PARKS, RECREATION, AND COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT

The Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee meeting was held on February 12, 2008, at 12:00 noon with Chairwoman Russell presiding. Members present were Mr. McGlumphy, Mr. Ruane, Mrs. Horsey, and Mr. Lewis.

AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS

Mr. McGlumphy moved for approval of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Ruane and unanimously carried.

Animal Care and Control Service

During their meeting of January 15, 2008, members were provided an update by the City Manager on the cost benefit analysis for providing animal control services by considering the elimination of the City’s animal control officer and contracting with the SPCA. Members were advised that the City Manager was in the process of finalizing the material for developing a final report to be considered by members during a future meeting. As a result of several questions, it was suggested that Mr. Goldwaithe, Executive Director of SPCA, be invited to meet with members.

Mr. DePrima reminded members that Mr. Goldwaithe was requested to provide members with information regarding those services that are provided by the SPCA in Kent County and the City, and an understanding of what services are provided to the City through the contract with the County or State.

Mr. Goldwaithe advised members that there is no contract with Kent County and that the SPCA is contracted by the State of Delaware to enforce the State Dog Law. There are two (2) contracts with the State: one through DNREC, which handles the dog management control; and the Board of Health, Department of Social Services, which handles rabies control (animal bites). Under the State’s contract, Mr. Goldwaithe stated that those municipalities that already had their own animal control laws and services were not included since it was their preference not to be included. The only contract that the SPCA has with the City of Dover is for housing animals. The SPCA does provide services to the City, on an hourly basis, when the animal control officer is not available or when the Police Department requests assistance.

Responding to Mr. DePrima, Mr. Goldwaithe stated that DNREC continues to be responsible for dog management control. There is a three (3) year plan, as a result of new legislation, that requires cities and towns to pay for animal control through the County. He stated that beginning his year, DNREC has paid half of the contract fees and that for the following years, the County will pay for all contract fees; however, the program will continue to be managed through DNREC.

Mr. McGlumphy reminded members that staff was requested to conduct a cost benefit analysis for providing animal control services by considering the elimination of the City’s animal control officer and contracting with the SPCA. He requested Mr. Goldwaithe to provide his opinion regarding the costs and services for outsourcing animal control and details regarding the services that are provided by the SPCA that are not currently provided by the City. He noted that staff has suggested the possibility of hiring additional animal control officers. In an attempt to control costs, he questioned the benefits of the City hiring additional officers versus having the services provided by the SPCA. Mrs. Russell also requested details as to the types of training provided by the SPCA for their animal control officers.

Mr. Goldwaithe stated that animal control officers for the SPCA are provided training through the OGP Guidelines and state and national training conferences to obtain certification. The State of Delaware does not currently require animal control officers to be certified as law enforcement officers; however, these officers are certified for providing law enforcement services that are animal related, such as warrants, arrests, prosecutions, etc. He explained that the SPCA is governed by the Delaware Code to provide animal enforcement in the State of Delaware.

Responding to Mr. Ruane, Mr. Goldwaithe stated that the animal control officers are required to obtain National Certification, which authorizes them to administer tranquilizers. Animal control officers would be required to obtain federal licenses for control and narcotics, explaining that the SPCA is also an animal hospital. Only those officers that have obtained certification and their department has acquired the required DDA licensing are permitted to administer tranquilizers.

Mr. DePrima stated his belief that training is available, at a minimal cost, for the City’s animal control officers to obtain the certification and authorities for providing law enforcement services. With regards to the tranquilizing, it was his feeling that the Police Department could obtain DDA licensing.

In response to Mrs. Russell, Mr. Goldwaithe advised members that officers of the SPCA are available 24 hours per day, 7 days per week. He noted that he has provided the City’s Police Department with three (3) different proposals for providing services to the City. A comparable to the City’s current services, he stated that the SPCA could assign an officer specifically for the City, 7 days per week, 12 hours per day. He advised members that most complaints are received between 6:30 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. and then 4:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. Mr. Goldwaithe stated that, unlike the City, the SPCA would not require a police officer to assist with any animal control issue, which eliminates the need to take a law enforcement officer away from their duties. The SPCA provides all the animal housing, which he estimated would take an hour trip for a City officer.

Regarding the proposals submitted to the Police Department, Mr. McGlumphy requested that members be provided copies of the proposals. Mr. Goldwaithe indicated that the proposals consisted of alternatives for 60 days, 90 days, and one (1) year.

Responding to Mr. DePrima, Mr. Goldwaithe stated that the SPCA responds to all animal complaints, including cats. He advised members that last year, the SPCA responded to 55 complaints and 84 assists in the City. The SPCA took in 715 cats, 278 dogs, 7 exotics, and 2 goats, and handled 10 wildlife cases.

Mr. DePrima noted that both the State of Delaware and Kent County pays the SPCA for animal control services. The City of Dover residents pay State and County taxes; however, the residents are not provided any of these services. When the SPCA responds to a City request, the City pays for this service (hourly rate and flat fee for housing). It was his opinion that this is an unfair situation for the resident of Dover, explaining his opinion that the residents of Dover should be receiving services equal to the County and State residents. He felt that, in essence, the City is subsidizing services in the County since the City chose to have an animal control officer. Mr. DePrima further explained that, due to the fact that the City does have an animal control officer, there is less burden for the SPCA. He suggested that there should be a certain amount of services provided by the SPCA to the residents of Dover since they too are taxpayers of the State and County. He stated that a part of the cost benefit is analyzing why the City is required to pay extra for a service, when, in the County, those residents are not required to pay for the service.

Responding, Mr. Goldwaithe advised members that the SPCA met with Police Chief Horvath and Ms. Herman, Program Manager for DNREC, at which time the Police Chief indicated that the City of Dover was not interested in the SPCA providing animal control services to the City. Therefore, he explained that the City was not figured into the SPCA contract with the State of Delaware for dog control. He assured members that this service is paid for; however, the costs were not included in the contract with the State since the City did not want to be included.

Noting that the City was not included in the State’s contract relating to dog control, Mr. DePrima noted that the City has contracted with the SPCA for additional services, such as housing for animals, which he felt should be included in the State’s contract. Responding, Mr. Goldwaithe suggested that if the City indicated a desire to have these services included in the contract with the State, the contract would be developed accordingly. He noted that the SPCA is currently in the second year of a three (3) year contract with the State. If desired, he suggested that the City meet with Ms. Herman to determine if the City could be included in this regard and advised members that the SPCA is in the process of submitting a contract to the City for the housing of animals.

In response to Mr. DePrima, Mr. Goldwaithe stated that the fees paid for dog licensing is credited to the State for dog control. Mr. DePrima noted that there is no credit provided to the City for dog licenses purchased by City residents; therefore, Dover residents pay for these services through taxes as well as licensing.

Mrs. Horsey questioned which municipalities are provided animal control service by the SPCA. Mr. Goldwaithe stated that the Towns of Milford and Smyrna have contracted with the SPCA for animal control services. He stated that it would be necessary for the SPCA to add an additional officer if they were to provide animal control services for the City of Dover.

For clarification regarding cat control, Mr. Goldwaithe explained that there are no current laws regarding cats; however, the SPCA will provide assistance if a resident has a cat problem or there is an indication that there are sick cats, due to the possibility of a rabies control issue.

Mrs. Russell suggested that members be provided the proposed contracts submitted to the City and that the Police Chief and Mr. Goldwaithe attend the next committee meeting on March 11, 2008 to further discuss this issue. As directed during the committee meeting of January 15, 2008, Mr. McGlumphy noted that staff was requested to contact the City of Newark and Wilmington to obtain information as to how they handle animal control within their jurisdiction and requested that this information also be provided to members during their next meeting. Mr. Ruane suggested that the City Manager include his recommendation with regards to the Police Department in the final report of the cost benefit analysis for providing animal control services. In order to allow for appropriate review, Mrs. Russell reiterated the need to include all the information in the packet for the meeting and that the information not be presented to members at the committee meeting.

Noting that another option has been presented to members, Mr. Ruane requested that the City Manager’s report include the alternative of having the animal control services provided by the SPCA through the State of Delaware contract, to be paid for by the resident through the licensing fees and taxes paid to the State and County. For clarification, Mr. Goldwaithe indicated that the State’s contract only provides for animal control services for dogs and wildlife.

Mr. Ruane suggested that the draft amendments to the City’s animal control ordinance be provided to the representatives of SPCA for their review and comments. Due to the amount of time it has taken in the development of this draft, he questioned if members wish to pursue the amendment, to determine if he should continue to work on this project.

Responding, Mrs. Russell suggested that members have been delaying the consideration of the proposed ordinance amendment for receipt of additional information, such as that which is being obtained regarding the animal control services.

Updates

Members were provided the following updates:

Puncheon Run Watershed Action Team Update

Mr. Koenig, Public Services Director, indicated that no further action has been taken since the last update; therefore, the next update will be provided to members during their meeting of March 11, 2008. Responding to Mr. Ruane, Mr. Koenig stated that he anticipates a meeting to be held by the Puncheon Run Watershed Action Team prior to the committee’s meeting on March 11, 2008 and that members will follow-up on the recommendations of the URS Corporation that were submitted to the Conservation District.

Mr. Koenig stated that he also requested that the concerns previously relayed by Mr. Ruane be addressed regarding the flood plain of the Puncheon Run.

Mr. Ruane reiterated the importance of notifying residents due to the affect the results could have on their obtaining insurance. He stated that the committee will be given the opportunity to be supportive of recommendations to be forwarded to the General Assembly.

John W. Pitts Recreation Center

Mr. Carter, Director of Parks and Recreation, reviewed the update for the John W. Pitts Recreation Center, and advised members that the opening is scheduled for March 2008; therefore, he stated that this should be the last update provided to members.

Responding to Mrs. Russell, Mr. Carter stated that once the building is completed, he would contact her to schedule a tour of the facility for members of the Services for Seniors Committee. In response to her request regarding the basketball team, Delaware Finest, Mr. Carter stated that there are no other City facilities available to provide basketball courts and that the space at the new Center will be made available for leasing.

Mr. Ruane requested that during the next committee meeting, staff be directed to provide members an update on the status regarding the Schutte Park issue involving the Boys and Girls Club and the CDSA, which was previously discussed by members.

Mr. Frank Tenusak, 880 Schoolhouse Lane, indicated his interest in additional facilities for residents. He stated that he has found difficulty in locating a place for individuals who wish to play basketball, exercise, etc., due to the facilities being rented and leased to groups. He suggested consideration of public comments on what would be desired of the various facilities. Responding, Mrs. Russell suggested that Mr. Tenusak attend the Services for Seniors Committee meeting tomorrow, which was developed as a result of several of these same concerns.

Mr. Carter advised members that staff is continuing to meet with senior citizens in an attempt to address their needs in this community relative to recreation, including the Senior Olympics.

Planning and Funding for New Library

Mr. Richard Thau, Library Director, provided an update on the planning and funding for the new library.

Mr. Ruane requested that staff provide a brief financial report regarding the new library during future updates.

Mr. Frank Tenusak, 880 Schoolhouse Lane, advised members of his involvement at the State level, prior County meetings, and recent Library Commission meetings. Being supportive in the development of library facilities, he was requested to participate in fund raising efforts. Having attended a recent fund raising meeting, it was his feeling that prior to asking the public for contributions for this cause, as well as other groups beyond the monies available from governments, that the known status of the project be defined clearly as it applies specifically to the City of Dover. He explained that although there have been studies conducted, it would behoove those involved in the fund raising efforts to have information relative to the decisions made by Council regarding the construction and funding for the new library. He also requested any documents that may exist that specify the current status of the plans for the new library. Mr. Tenusak stated that this information is critical so that when members approach the people for contributions and they have questions, members will be able to respond.

Mr. Thau assured members that once the “team of consultants” has been acquired, their responsibility would be to consolidate the project and clarify the elements therein in order for the development of a cohesive plan.

2008 Comprehensive Plan Update

Mr. Koenig, Public Services Director, reviewed the update on the Comprehensive Plan development process for the 2008 Comprehensive Plan.

Mr. Ruane requested that staff provide members with a copy of the current Comprehensive Plan to allow members the opportunity to better understand the various elements.

It was noted that staff would like to have determined at what point during this process they should no longer accept applications to amend the current Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Koenig explained that this deadline would allow staff to prepare a Comprehensive Plan to be submitted to the State in a final format, without pending amendments. Staff recommended that a deadline of May 2, 2008 be established for these applications. This would allow for Council to take action on the applications in July, which aligns with the submission of the draft to the State for their review.

Mr. Ruane moved to recommend that a deadline of May 2, 2008 be established for accepting applications for amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, as recommended by staff. The motion was seconded by Mr. McGlumphy and unanimously carried.

Mr. Ruane noted that during the review of the previous Comprehensive Plan, the City Committees were involved since there are certain elements of the Plan specific to their area of expertise. As an example, he stated that the Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee had a very significant role in the development of the transportation section of the current Plan. He urged staff to schedule meetings with the various committees to allow for their input and allow for the committee’s priorities and goals to be included, as well as to obtain their support of the Plan.

In addition, Mr. DePrima suggested that the civilian committee members be invited to attend the Planning Commission/Council Workshop scheduled for April.

Mr. McGlumphy moved for adjournment, seconded by Mrs. Horsey and unanimously carried.

Meeting Adjourned at 1:24 P.M.

Respectfully submitted,

Sophia R. Russell

Chairwoman

SRR/tm/ac/jg

S:ClerksOfficeAgendas&MinutesCommittee-Minutes20082-12-2008 PR&CE.wpd