engage with the city to try to address
[2:27:01] some of the concerns that the city has
while also addressing some of the
[2:27:04] needing societal concerns related to
affordable housing. We think that the
[2:27:08] most prudent course here would be not to
enact a moratorum, but would be to
[2:27:12] instead act with haste to revise your
codes to reflect how the city of
[2:27:16] Millsboro should look in the eyes of
you, the town council, as well as the
[2:27:20] residents with an eye toward those
people who maybe don't live here yet,
[2:27:24] but are working in your restaurants,
working in your schools, working in your
[2:27:28] daycarees.
Um,
[2:27:32] one other thing that I I that a little
bit bugged me when reading about this
[2:27:36] was there were some concerning
statements made by members of this
[2:27:39] council about affordable housing. Um,
those statements
[2:27:44] included rhetoric and talking points
that have been thoroughly debunked
[2:27:50] through many, many, many scholarly
articles about the impacts of affordable
[2:27:54] housing. Affordable housing is not
driving crime. Affordable housing is not
[2:27:58] driving all of these terrible things.
Affordable housing is not putting people
[2:28:02] into your communities that you don't
want there and that are not already
[2:28:05] there. Affordable housing is probably
providing a place for people to live
[2:28:08] that are already living and working in
your community. And maybe they're living
[2:28:12] here, but they're not in the type of
housing that's providing them a stable
[2:28:15] environment. And that's what we need to
do. The last point I will make is I'm a
[2:28:19] little confused by the process here.
Typically, a public hearing um under
[2:28:25] sort of established Delaware law, you
have an ordinance, you have a public
[2:28:28] hearing, you have a notice that gives
the opportunity for the public to
[2:28:31] understand exactly what is being
considered. And here we have a one-page
[2:28:35] thing that says uh an ordinance on
residential development based on
[2:28:39] potential affordable housing
regulations. I learned for the first
[2:28:42] time sort of the scope that's being
proposed, which that was outside of the
[2:28:45] public record in the public hearing that
it's now 10 units. Um there are just so
[2:28:50] many things wrong with how this is being
proposed. So I think the right thing to
[2:28:53] do is to not enact a moratorum to lean
in on solving the problem rather than
[2:28:59] kicking the can down the road. And the
last and the last and final point that I
[2:29:02] will make one legislator said to me
about this exact action. They said this
[2:29:06] is exactly what will cause the state to
act when local governments are refusing
[2:29:12] to do what is needed to address the
housing needs of its population. So if
[2:29:17] your goal here is to keep the big bad
boogeyman of potential regulation of the
[2:29:22] state away, you are doing the exact
opposite. You are ensuring that the
[2:29:25] state that is looking at your
municipality and saying they are not
[2:29:28] providing for the housing needs of their
citizenry. You're ensuring that the
[2:29:32] state is going to come down here and say
if you're not going to do it, you're
[2:29:35] forcing our hand because we're not okay
with citizens of the state of Delaware
[2:29:38] not having adequate housing. Thank you.
[2:30:07] Good evening, mayor and council. My name
is John Ford. I'm a Sussex County
[2:30:10] resident. I'm uh also a board member for
the Homebuilders Association of
[2:30:15] Delaware. Most of my points have been
said by um by John her and Katie Gillis,
[2:30:21] but I did want to also state that I'm
adamantly against any moratorum for
[2:30:26] those reasons that they stated. Uh I'm
also the owner of ReMax Associates,
[2:30:31] which is a real estate company serving
all of Delaware. We have an office in
[2:30:34] Sussex County, and I can tell you that
we feel the squeeze and the pain of the
[2:30:40] affordability crisis daily. Uh I have an
appointment on Friday with a young
[2:30:45] couple that's looking to buy their first
home and it's a different conversation
[2:30:49] that it's been uh that it that it has
been in the past 10 years, 20 years and
[2:30:54] certainly 38 years ago. I was able to
rent an apartment, buy a home uh with,
[2:31:00] you know, in this beautiful country to
get a mortgage with a very low down
[2:31:03] payment and build some equity and then
move on to my next home. And I think
[2:31:08] that it is time for all of us to roll up
our sleeves, get to work, and talk about
[2:31:13] the type of housing that ex that can
exist that is a combination of the
[2:31:18] apartments, the town homes, the single
family homes. So, everyone can find
[2:31:23] housing that's that fits their needs
until their needs outgrow uh where they
[2:31:28] are and they have the option of moving
up to additional housing, the next level
[2:31:33] of housing. So my my point here is to
please do not uh move forward with any
[2:31:39] moratorum. Thank you.
[2:32:07] any other speakers.
[2:32:15] Good evening, Ken Christenberry. I did
speak earlier, but I didn't write my
[2:32:18] name down for that one. So u I'm not
only a professional engineer who
[2:32:24] practices land use in Sussex County and
have for the last 25 years. I live one
[2:32:30] mile from here in Plantation Lakes and I
have for six years and in 2004 I moved
[2:32:35] into the Millsboro zip code. So I'm very
much familiar with the area. I've been
[2:32:39] here for most of my adult life. I've
raised my kids here. Uh we have grown
[2:32:45] we've grown a lot and is it time to take
a hard look at things and think about
[2:32:50] what directions do we want the town to
go in? Sure. But I do think a moratorum
[2:32:56] has potential to do a lot more harm than
good. I think you can uh
[2:33:01] stifle people who might have just
conceived of a project and they're about
[2:33:05] ready to apply and all of a sudden uh a
fairly uh hasty moratorum
[2:33:13] really is a puts a very chilling effect.
I'm not the only one in this room or in
[2:33:18] this town who does make a living tied to
real estate and construction and
[2:33:22] development. A lot of folks do. Uh so I
would encourage you to to take that
[2:33:27] advice of thinking about what your goals
are and trying to move in the direction
[2:33:31] where you update your ordinances without
going to the extreme measure. Thank you.
[2:33:57] Hi, good evening, mayor, council
members. My name is Debbie Fenerero and
[2:34:02] uh I'm a partner and I head up our
construction department at Leon Weiner
[2:34:06] and Associates out of Wilmington,
Delaware. I build affordable housing.
[2:34:10] Been building affordable housing for 36
years. Um we're in a major housing
[2:34:16] crisis as uh you've already heard. Um,
one of the things that I heard tonight
[2:34:22] was kind of disturbing is that there's
an application in currently for
[2:34:26] affordable housing. Please keep in mind
that when these applications are
[2:34:31] approved, it's a process. There's a lot
of financial and a lot of hard work that
[2:34:36] goes into that and denying something
that is in the process right now could
[2:34:42] turn tax credits and funding back where
that affordable housing will go away
[2:34:47] forever and never return.
I really really hope that you reconsider
[2:34:53] uh this moratorum because it goes
against everything that we have
[2:34:57] discussed. I was part of the affordable
housing task force as well on a
[2:35:02] subcommittee
and a moratorum was not one of the items
[2:35:06] that was issued in the final report.
Thank you.
[2:35:27] Thank you.
[2:35:51] Hello and good evening. Uh my name is
Kathy Hidle and um I live in Plantation
[2:35:55] Lakes.
I really think that we have to look at
[2:35:59] the uh amount of affordable housing
that's already in Millsboro and if we
[2:36:05] have satisfied that affordable housing
um there's nothing wrong with taking
[2:36:11] some time out and making an assessment
uh and taking a good look at what will
[2:36:18] what the effects are of you know further
development and um I mean even the town
[2:36:24] lakes development I see because I live
in Plantation Lakes and I see the
[2:36:28] limitations that we have there versus
how the changes happen for this uh what
[2:36:35] is it called Town Lakes development
where you are actually looking at the
[2:36:39] setbacks and you're looking at the you
know uh the uh driveway approaches and
[2:36:46] everything like that whereas in
Plantation Lakes there are a lot of
[2:36:49] faults in in that particular community.
So taking a break and taking a look and
[2:36:55] really seeing um you know what you're
looking at and you know what can be done
[2:37:00] what can be changed possibly after 6
months you'll say yes you know
[2:37:04] affordable housing is something that we
should look at maybe we should approve
[2:37:08] it um but I I don't I don't see anything
wrong with having a moratorium
[2:37:13] especially six months I think it's a
it's a good thing to do and I don't
[2:37:18] think the public is really being
represented here I think if you took
[2:37:22] took um if you really asked I don't know
whether you do a referendum or anything
[2:37:26] like that uh if you would he actually
get the public's opinion at Millsboro as
[2:37:32] to how they feel about it. Is that
possibility?
[2:37:45] I personally did not um
ask for or go on any um social media
[2:37:53] sites or even talk to neighbors about
tonight's hearing. I I want the council
[2:37:58] to hear this. Um
but I think if if if this was put out
[2:38:04] there, we would have a thousand people
in here tonight. And I think 900 of them
[2:38:09] would say that's a good idea. Get your
financial house in order in order that
[2:38:14] we can go forward for the next five or
10 years. And how about looking out for
[2:38:20] the residents who live here versus the
residents that may live here in five or
[2:38:25] 10 years from now?
Maybe we should have done it. Maybe I
[2:38:28] should have done that. Um but we'll see
what happens with the vote tonight.
[2:39:02] Mary Anderson. Um,
[2:39:08] I'm trying to think of the right words,
but I'm not going to waste time on that.
[2:39:12] I think it was really underhanded to do
that. I think the people in Millsboro
[2:39:18] have a right to be represented. I think
there needs to be transparency. I
[2:39:24] question I wasn't even sure the way it
was written on the agenda if it was
[2:39:29] considering
to to decide if there was going to be a
[2:39:33] public hearing in February or if tonight
was the public hearing. And then I
[2:39:38] thought if it's tonight, why isn't it in
in the beginning of the meeting like
[2:39:43] public hearings always are when people
are here instead of 9 or 10:00, whatever
[2:39:49] it is. Um
[2:39:55] I think if the town of Millsboro
approves this tonight,
[2:40:02] you ought to be ashamed.
[2:40:13] Well, ma'am, I could probably answer
your question. Um, and maybe maybe the
[2:40:18] word after tonight does need to get out
to all the residents so that we could
[2:40:24] see what what uh the resident's feelings
are. Um, but this is does tonight
[2:40:30] doesn't settle the issue. tonight only
instructs the attorney to draw up in an
[2:40:35] ordinance. The real vote would be in
February. So, there's plenty of time if
[2:40:41] the residents want to turn out in favor
of it or against it to show up in
[2:40:45] February meeting.
[2:40:56] » Any other speakers?
[2:41:18] name is William Bashlin. I also am a
resident Plantation Lakes,
[2:41:24] but I'm speaking now as a commuter
in the town of Millsboro
[2:41:32] and in this Sussex County.
I've been here 10 years and I've seen
[2:41:39] this traffic
[2:41:42] just terrible. It's it's it's just
gotten so out of hand from the time I
[2:41:48] first moved here. There's nothing but
construction. They'll start popping up
[2:41:53] these homes. This gentleman wants to put
in a town lake here off a handy road. As
[2:41:59] Mr. Mason said, what about the entrance?
You got one way in, one way out. What if
[2:42:03] you got an emergency? Everybody here is
going to try get out on emergency
[2:42:08] situation on one road. Handy road is
terrible. You're right. You can lose a
[2:42:14] car there
trying to get all he's doing is talking
[2:42:18] about the 400 homes in Town Lake. Now,
we're speaking only of Town Lake right
[2:42:22] now and he's talking about 800 cars in
that one division. Not taking into
[2:42:30] consideration all the traffic that goes
over to that shopping center. the new
[2:42:35] grocery store that's going to be up. You
got the hotel, doctors, fast food. Those
[2:42:40] are also cars coming in and out and road
alone. Not to mention out there on 113.
[2:42:46] You can't get to Georgetown and and and
beyond that you got traffic tied up in
[2:42:53] Millsboro and in Georgetown. The traffic
is and then you're that I'm talking
[2:42:58] about right now off season you got
construction going out 113. You got
[2:43:04] truck construction going out there on 24
constantly on both sides. Look at the
[2:43:09] roads. If you keep adding homes, and I
don't understand about the affordable
[2:43:14] housing, but even those people have
cars, and you're right, you're going to
[2:43:19] have two cars
minimum of a house.
[2:43:25] I say you slow down the the building.
Let's get caught up with the roads. you
[2:43:30] get you build a road then you start
building houses and stuff not vice versa
[2:43:35] not playing catchup and that's all these
people are doing around here playing
[2:43:38] catchup. Thank you.
[2:43:49] Anyone else?
Simon, is anyone uh anyone online?
[2:44:00] Council members, that you all did
receive a couple of different emails, I
[2:44:04] believe, this evening
>> from uh different organizations stating
[2:44:08] their position.
[2:44:12] » And then there was another one from um
Can you speak a little louder?
[2:44:15] » One was from Msculus, I believe, and
then there was one from Carl Freeman. Um
[2:44:20] they sent one in opposition as well.
>> Can someone send those emails to me
[2:44:25] please?
>> Sure. Thank you.
[2:44:36] » I'd like to make a comment if I could.
[2:44:42] When we had the vote at the last meeting
whether or not to have
[2:44:49] this meeting, this hearing. Um, I was a
little no vote. Um, because
[2:45:00] I understood what you were saying, Mr.
Presley and it's very concerning to me
[2:45:06] that the state
has been overreaching
[2:45:11] its authority and not respecting home
rule. Our county and Fenwick both have
[2:45:18] lawsuits.
Town of Millsboro
[2:45:23] has also suffered in the past from state
overreach.
[2:45:28] And I'd really like to see going forward
um some kind of coalition of towns and
[2:45:38] other political subdivisions
to come back at the state for their
[2:45:44] overreach.
>> Somebody's got to go first.
[2:45:48] » I I understand what you're saying, but I
think we need to do that collectively.
[2:45:53] Um, I objected to this hearing because I
felt like with the focus being the
[2:46:01] affordable housing, it wasn't just a
building moratorum but about a who who
[2:46:08] was coming moratorum and that's just my
own personal feeling. Um,
[2:46:14] and
you know I don't know if we should have
[2:46:18] a building moratorum or not. Um, I
didn't like the specifics of this one
[2:46:24] that was being proposed, but I really
think that the town has to get together
[2:46:32] with other municipalities
and
[2:46:37] go back at the state with um their their
threat to home rule.
[2:46:43] Well, I think and this is my concern and
home rule is not a is not in the
[2:46:50] Delaware's constitution. It's it's a
legislative act that can be changed at
[2:46:56] any point in time. They could they could
vote February 1st to do away with all of
[2:47:00] our ordinances and and basically take
over every municipality in the state.
[2:47:05] Um,
so
[2:47:08] my point and two things, this is not
about affordable housing. It's not about
[2:47:14] affordable housing. We're this ordinance
would restrict applications for all
[2:47:20] residential construction, not just
affordable housing. Um,
[2:47:26] so it's not about affordable housing.
And secondly, you know, we've had some
[2:47:30] speakers here tonight that that defended
their their occupations and and um and
[2:47:34] who they represent very well. I think we
should have all expected that. Um if I
[2:47:40] was the home builder or if I represented
a homebuilding associations, I would
[2:47:44] think the same thing. But guess what? If
you've lived here in Suchasis County for
[2:47:50] any length of time, you know that a
fivemon, six month, or if we voted,
[2:47:55] two-month moratorum is going to slow
down things in Millsboro or Sussex
[2:48:00] County. It's not going to happen. The
only thing this moratorum allows is for
[2:48:06] the council to recognize what's coming
our way. Um, as of January 1st, no
[2:48:14] landlord can refuse to take section 8
vouchers.
[2:48:19] It's queued up um in the already through
the committees and the legislature to
[2:48:24] overrule our ordinances on accessory
dwelling units. Um, this is going down
[2:48:31] the list the seven or eight things
that's in the affordable task force. um
[2:48:36] they're going to do and I'm I'm not a
prog prognosticator but it seems to me
[2:48:40] they are heading in that direction with
the support of homebuilders and
[2:48:46] developers. Um so our reaction is going
to be okay, you know, we're not going to
[2:48:51] do anything. What what can we do? We can
we can call Rich Collins. We can call
[2:48:56] Gerald Hawker. They're outnumbered. If
if if the legislature wants this passed
[2:49:02] and signed into law, it could be done by
March 1st if they want it done. And I I
[2:49:07] think they do want it done. Um number
one, it it gets politicians elected. Um
[2:49:13] and number two, it makes them uh
developers a lot of money. Who suffers
[2:49:18] from that? The people that are here, the
taxpayers that are here. Um,
[2:49:24] legally speaking, you know, we were
threatened tonight with a lawsuit. Well,
[2:49:30] in Delaware, moratoriums are valid and
they're legal. The the basis of it is uh
[2:49:37] you have to pass an ordinance, which
this hearing is designed to do. They got
[2:49:41] take a vote on passing an ordinance. Um,
has to be 6 months or shorter in
[2:49:47] duration. You have to have a finding of
necessity. Well, after I get done
[2:49:52] talking, and when I got done talking
before, I don't see how you could not
[2:49:56] say we don't have a necessity. We don't
have any idea what our budget is going
[2:50:00] to look like. We don't have any idea
what our sewer rates, our water rates,
[2:50:04] our transfer tax, our employees. We know
none of that going into the budget cycle
[2:50:10] because if if this passes in its
entirety, it basically overrides
[2:50:14] everything we do. They're talking about
coming up with a UN or a standardized
[2:50:19] building code um and zoning regulations
for the state of Delaware that will
[2:50:23] completely override everything we have.
So, do we need zoning employees uh
[2:50:30] building inspectors if we have a
statewide um code that we have to abide
[2:50:35] by?
I don't know. I'm I'm interested in in
[2:50:40] working with all of these people who
said they're willing to work with us.
[2:50:43] Um, but what I didn't hear tonight from
any of them is who's taking care of our
[2:50:49] residents, the ones that that elected us
to serve here. Um, again, I don't think
[2:50:55] anybody is against affordable housing.
Just like the young lady said, I don't
[2:50:59] even think we know. We may we may have
50 60 70% of what they want us to do
[2:51:05] already in affordable housing. I sent
you guys an article a couple of weeks
[2:51:10] ago about New Jersey. New Jersey has
been going through this exact same thing
[2:51:14] for 50 years. Um, it's mandated by their
legislation that each town has to build
[2:51:21] a certain amount of of affordable
housing units based on the basically the
[2:51:26] same definition that the task force
gave. Um, I don't think they came up
[2:51:30] with anything new. um basically copied
off what New Jersey um
[2:51:37] and
the town in in New Jersey in that letter
[2:51:42] was saying in order to build 171
affordable housing units with the
[2:51:48] handouts that were given. The town needs
to build an additional 800 units that
[2:51:53] are full pay. In other words, people who
work and pay their taxes and and pay the
[2:51:58] transfer tax and pay their school taxes
and everything, you have to have 800
[2:52:02] units new on the books to support that
171 that you build in affordable housing
[2:52:08] when you factor in the giveaways. Um,
and again, like I said last time, these
[2:52:16] houses aren't going to be built in
Rahub. They're not going to be built in
[2:52:20] in Bethany, Dewey Beach. They're not
going to get close to down there. They
[2:52:24] might throw up a few here and a few
there outside of town, but 45,000 units
[2:52:28] by 2030 is going to be right up and down
the 113 corridor stretcher from
[2:52:33] Selbyville to do over. And what is our
quota going to be? It may it may not be
[2:52:39] 171, it might be 1,700.
So if we have to build, you know, 100
[2:52:43] houses or a thousand houses, how many
other houses do we have to build to make
[2:52:47] up for the lost tax revenue, the last
lost water rates, um sewer rates,
[2:52:53] transfer tax?
I think a five or six month moratorum to
[2:52:59] allow us to find out number one what the
legislature is going to do and whether
[2:53:03] this comes to fruition at all. Um and
number two, how it's going to affect our
[2:53:08] our budget and our employees. So, the
way I'm looking at this, you know, these
[2:53:14] some of these pe um people that are
opposed to my proposal, they're looking
[2:53:19] out for their jobs. You know, they're
looking out for um the future residents
[2:53:23] of the town um or any town in Sussex
County. I'm looking out for the for the
[2:53:28] existing residents here who's going to
have their water rates risen, their
[2:53:32] their sewer rates, their taxes raised to
be able to to handle this. So,
[2:53:40] it's up to you guys what do we go
through with having the ordinance
[2:53:43] proposed and um and voted on next month.
But, um again, I think if this was
[2:53:48] publicized,
you probably get 3,000 people here. And
[2:53:52] I'll guarantee you 95% of them would be
a be in favor of the moratorum. And this
[2:53:56] is a very modest moratorum.
>> Mr. Mayor, do we need a motion to post a
[2:54:02] public hearing before we start
discussion?
[2:54:05] » Yes. Yes.
you making that motion?
[2:54:09] » I'll make a motion to close the public
hearing.
[2:54:12] I'll
>> second it. All
[2:54:14] » in favor say I.
>> I.
[2:54:17] » I.
>> Any opposed?
[2:54:21] Public hearing is now closed. Discussion
can continue though. Council
[2:54:39] I have a couple of points that I was
going to ask Marty. Um, your proposal
[2:54:43] for the six-month moratorum is based on
the final report that came out in April
[2:54:50] 2025. So, what happens just just the
first question, what happens in 6 months
[2:54:57] when nothing happens? Are you going to
extend the moratorum? Is that going to
[2:55:01] be your proposal?
>> No. Um I think if if by midFebruary or
[2:55:06] 1st of February it it's apparent that uh
you know these these proposals aren't
[2:55:12] going to go through we can end a
mortorium at that point in time. If we
[2:55:16] get to June and um the entire package
passes the worst nightmare passes uh and
[2:55:25] we don't know what we're doing as far as
budget-wise goes. Yeah, I might I might
[2:55:30] consider another uh six-month mortorium
until we get our house in order.
[2:55:36] » Well, it's interesting because you keep
saying that you're not against
[2:55:40] affordable housing. That's not what your
focus is, but that's really what your
[2:55:44] presentation and your linguistics
>> talking about. But just to let you know,
[2:55:50] um, Millsboro, the town of Millsboro has
at least five what you would call
[2:55:55] affordable housing developments already
in it. Um,
[2:56:01] » that counter would
The problem is they want 45,000 new.
[2:56:06] They already count them. They want
45,000 new, which we're going to have.
[2:56:11] We're It appears we're going to have a
quot we have to fill. There's nothing on
[2:56:16] the books and there's nothing mandated
down. I have to say that I do agree with
[2:56:20] the one
very
[2:56:24] sound point that Kimberly brought up
which is we need to work with a
[2:56:27] consensus. We need to work with other
towns. Going out on a limb and saying
[2:56:32] we're going to do this or we're going to
do that just makes you out on a limb.
[2:56:37] You're in the focus point but you're
working with other towns. Well, I would
[2:56:42] ask how do we expect um Matt, Jamie,
Ashley to come up with some budget
[2:56:47] figures in the middle of this when they
don't know what our transfer tax is
[2:56:51] going to be, when they don't know what
>> nothing's been proposed. It would be no
[2:56:55] different than if Georgetown was coming
up with a budget proposal or the
[2:56:58] transfer tax or anything or Lewis was
doing that. It wouldn't be any
[2:57:02] different. If Frankfurt was doing it, it
would be the same exact thing. So, I
[2:57:08] mean, we all got these we all got the
April 2025
[2:57:13] affordable housing thing and that you're
going off. So, I'm not really I don't
[2:57:20] understand why we need to do it just in
Millsboro. Why can't we work
[2:57:24] collectively with the other counts is
what I'm saying to you first.
[2:57:28] » Well, I don't I don't go to the seed
meetings. I you know, I don't I'm not on
[2:57:32] you I don't know many of the town
managers or other town councils. I don't
[2:57:36] know what their thinking is. I do know
that Dagsboro
[2:57:40] because [clears throat] of the impending
growth that they're seeing put a
[2:57:43] six-month moratorum on it um so that
they could catch up. Same thing with
[2:57:47] Frederica. Same thing with Kent County.
Um talk about nebulous concepts, you
[2:57:53] know, just keeping up with growth. We've
got that times 10 because and and this
[2:57:58] isn't against affordable housing. It's
about the polit the policies that are
[2:58:02] coming out of do that's going to force
us to do it and it's going to force us
[2:58:06] to adjust to it. It's not about
affordable housing. If they just had
[2:58:09] free market, you know, the state's going
to give them x amount of dollars to
[2:58:14] build and we encourage town Millsboro
to, you know, lower their their uh um
[2:58:22] um transfer tax or their um fees for for
developing. We could consider that, but
[2:58:28] that's that doesn't appear to me be
what's going to happen here. They've
[2:58:31] they're passing this peace meal
obviously, but point by point by point.
[2:58:36] Um,
>> I understand you're having a reaction to
[2:58:39] something that's coming down the road.
You're being trying to be anticipatory,
[2:58:44] right? So, I I'm I throw this at you.
In the past two months, we've had in the
[2:58:50] past few months, we've had two very
large construction groundbreaking
[2:58:56] projects. One by Title Health and one by
BB. Now I personally am going to tell
[2:59:02] you with this moratorum
both I guarantee you both the title
[2:59:08] health and the BB projects are going to
have a problem
[2:59:13] recruiting
staff, retaining staff and promising
[2:59:18] staff anything because basically you're
saying to them we're not sure how to
[2:59:24] move forward. We're going to stop this
housing thing. In addition, it's going
[2:59:28] to affect the staff that Jaime's looking
for or the staff the chief's looking
[2:59:33] for. So, if you want to get people to
come to work in Millsboro, they have to
[2:59:39] be able to afford to live here in
Millsboro.
[2:59:43] » Well, not to be blunt, but that's not
our problem. If if if uh BB or uh Title
[2:59:49] Health won't pay their employees enough
to afford the housing in the area,
[2:59:53] perhaps they need to look at their pay
structure.
[2:59:56] um a 1% decrease in mortgage rates. If
mortgage rates were three and a half%
[3:00:02] the way they were four years ago, we
wouldn't even be having this
[3:00:04] conversation, right? Mortgage rates are
7% takes a lot of people out of the
[3:00:09] equation. Not just
>> But you're you're not concerned.
[3:00:13] » No, I'm saying
>> be able to recruit staff is what you're
[3:00:16] saying. It's it's
>> perhaps they need to evaluate their pay
[3:00:20] structure. If they're hiring people that
can't afford to live here, maybe they
[3:00:24] need to look at their pay structure. Why
should it be all the the existing
[3:00:27] taxpayers of Delaware or Millsboro to
fund that? Why why are we building
[3:00:33] affordable housing in Millsboro that
will feed the restaurants in Rahobit and
[3:00:37] Dwey? Why aren't they building them? You
know why they're not doing? Because acre
[3:00:41] land sales between$1 and5 million. It
blows it out of the water. So where's it
[3:00:45] going to be? It's going to be here.
And we better prepare for it.
[3:00:59] How many housing units do we have on the
books right now that that are not under
[3:01:04] construction, but they've been through
preliminary? We're in the couple of
[3:01:09] thousand.
>> I I would have to defer to Matt. I mean,
[3:01:13] we do have a grid, but that wasn't
something we were asked to prepare for
[3:01:16] tonight. That's what I want to kind of
be built having been built.
[3:01:21] » Yes, they've been approved.
>> It would be it'd be the southside
[3:01:25] plantation lakes and u and town lakes.
So, you're probably
[3:01:32] about a thousand or so.
>> Oh, you got several developments that
[3:01:35] aren't built out too, right?
>> Most of them are
[3:01:41] Oh, and Summers and Chase. Sorry.
Summers and Chase,
[3:01:44] 1500. So, Yeah.
>> So, so six-month moratorum is not going
[3:01:50] to impact anything
>> because the way the way they're building
[3:01:54] these houses, you're talking about 150
or 200 per year.
[3:01:59] I mean, the different developments, if
they're working simultaneously, maybe a
[3:02:02] little bit more.
>> So, six month break is is not going to
[3:02:06] stop the wheels of progress. And and to
be brutally honest, if if a developer
[3:02:14] is going to invest a million dollar, $10
million, $50 million into a development,
[3:02:19] I would hope he has enough smarts, and
I'm pretty sure he does, to pay
[3:02:23] attention to what's going on in
politics, either in in the city he wants
[3:02:26] to build in the county, or the state.
And any developer that takes a look at
[3:02:30] this affordable housing
is going to think one of two things. Um,
[3:02:35] I'm going to wait until there's more
certainty in the market because I don't
[3:02:39] know why would I go out and spend, you
know, thousands of dollars on
[3:02:43] application fees and and and manh hours
coming up with a a proposal to be
[3:02:48] approved by the city council when 3
months from now that proposal may not
[3:02:52] mean anything.
or they're thinking there's enough money
[3:02:56] flowing down from the state that I my
required rate of return of 10% or 12% or
[3:03:03] whatever it is I'm going to make my
retired rate of concern
[3:03:07] they if not they would stick money in
the bank right you know 5% CD or
[3:03:12] something so they have a required rate
of return that they need to make and
[3:03:15] they're going to get it whether they get
it from the unfortunate people that have
[3:03:19] to live in some some type of environment
which is not great or they're going to
[3:03:23] get it from from the state or the
municipalities
[3:03:29] through higher rates for our citizens.
[3:03:33] So I would think a developer a six-month
mortorium going to affect any developer
[3:03:38] as far as coming in here or anywhere in
the state. I I would think there they
[3:03:43] would be leading the charge to unless
they're got some kind of deal under the
[3:03:49] table to get some certainty on their
plans. Why would you spend that much
[3:03:53] money when you don't know what the
zoning and and ordinances are going to
[3:03:57] be anywhere?
>> I personally think that if we're
[3:04:01] complaining about the overreach that
goes on at the legislature and do
[3:04:07] how dare we decide that we're going to
do a moratorum, isn't that a little
[3:04:11] overreach on our part?
>> No, I don't I don't The whole point
[3:04:16] » complain about one and not see the other
point. Now the whole point in the
[3:04:20] moratorum is for us to get through the
budget cycle to find out whether we need
[3:04:24] to cut budget fire employees.
I don't have any answers. I don't know.
[3:04:30] But if if this comes down in its
totality, I guarantee one thing. We
[3:04:34] won't be buying 11 vehicles this year in
the budget. We won't be you know
[3:04:38] increasing pay uh you know tremendously.
And we may have to look at laying some
[3:04:44] people off because we can't function
without that transfer tax. we can't
[3:04:48] function. Impact fees, we just increased
them last year, right? If those impact
[3:04:53] fees go away for a thousand or 2,000
homes, how much have we got to jack it
[3:04:58] up on the next house that that pays the
full boat?
[3:05:02] This isn't about affordable housing.
This is about a policy coming from do
[3:05:06] stuffed down our throats that we need to
prepare for and act like it's coming.
[3:05:10] Whether it's coming or not, we need to
be prepared for it in my opinion.
[3:05:24] you know, our our responsibility is the
is first and foremost what we swore an
[3:05:29] oath to is the people of Millsboro.
Um, our second responsibility is to the
[3:05:35] employees of Millsboro.
You know, our third responsibility
[3:05:40] obviously is to promote affordable
housing, all types of housing, jobs,
[3:05:46] everything.
But you can't flip it on its head. You
[3:05:49] can't say you got to take care of this
over here and forget about your budget,
[3:05:53] forget about your employees. Um, it
won't work.
[3:05:59] And I I don't think we'd be doing our
fiduciary duty to our citizens, but not
[3:06:04] taking this serious and prepare for it
and hope that it doesn't come.
[3:06:10] And again, it's not about affordable
housing. Take all that affordable
[3:06:14] housing we can get, but we can't not get
a transfer tax. We can't not get a tax
[3:06:20] payment. We got to run the town on
something. and and if and if you have a
[3:06:24] certain percentage of population that's
not paying, you've got to increase it on
[3:06:29] everybody else. It's it's it's a zero
sum game. I don't see Delaware, the
[3:06:34] state coming out saying they're going to
make Millsboro whole for our transfer
[3:06:38] tax. That's not in the proposal.
[3:06:49] Have we looked at what a six-month
moratorum would do to our budget?
[3:06:57] » Nothing.
>> Well, why would it have anything to do
[3:07:00] with our budget?
>> Well, right now we're paying
[3:07:03] » $300 application fee to
How much does it cost for somebody to
[3:07:08] apply for a preliminary approval?
>> Thousand bucks. I think it's 750 or a
[3:07:14] thousand.
>> Well, I'm talking about the internet
[3:07:18] fees.
>> Well, somebody comes in with a housing
[3:07:21] project today for preliminary approval
that's not going to be built in 3 months
[3:07:26] or four months. It'd be lucky built in
two or three years. So, it's not going
[3:07:30] to have any effect on that budgetary
wise at all.
[3:07:34] » This is what I have a problem with.
We say it's not going to happen for two
[3:07:39] or three years that we need the impact
fees otherwise we can't balance our
[3:07:43] budget.
So we're going to have a mortorium for
[3:07:47] six months to figure it out. Why don't
we just figure it out in lie of a
[3:07:50] mortorium because it's not going to
happen for 6 months. We haven't we've
[3:07:54] talked about this for 3 months and we've
not sat down to have a budget meeting
[3:07:57] and say okay let's assume the worst case
scenario. Here's our plan.
[3:08:02] I mean to get the attention of do we
have gotten it um and we were successful
[3:08:09] at that. I don't know if it's a positive
thing or a negative thing but I to say
[3:08:13] in one sentence that 6 months are not
going to affect us in any way because
[3:08:18] everything we got 1500 houses on the
books that we got permits for and
[3:08:21] they're going to continue and if a new
house comes in it's not it's going to
[3:08:24] take 18 months before they get started.
6 months isn't going to do anything.
[3:08:29] It's just it's just kicking the can down
the road. What we need to do is get to
[3:08:34] work.
>> Well, 6 months does two things. It it
[3:08:38] gets us through the this budget cycle
and hopefully bring some attention as uh
[3:08:44] Councilwoman Khan said that others will
join in.
[3:08:48] » I would make it I would make a
suggestion that we assume the worst case
[3:08:51] scenario and we use that to develop our
budget cycle. And if it doesn't happen,
[3:08:56] we have saved the taxpayers of the town
of Millsboro money.
[3:09:00] » But we don't we don't know what it's
going to look like. So we how can we
[3:09:04] plan for something we don't know?
>> 6 months we're not going to know what it
[3:09:07] looks like either.
>> Well, 6 months we'll know if it's going
[3:09:09] to pass this this this legislative
session.
[3:09:11] » I don't It'll pass it. So what then?
>> We've we're still in budget cycle. We
[3:09:16] don't have to pass our budget to July
1st.
[3:09:19] » But it it's not going to affect us for
the next budget cycle. No, it will it
[3:09:23] will affect us.
>> How many homes are going to get how many
[3:09:26] homes are going? Six months from now we
approve a a subdivision.
[3:09:30] It takes them that we start the process
to approve a subdivision. Takes them two
[3:09:35] or three months before they get the
second approval. Then it takes them
[3:09:39] groundwork and site work and your impact
fees are that they're not going to hit
[3:09:43] until 2028.
>> So it's not going to be the 26 27 or
[3:09:48] 2728, but it's going to be the 28 and
beyond. that I just don't maybe I'm
[3:09:53] wrong, but I just don't see the
six-month mortorium having any positive
[3:09:57] impact
um to help us. I think what we need to
[3:10:01] do is sit down and say, "Hey,
um I hate home rule. I hate that that
[3:10:06] that the big people are looking out on
us, but how do we get prepared for when
[3:10:10] it's going to happen?" Because if it
didn't happen this year, it's probably
[3:10:12] going to happen next year. Mhm.
>> Mhm.
[3:10:14] » So why not why not just,
you know,
[3:10:20] why not just assume it's going to happen
and prepare accordingly?
[3:10:24] » I agree with Ron. We should look at it.
Look at it. It's coming down the road.
[3:10:30] But I will tell you, I think it was Mr.
was it who said it. By us putting a
[3:10:38] sixmonth moratorum, what it does is it
puts the bull's eyee on us. We already
[3:10:43] did that.
>> Yeah, we
[3:10:44] » So that's that's what you're doing.
>> So I mean we there's no reason for that.
[3:10:49] » So it puts a bullseye on that. You think
that the legislature will pass the
[3:10:54] Millsboro
law and everybody else escape? I don't
[3:10:59] think so.
>> Suggest we make a motion and vote on
[3:11:01] this and just
>> Yeah. Well, the the I don't think Matt,
[3:11:09] Jamie, or us want to go into the budget
cycle preparing this budget based on the
[3:11:15] worst case scenario
because we're going to be firing people,
[3:11:19] you know, April and May. I
>> I don't I don't foresee that happening.
[3:11:26] » We're still going to get We still have
>> Where's the Where's Where's the impact
[3:11:29] fees coming from? transfer tax
>> on the 1500 homes that we're going to
[3:11:32] build. None of these homes in the next 6
months are going to start. First of all,
[3:11:35] there's no subdivisions that I'm aware
of and have looked at the zoning map.
[3:11:39] There's do we even know how many
subdivisions there are left to be built
[3:11:43] that's owned residential?
>> That's right.
[3:11:46] » Does anybody know that answer right now?
>> Not just council members, do we know the
[3:11:51] number that's out there that can can
come in that's already zoned that they
[3:11:56] can come in and ask for approval?
>> Well, there
[3:11:58] » there's very few. There's lots that are
in the town's limits that have zoning.
[3:12:04] » There's very few.
>> Yeah, there's really at this point not
[3:12:08] that
>> white farm project. How many homes are
[3:12:09] » white farm projects is already in the
works?
[3:12:12] » They haven't come in for approval.
>> They've come in they submitted stuff
[3:12:15] this month.
>> They've submitted. It just depends on
[3:12:18] where you draw the line to where the
moratorum is. Yeah, there there's a good
[3:12:22] reason to to pass the moratorum in my
opinion. Oh.
[3:12:29] Well, I've I've said all I want to say
if you want to make the motion. Um I I
[3:12:34] would just
I don't know how that I pray this
[3:12:38] doesn't come down the pike. I'm afraid
that it's going to in some form or
[3:12:43] fashion and
I have no clue what our ordinances,
[3:12:48] budget, police department, any of it's
going to look like. But if we're going
[3:12:52] to prepare this budget cycle for the
worst, it's going to be a very slim
[3:12:56] budget.
>> My other concern is is that the the
[3:13:01] state has been so far overreaching in
certain areas that if we did a
[3:13:08] moratorum,
I think that they could just tell you
[3:13:14] too bad,
>> you're getting it anyway.
[3:13:17] » I agree. I don't think they care. you're
not at wits end about us.
[3:13:23] If they if they wanted to solve the
affordability issue, there's two or
[3:13:28] three ways that I won't bring up here,
but there's two or three ways to solve
[3:13:31] it just like that. It's not about that.
It's about, you know, what politicians
[3:13:36] get elected, who palms get greased, and
who has to pay. And it's usually the
[3:13:41] honest, hardworking people that have to
pay.
[3:13:55] What do we need a motion to to pass the
mortorium?
[3:13:58] » What? What's your pleasure? Yes, we
would need one.
[3:14:01] » Well, we I I thought we needed an
ordinance.
[3:14:04] » An ordinance.
>> We need a motion to either go for an
[3:14:07] ordinance or to not go for an ordinance.
>> Yeah, that's true.
[3:14:09] » Yeah.
If if anyone is inclined to pursue an
[3:14:15] ordinance, then I'm going to need a a
well articulated public purpose and some
[3:14:21] other details about what would be
included in the ordinance in order to
[3:14:25] draft something um and keep it within
the legal constraints of what would be
[3:14:30] an appropriate moratorum. So if the
motion is to pursue a moratorum and to
[3:14:36] draft an ordinance, please make sure you
cover those bases in your motion. And
[3:14:40] Mary, that would have to come back as a
second public hearing with the exact
[3:14:44] language. Correct.
>> Absolutely. Absolutely.
[3:14:48] I It was my understanding tonight was to
explore the possibility and to have a
[3:14:52] public hearing to ask for input.
>> I'll make a motion that the town of
[3:14:56] Millsboro does not pursue a moratorum on
housing.
[3:15:01] [clears throat]
[3:15:04] » I'll second that.
[3:15:08] All in favor say I.
>> I. I.
[3:15:11] » I. I.....................
Any opposed.
[3:15:15] » Opposed.
Opposed.
[3:15:19] » Do we want to do a roll call?
>> Yes, please.
[3:15:23] » Um. Councilwoman Dilva. Yes or no?
>> I'm opposed to the moratorum.
[3:15:29] » That would be a yes.
Um, Councilwoman Khan, yes or no?
[3:15:34] » Yes.
Councilman O'Neal, yes or no?
[3:15:39] » Yes.
>> Uh, Councilman
[3:15:43] Mason, I'm sorry, it's getting
[laughter]
[3:15:46] » so sorry. Um, Councilman Presley, yes or
no?
[3:15:50] » No.
>> And Mayor McKith,
[3:15:53] » no.
>> So, we have four yes votes and two no
[3:15:58] votes.
>> Motion carries.
[3:16:00] » Motion carries.
[3:16:07] We have a motion to adjurnn.
[3:16:11] » So moved.
>> Second.
[3:16:14] All in favor.