[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.

Town Council Meeting 1/5/2026

Transcript