Public Meetings - Milford, Delaware

The Milford City Council held a workshop on August 26, 2026. The agenda included a public comment period, a state-mandated ethics training session led by attorney Max Walton, and a discussion on recently approved updates to the City Charter. Public Comments & Testimony - Julie Morris (2114 Cedar Beach Road) spoke about ethics and governance. She argued that council members should be able to vote independently without pressure from the mayor, and that planning commission and Board of Adjustment members should not have to fear that questioning staff or disagreeing with the mayor could affect their reappointments. She requested a clear explanation of the boundary between the mayor's authority and the city manager's authority. Regarding land use, she countered the idea that an application must be approved simply because it meets technical requirements, citing Supreme Court precedent that allows commissions to investigate site-specific concerns (flooding, drainage, traffic, etc.) and impose reasonable conditions when supported by the evidence. She concluded that the council, planning commission, Board of Adjustment, and mayor all "work for Milford". Discussion Items - Public Officials Ethics Training - Max Walton (Partner, Conley Gallagher and Senior Fellow, University of Delaware Institute of Public Administration) presented the training. He covered the state Public Integrity Commission (PIC) standard, emphasizing the "appearance of impropriety" as the key metric for recusal and noting the city relies on the state for ethics review. - City Manager Government and Recusal: Walton advised council members to "stay in your lane," stating the council sets policy while the city manager implements it. He warned against public prejudgment of quasi-judicial matters (e.g., conditional use applications), which could force disqualification, citing cases such as Dale vs. Town of Ellesmere, where one member's failure to recuse tainted an entire body's decision. - Smoky Hollow Decision / Land Use: Walton explicitly disagreed with the public commenter's interpretation of the Smoky Hollow decision. He stated it is "well settled" in Delaware that if a subdivision meets all requirements of the code, it must be approved, as affirmed by the Ashburn decision. He noted conditions can be imposed but must be justified under the constitutional standards of nexus and rough proportionality. - Takings and Exactions: Walton warned about Koontz, Nolan, Dolan, and Sheetz, explaining that demanding unconstitutional conditions or fees grossly disproportionate to service costs in development approvals can constitute a taking, shifting the burden of proof to the municipality. He advised that percentage-based fees are vulnerable to challenge if they function as revenue raising measures rather than being tied to the actual cost of services. - Upcoming Legislation: Walton highlighted Senate Bill 23 and House Bill 450, predicting they would significantly limit local land use control, including effectively eliminating requirements for traffic impact studies with a 500-trip threshold. - Charter Review Discussion - Councilmember Jason reviewed the City Charter changes approved in July 2025 and sponsored by Senator Wilson and Representative Shoop. He noted the official online City Charter had not yet been updated to reflect these changes and requested the Deputy City Clerk ensure it is updated so the public and council operate under the current governing law. - In response to a question from Councilmember Maribella, staff confirmed that Planning Commission and Board of Adjustment members receive annual legal ethics training through the University of Delaware Institute of Public Administration. Key Outcomes - The council received the ethics training presentation from Max Walton. - Council discussed the July 2025 Charter amendments. The Deputy City Clerk was directed to update the online City Charter to reflect the newly approved changes. - Council was informed that Planning Commission and Board of Adjustment members already receive annual legal and ethics training.

The city council held its regular meeting on August 24, 2026, beginning with a 15-minute public comment period, followed by two public hearings, a museum update presentation, and several authorization items. The meeting saw significant public testimony regarding growth concerns and specific development proposals. The council voted 5-2 to deny the preliminary major subdivision for Cypress Hall Phase 4 and unanimously approved a conditional use for a short-term rental on North Washington Street. Public Comments & Testimony - Andrea Nichols (13 General Torbert Drive, Ward 3): Raised concerns about a code violation notice received on August 1st, demanding compliance by August 12th, after parking a boat in the same spot for 28 years. She questioned the lack of prior notice, the $300 non-refundable appeal fee, the absence of a Board of Appeals, and the aggressive tone of the letter. - Eric Johnson (703 North Walnut Street): Expressed concern about unchecked growth and its impact on healthcare capacity, citing experiences with a full emergency room and long waits for specialist appointments. He also requested that the council provide feedback or follow up on citizen comments. - Jennifer Snelly Miller (715 New Street, former state planner): Criticized the city for failing to manage growth and infrastructure, citing examples such as overgrown lots at Simpson's Crossing, broken streets, and inadequate road closure signage. She urged the council to do better and to properly compare the land swap proposal using an "apples to apples" valuation. Public Hearings Cypress Hall Residential Phase 4 Preliminary Major Subdivision (MJSP-341-2026) This application sought preliminary approval for 64 single-family detached and 30 semi-detached dwellings as part of the existing Cypress Hall PUD. Planning Director Rob Pierce reviewed the project history and noted that the planning commission had recommended approval (4-0). Applicant engineer Tim Metzner stated the plans comply with the 2025 PUD approval and that infrastructure (water, sewer, stormwater) was designed for the full buildout. Public comments included concerns about on-street parking, street width (28 feet under a waiver), stormwater approval from Sussex Conservation District, and the use of older code standards. Council debate focused on parking adequacy and the long-term implications of waivers granted years ago. Vote: 5-2 against approval (Katrina and Jason voted yes; Perez, Dan, Medulla, Nadia, and Nina voted no). Mayor commented that the denial could trigger SB23 consequences. Central Sussex LLC Conditional Use for Short-Term Rental (116 North Washington Street) This request was to allow the existing second-floor apartment to be used as a short-term rental (Airbnb/VRBO). The property is in the C2 Central Business District; staff treated it as a motel/hotel use requiring a conditional use permit. Applicant Hunter Emory described the unit (1,000 sq ft, two bedrooms, max 4 guests, one off-street parking space) and noted the potential to attract visitors to downtown and DE Turf. Public comments were mostly in favor, citing the walkable location and parking provision. One online speaker (Julie Morris) opposed, arguing that short-term rentals should not be squeezed into the hotel category and could create noise and nuisance issues. Council members expressed support and noted the need for a specific short-term rental ordinance in the future. Vote: 7-0 approved. Presentation: Milford Museum Update Curator Claudia Leicester and new Executive Director Larry Josephkowski presented the museum's relocation to 400A Northeast Front Street (former police station). They outlined a phased approach, with offices, a welcome center, and a main exhibit opening by year-end. Key initiatives include continued Saturday talks (funded through July 2027), a photo scavenger hunt, and a winter house tour. They requested clearer agreement terms with the city regarding maintenance responsibilities (e.g., parking lot) and additional financial support for exterior work. The museum is also seeking grants and volunteer assistance. Consent Calendar The following items were approved unanimously without substantive debate: - Authorization for Police AED Purchase: Approval to purchase 42 automated external defibrillators (AEDs) from Rescue One using federal grant funds (no city money). 10 units for police, remainder for public works vehicles. - Authorization for DelDOT Letter of Agreement: Approval for the mayor to sign an agreement for relocation and adjustment of city utilities (water, sewer, electric) as part of the US 113 shared use path project between Milford Plaza and Buccaneer Boulevard. No cost to the city; the city will be reimbursed approximately $4,000 for electric work. - Authorization for Northeast Front Street Parking Lease Extension: Approval to extend the current lease (signed June 2, 2025) through December 31, 2026, with a mutually agreed date thereafter, allowing additional time for negotiations with the property owner. - Authorization for Advantec Agreement for 10th & Front Street Video Access Control: Approval for the mayor to sign a DEMA grant agreement ($60,000 grant, city share $34) to improve security at the Milford water infrastructure. - Authorization for No-Cost Change Order for Milford Corporate Center: Approval of change order number seven, extending the contract completion date to September 30, 2026 (from the previous August 31) to allow tree planting after September 15. No additional cost. Key Outcomes - Cypress Hall Phase 4: Preliminary major subdivision denied (5-2). - Central Sussex Short-Term Rental: Conditional use approved (7-0). - Consent Calendar: All five authorization items approved unanimously (7-0 each). - Executive Session: Council entered and exited executive session with no action required. - Adjournment: Meeting adjourned without incident.

The City Council held a workshop on August 24, 2026, beginning at 17:00 UTC, to continue the previous month's discussion of proposed amendments to the deed restrictions and declaration of covenants for Independence Commons Business Park, located on the North Side of Airport Road. A quorum was present. The agenda and minutes were not included in the available record. Public Comments & Testimony - The Council reserved 15 minutes for public comment; no members of the public were present in the room or online, so the workshop proceeded without public testimony. Discussion Items - Rob, presenting for staff, reviewed a revised draft amendment to Article 2 of the deed restrictions. The revisions were a follow-up to feedback from the prior committee meeting. - Under the revised Paragraph A, signs in Independence Commons must incorporate architectural features and colors common to the principal buildings on the development. Councilmember Brad asked whether this replaced the prior monument sign and internal lighting requirements; Rob confirmed that Paragraph A replaces those specific requirements with a more flexible architectural compatibility standard. - Under Paragraph B, staff removed size limitations because the zoning code already regulates sign size, but retained a requirement that signs may be only indirectly illuminated with non-color light, which is an additional standard beyond the zoning code. - Under Paragraph C, decisions by the planning department on sign requirements could be appealed to the planning commission, which may review and approve alternative designs. Staff explained this parallels the existing architectural review process for site plan review. - Staff noted that the comprehensive sign plan provision remains in the deed restrictions, though it would likely no longer be used in Independence Commons. It allows flexibility for larger complexes, similar to a planned unit development for signage. - Councilmember Danny asked whether there would be a fee to appeal a planning department sign decision to the planning commission. Rob initially replied there is no fee; Danny suggested the draft should state that no fee is required for an appeal or for holding a public meeting. Rob agreed that the language could be clarified for both sign appeals and architectural review. - A councilmember asked how the Beach Babies sign fits into the standards. Rob explained that Beach Babies is on Marshall Street, not in Independence Commons, so it is not subject to these deed restrictions; it went through a conditional use process under the zoning code and does not set a precedent for this development. Key Outcomes - The committee voted to recommend support for the revised deed restriction amendments, with the pending clarification that no fee is charged for appeal or architectural review. Councilmember Madula made the motion; it was seconded and passed by voice vote with all in favor. - Staff will finalize the fee clarification language and the matter will move forward to City Council for consideration.

The Milford Planning Commission held a regular meeting on August 18, 2026, starting at 6:00 PM. Four commissioners were present (Commissioners Redden, Deacon Stanzo, Purcell, and Wright); three were absent. The meeting included public comment, approval of previous minutes, four public hearings on development applications, a site plan extension request, and a comprehensive plan workshop session. Consent Calendar - Unanimously approved minutes from the January and February 2026 planning commission meetings. Public Comments & Testimony - General Public Comment (Pre-Meeting): A resident raised three issues: (1) Milford's development regulations and the commission's handling of documented public concerns, (2) the decision not to reappoint Shelby D. Costanza to the commission, and (3) downstream flooding concerns tied to the Misspillion Landing project. The resident stated that the Delaware Supreme Court has recognized that public health, safety, and welfare concerns can be investigated by the commission and that the commission can require additional investigation or conditional approval. They urged the commission to say publicly whether they valued Ms. Costanza's service. - Cypress Hall Phase 4 (Objection): Julie Morris (21142 Cedar Beach Road) expressed concerns about stormwater management for Phase 4, noting that the city engineer's "general compliance" review was vague and that previous phases had stormwater issues. She argued that with pending issues for Phase 3, the commission should not give preliminary approval for Phase 4. - Conditional Use – Short-Term Rental (General/Support): Jennifer Snelly Miller (715 New Street) spoke in favor of the application due to location and need, but urged the city to develop a clear policy for short-term rentals rather than relying on conditional use approvals. Julie Morris also spoke, questioning the legal basis for classifying a short-term rental as a hotel/motel under the code and warning that approving this on a case-by-case basis creates an unfair standard. - Night Crossing PUD (Opposition): Multiple residents spoke in strong opposition: - Jennifer Snelly Miller: Called the project "inappropriate" for the area, citing floodplain risks, sea level rise, contamination concerns, traffic on Cedar Beach Road, a dangerous mid-block crossing on Route36, and the cumulative impact of multiple large PUDs. She urged the city to say no. - Resident (Maritime Court): Raised concerns about 48-foot building height, 26 units per building (over 24 limit), parking, 30-foot roads with on-street parking, school bus access, and the tacking-on of a new section. - Kirk Hamza (1855 Flying Geese Drive): Asked about electrical grid capacity, school capacity, road width for fire trucks, and the need for fire access from two directions. - Brenda Watson (35 Beaver Dam Drive): Opposed the change in character, increased traffic on an evacuation route, narrow roads, school strain, and the shift from 55+ housing to family units. - Julie Morris: Raised flooding/drainage concerns, noting that portions of the property are in floodzones and former borrow pits would require substantial grading, pushing water onto downstream properties. She also referenced $500,000 in outstanding fees owed to the city for the development. - Misspillion Landing Extension (General): Cliff Mumfer, engineer for the applicant, explained the project has been difficult to make feasible due to high impact fees ($1.2 million), building permit fees, and other costs. He noted the rental market in Milford has a 0.5% vacancy rate versus a healthy 7%, emphasizing a need for apartments. - Comprehensive Plan Workshop: Superintendent Travis Mormon from Milford School District presented enrollment data and demographic trends. He noted current enrollment of 4,347 (Sept30 snapshot pending), a slight decline over recent years, but a shift from Kent to Sussex County students. Ross and Morris elementary schools are at capacity. He discussed school bus requirements for development (30 ft wide streets, 45-50 ft radius turnarounds for cul-de-sacs, gang stops at entrances). He said the district has not been commenting on development plans and will improve that collaboration. Discussion Items - Cypress Hall Residential Phase4 (Preliminary Major Subdivision): The applicant sought approval for 94 townhouses as part of the approved PUD. Staff noted the application was consistent with the PUD and met standards for general compliance. Commissioners asked about construction timeline (shovel-ready in 6 months) and pricing (unknown). No public speakers in favor; one opposition (Julie Morris). Commission voted 4-0 to recommend approval to city council, noting that detailed agency reviews occur at final approval. - Conditional Use – Central Sussex LLC (Short-Term Rental): The applicant proposed using an existing second-floor apartment as a short-term rental (Airbnb) in a mixed-use building in the C2 district. Staff treated the use as similar to a hotel/motel. The commission discussed tracking cumulative loss of long-term rentals and the need for a broader policy. The vote was 4-0 to recommend approval, citing the presence of similar uses and no neighbor objections. - Night Crossing Planned Unit Development (PUD): The applicant proposed a revised PUD incorporating new lands, with 344 townhouse condominiums, 78 apartments, and 19,998 sq ft commercial. The application deviated from code on 12 items (1-7 carried over from prior approval, 8-12 new). After extensive debate and a public hearing, the commission voted on each deviation separately: - Items 1 (right-of-way reduction 60' to 50') – Denied (4-0) - Item2 (pavement width 36' to 30') – Denied (4-0) - Item3 (T-turnaround instead of cul-de-sac) – Failed (2-2, not passed; thus motion to deny T-turnaround passed? Actually motion to deny item3 was voted 4-0? Let's check: Transcript: "Motion to deny chapter 200-8... T-turnaround... I feel like a cul-de-sac is more appropriate." Vote: Commissioner DiContanza: deny; Redden: deny; Purcell: deny; Wright: deny. So motion to deny passed 4-0. So item3 is denied. - Item4 (dead end street length 400' to 630.7') – Approved (4-0) - Item5 (block width 275' to 241') – Approved (4-0) - Item6 (single front setback and two side setbacks for corner lots) – Failed (2-2, motion to approve fails? Actually motion to approve item6 was made, vote: DiContanza: approve; Purcell: approve; Redden: oppose; Wright: oppose; motion fails 2-2. So item6 denied. - Item7 (parking setback 15' to 0') – Approved (4-0) - Item8 (front yard setback 30' to 20' for townhouses) – Vote on motion to deny: DiContanza: deny; Redden: oppose (so vote to deny? Actually motion to deny item8 was made, vote: DiContanza: approve motion to deny; Redden: against motion to deny; Purcell: against; Wright: against. So motion to deny fails 1-3. Then motion to approve item8 likely passes? Need to clarify: After vote fails, chair says "So waiver granted 3-1" meaning item8 was approved. So item8 approved. - Item9 (side front yard setback to 15 ft for corner lot) – Approved (3-1, Redden opposed) - Item10 (lot coverage 60% to 70%) – Approved (4-0) - Item11 (building height 35' to 48' for apartments) – Motion to deny was made and seconded. Vote: DiContanza: deny; Redden: approve (so opposed to motion to deny); Purcell: approve (opposed to motion); Wright: approve (opposed to motion). So motion to deny fails 1-3; therefore item11 approved? Actually motion to deny fails, meaning waiver for 48' height is granted? But code says max 48' is allowed in PUD. The request was for 48' which is within code, but the existing district had 35' limit. The commission's vote on motion to deny failed, so the waiver is approved? However the transcript says: "I make a motion to deny... Is there a second?... Commissioner DeConstanzo: vote to deny; Redden: would vote to approve or deny the motion for approve the waiver as it is within our code; Purcell: would vote to permit the waiver and deny the motion; Wright: correct. Does not carry." So motion to deny fails, thus the waiver for 48' height is approved? The text says "Does not carry" meaning motion to deny does not carry. Then the chair proceeds to item12. It appears the waiver for item11 was approved because it was within code and motion to deny failed. However later in the summary I need to be clear. - Item12 (units per apartment building 24 to 26) – Approved (4-0) After all waiver votes, the commission then made a motion to deny the overall PUD because the plan would need to be redesigned due to failed waivers (items1,2,3,6). The motion passed 4-0. - Night Crossing Phase1 Preliminary Major Subdivision: Since the underlying PUD was denied, the phase1 plan was also inconsistent. The commission voted 4-0 to recommend denial. - Misspillion Landing Site Plan Extension (Fourth Extension): The applicant requested a one-year extension from the August 2021 approval. Staff noted the entrance and utility work were done but buildings not started. Vote: 2-2 (Commissioners Redden and Wright in favor; DiContanzo and Purcell opposed). Motion fails, so extension is denied. Commissioner Purcell stated the plan needs updated with floodplain information and housing diversity. Key Outcomes - Cypress Hall Phase4 Preliminary Subdivision: Recommended approval (4-0) to city council. - Conditional Use for Short-Term Rental (Washington Street): Recommended approval (4-0) to city council. - Night Crossing PUD: Recommended denial (4-0) due to critical waivers not being granted; plan must be redesigned. - Night Crossing Phase1 Preliminary Subdivision: Recommended denial (4-0) as inconsistent with the revised PUD. - Misspillion Landing Site Plan Extension: Denied (2-2 tie); applicant may resubmit with updated plans. - Comprehensive Plan Workshop: Continued discussion; commission will review draft position statements and goals; upcoming workshops on housing (with Housing Authority) and transportation (with DelDOT). Superintendent Mormon committed to improving school district comments on developments.

The Milford Board of Adjustment convened at 10:00 a.m. on August 13, 2026, with a full quorum present. The board held two public hearings on variance applications, deferred one application because of a noticing error, approved five variances for an infill house application, and unanimously approved the minutes and seven prior findings of fact. Consent Calendar - Approved the January meeting minutes by unanimous voice vote. - Approved findings of fact for prior applications by unanimous voice vote: BOA-328-2026 (Landa Brian West), BOA-317-2026 (CK Holdings Worldwide), BOA-325-2026 (Sussex County Habitat for Humanity, 21 Columbia Street), BOA-349-2026 (Lands of Brian Shipe), BOA-308-2026 (Pierce Hardy Partnership), BOA-339-2026 (Southern States Co-op, Route 14), and BOA-331-2026 (Maston Trade Yards). Public Comments & Testimony - Julie Morris (21142 Cedar Beach Road, Milford) spoke during open public comment about the Board of Adjustment’s independence. She expressed concern about Chair Brendan Wharfle’s dual role as a local builder, cited prior objections to his reappointment, including concerns about VIP NASCAR tickets, and urged each board member to vote independently and base decisions on the law and evidence rather than predetermined outcomes. - On the Walmart application, Julie Morris said she supports the expansion and uses Walmart pickup/delivery exclusively, but questioned whether the applicant had explored acquiring adjacent land, whether the owner was consulted, and whether the building could be redesigned. She raised concerns about the one-foot setback’s practical consequences for maintenance, drainage, utilities, emergency access, and the neighboring property’s future use and value. - On the Telos Properties parcel 18 application, Julie Morris said she liked the infill-home idea but questioned the alternatives presented, including townhomes sold separately, a smaller footprint, a narrower driveway, and affordability restrictions. She called a “1.9 foot setback” “ridiculous” as transcribed. Discussion Items Walmart Variance Application (BOA-371-2026) - The applicant, Walmart, proposes a 4,308-square-foot addition at 939 North DuPont Boulevard in the C3 Highway Commercial district to expand online pickup operations. The plan would increase dedicated pickup stalls from 18 to 29 and add order-preparation space without customer entry. - Two variances were requested: a side-yard setback reduction from 20 feet to one foot (a 19-foot reduction) under Chapter 230-14D6, and an off-street parking reduction from 1,046 to 1,037 spaces (a nine-space reduction) under Chapter 230-21B. - Applicant’s representative Jamie Andruzi, a civil engineer with Bowler, testified that the project is driven by demand for online shopping. He said the rear, front, and right-side expansion options were rejected due to truck/loading conflicts, unsafe crossings, and incompatibility with the auto and garden centers. He stated land acquisition is not guaranteed and that the expansion would maintain a drive aisle and use fire-rated walls to avoid impacting the neighboring property. He also said the site already exceeds Walmart’s internal standard of four parking spaces per thousand square feet, while the city code requires five per thousand, so the nine spaces would likely go unused. - Staff confirmed the public notice was advertised in the Daily State News on July 29, 2026, mailed to properties within 200 feet, and posted on the property. Board discussion addressed the loading dock, bus-pad relocation, cart access, and administrative review; staff noted that the below-5,000-square-foot expansion would be reviewed administratively by planning and the city engineer after this hearing. Telos Properties Parcel 14 (BOA-374-2026) – Deferred - Staff requested deferral because a typographical error in the staff report affected the public notice for variance request one. The board agreed to defer the application, re-advertise with corrected dimensional information, and return it in September. Telos Properties Parcel 18 (BOA-373-2026) - Applicant Kyle Nichols, a local builder, proposes a single-family detached dwelling on a vacant R3-zoned corner lot at Northwest 6th Street and Truett Avenue. The house would be 1,400 square feet, three bedrooms, two and a half baths, with a 700-square-foot first floor and a target sales price of about $290,000. The applicant cited Redfin’s median Milford sales price of about $350,000. - Five variances were requested: front-yard setbacks along Truett Avenue and Northwest 6th Street from 30 feet to five feet each (25-foot reductions), side-yard setbacks from eight feet to three feet (five-foot reduction), rear-yard setback from 15 feet to 13 feet (two-foot reduction), and maximum lot coverage from 40% to 58% (18 percentage points above code). Staff corrected a slide typo stating the lot coverage requirement is 40%, not 45%. - The applicant testified that the existing non-conforming lot has virtually zero buildable area under current R3 setbacks and that the hardship was not self-created. He said the design was the smallest reasonable footprint that could still be a three-bedroom home and that the project supports infill, downtown investment, homeownership, and Milford’s comprehensive plan. Staff confirmed the public notice was advertised July 29, 2026, mailed to properties within 200 feet, and posted. - Asked whether combining lots could avoid variances, the applicant said any development on the corner lot would still require variances, and that combining the lots for a duplex would likely push the home into an investor/rental model rather than for-sale homeownership. One board member commented that the practical choice was between an empty lot and an affordable infill home. Key Outcomes - Walmart variance 1 (side-yard setback): Motion by Ron Rizzo, second by Joe Wiley; granted unanimously (5-0). Board members cited lack of impact, increased order volume, and pedestrian safety. - Walmart variance 2 (parking reduction): Motion by Ron Rizzo, second by Ron Muscola; granted unanimously (5-0). Board members cited the minimal nine-space reduction and no impact on customers. - Telos Properties parcel 14: Deferred to the September meeting for corrected re-noticing. - Telos Properties parcel 18 variance 1 (Truett Avenue front setback): Motion by Joe Wiley, second by Ron Muscola; granted unanimously (5-0). - Telos Properties parcel 18 variance 2 (Northwest 6th Street front setback): Motion by Joe Wiley, second by Ron Rizzo; granted unanimously (5-0). - Telos Properties parcel 18 variance 3 (side-yard setbacks): Motion by Joe Wiley, second by Andrea White; granted unanimously (5-0). - Telos Properties parcel 18 variance 4 (rear-yard setback): Motion by Joe Wiley, second by Ron Muscola; granted unanimously (5-0). - Telos Properties parcel 18 variance 5 (lot coverage): Motion by Joe Wiley, second by Ron Rizzo; granted unanimously (5-0). - Next steps: Walmart’s site plan will be reviewed administratively; the Telos parcel 14 application will be re-advertised and heard in September; the Telos parcel 18 applicant was told to follow up with staff and planning. The board voted unanimously to adjourn after completing the findings of fact.

The meeting was held on August10,2026 at 6:00 PM, with Vice Mayor presiding in the Mayor's absence and six council members present. The meeting covered public comments, departmental reports, approvals of purchases and policies, ordinance introductions, and discussions on flooding, public safety, and development. Consent Calendar - Approval of agenda and previous minutes. - Reports from Police, City Clerk, City Manager, Public Works, Planning & Zoning, Parks & Rec, Human Resources, Economic Development, IT, and Finance were all accepted. Public Comments & Testimony - Scott Lynch, Vice President of Asset Development for Delaware Municipal Electric Corporation (DMEC), invited council to DMEC's annual dinner on September9,2026 at Bally's in Dover. He noted DMEC tracked 44 pieces of energy legislation in the past session, up from22 last year and8 prior. Discussion Items - Police Report: Sgt. Tim Maloney reported that the pole barn renovation is nearly complete, and new maintenance facilities are slated for October. A Group Violence Intervention (GVI) calling event was successful. Milford reached 365 days without a shooting incident. Council praised the efforts. - City Clerk's Report: Upcoming events including Riverwalk Farmers Market, Hippie Fest (August15), Grand Venta da Comida (August29), and Touch a Truck (August15). Ward3 special election set for September26; filing deadline September3. - City Manager's Report: Met with DEMA, attended DMAC board retreat, met with Representative Shup regarding city matters, discussed misutility improvements, and attended Milford Museum project meeting. Attended DMAC ribbon cutting in Middletown. - Public Works Report: Fleet performed49 work orders, street division painted hydrants and exercised valves, water/sewer department involved in well redevelopment, road rehabiliation project near completion. Discussion on Northeast Front Street flooding – councilman expressed concern about danger and frequency. Director Schaefer noted historic issues and ongoing study with consultant. - Planning & Zoning Report: 159 new dwelling permits issued through July (72 apartments,24 condominiums,6 townhouses,57 single-family). Five applications under review by planning commission, three by Board of Adjustment. - Parks & Rec (via City Manager): Storm debris removal for six weather events, cleanup for July3 and bicentennial events, and31st annual Take It to the Streets Basketball Tournament successfully held. - Code Enforcement: Councilwoman inquired about grace period for citation delivery if landlord delays. Director responded violations are with property owner, tenant should contact code office. - Human Resources: Personal budgeting workshops for staff begin next week. Touch a Truck event scheduled for August15 from10 AM to2 PM on South Walnut Street. - Economic Development: Attended legislative luncheon, met with Division of Small Business (new Office of Small Business Access), monthly meeting with Emory Hill on corporate center. Emory Hill to present at September28 meeting. EDGE grant opens August11. New Delaware Commercial Corridor initiative launching this fall. Community Parade theme: comic books come to life with America's250th tribute. - IT: Emergency operations plan updated with centralized surveillance; cameras installed at public works and electric facilities. Government AI ethics working group grown substantially; data visualization dashboards being developed. - Finance (Director Vitola): FY27 priorities include FY25 audit, annual tax billing, system improvements, cost of service studies, USDA loan for police facility, and financing for Northwest water project. Tax collection graph changed to include all interim billings for transparency. Current uncollected property taxes total $632,000 (mostly current year); prior year stale receipts at $247,000. Councilman Marabella asked about breakdown by escrow vs. direct payment. - Monthly Finance Reports (May/June): May cash consumption high due to season and corporate center payments, operations strong. June cash consumption $777,000 due to projects; general fund surplus estimated at $430,000, strongest estimate to date. Utilities finished strong vs budget but dipped vs prior year due to higher power costs. FY26 expected to be 13th consecutive year of net position increase. - Communications: Councilwoman reported flooding concern at6 NW4th Street; resident requests update. Director Schaefer said Banneker pond study complete, basketball court stays, downstream project in FY25 budget, staff will meet with resident. Councilman questioned boat and vehicle violations; Director explained parking on grass is violation, no limit on vehicle count if parked legally, and impervious surface restrictions apply. - Councilman Marabella: Expressed concern about missed meetings and need for workshops, citing development of nearly400 units that needs discussion. Key Outcomes - BMX Facility Improvements: Clarified motion from previous meeting – council voted to authorize improvements to the BMX facility (start gate structure) as discussed. - Public Works Vehicle Purchases: Approved purchase of five vehicles: (1)2027 Freightliner refuse truck($333,000 from equipment replacement reserves), (2)2027 Freightliner dump truck($325,000 from equipment replacement reserves), (3)2027 Ford F-350($96,430 from utility/general fund), (4)2027 Leaf Vac($175,574.10 from equipment replacement reserves), (5)2027 Ford Transit F-250 cargo EV van($56,000 from utility/general fund). Total $986,004.04. - Police Canine Retirement Sale: Authorized sale of canine Mason to handler Miles Kozarowski for $1 with mandatory retirement clause, releasing city from future liability. - Motorola Radios: Approved purchase of20 Motorola handheld radios for $139,810.08 ($139,413 from FY27 CIP, $397.08 from police O&M). Vice Mayor authorized to sign agreement. - Ordinance Introductions: Four ordinances introduced for first reading: - Ordinance2026-13: Planned unit development for Milford Marina property (344 townhouses,78 apartments,19,998 sq ft commercial). - Ordinance2026-14: Preliminary major subdivision for phase1 of that PUD (344 townhouses). o - Ordinance2026-15: Phase4 preliminary major subdivision for Cypress Hall (64 single-family detached,30 single-family sem-i-detached). o - Ordinance2026-12: Conditional use for short-term rental at116 N Washington Street. All ordinances to be reviewed by planning commission on August18 and set for public hearing on August24. - Executive Session: Motion passed to enter executive session, followed by adjournment.

The Milford City Council met on July 27, 2026. Council heard public comment, approved the agenda, adopted a 50th anniversary proclamation for the Parks and Recreation Department, reappointed members to boards and commissions, approved the fiscal 2027 tax warrant, received a grant notification, authorized police vehicle purchases and BMX facility improvements, and later entered executive session before adjourning. Public Comments & Testimony - Under the 15-minute public comment period (three minutes per person), Gary Emery (listed as Gary Emory on the sign-up list), of 8473 Holybrook Drive, Lincoln, Delaware, spoke. He said he was a Milford Parks and Recreation employee from 1978 to April 2015 and served as director from May 1981 until his retirement in April 2016, some 35 years. He announced that September 18, 2026, will mark the 50th anniversary celebration of the department and noted the importance of commemorating former staff, volunteers, and individuals no longer living. He thanked City Manager Todd and the council for their support. - No additional in-person or online speakers came forward. The mayor announced that the property tax appeal hearing had been canceled; no hearing was held. Agenda Approval - Council approved the agenda as presented by voice vote with no opposition. Proclamation 2026-15: Parks and Recreation 50th Anniversary - Mayor read Proclamation 2026-15, declaring 2026 the 50th anniversary year of the City of Milford Parks and Recreation Department. The proclamation recognized the department's establishment in 1976, its role in developing the Mispillion River Walk from Silver Lake to Goat Island, and the River Walk's status as the largest municipal park in Delaware. It also cited long-standing traditions such as the Freedom Festival and urged residents to join in honoring past and present staff. Communications and Correspondence - A council member relayed a constituent's concern from the third ward about overgrown grass and grass in curbing, and also observed the issue in the fourth ward. The council member asked the appropriate departments to address it. Board and Commission Reappointments - Council approved the following reappointments by voice vote: - Planning Commission: Charles Hammond and Ian Wright - Board of Adjustments: Ronald Rizzo - Tree Preservation and Advisory Board: Holly Heverly and Jason Peel - Parks and Recreation Advisory Board: Daron Johnson and Meredith Schmidt - The mayor said he expects to bring forward a new Planning Commission nominee at a future date. Councilman Jason clarified that the mayor has the authority to nominate, while council may accept or deny the appointment. Fiscal 2027 Tax Warrant - Finance Director Lou Will presented the fiscal 2027 tax warrant, described as the 2026 tax warrant, based on current property assessments less exemptions and senior citizen discounts. The resulting August property tax billing would be just over $7 million. In response to Councilman Marabella, Will estimated that a one-cent billing rate change from last year would generate about $114,000, growth would add about another $200,000, and the total change would be about $300,000. - The tax warrant adoption proceeded even though the property tax appeal hearing had been canceled. - Council authorized the mayor to sign the tax warrant as presented. FY26 Burn Discretionary Community Project Grant Notification - Staff notified council that the city applied for federal funding through the U.S. House and Senate Appropriations Committees in the amount of $435,000 for a rescue/SWAT vehicle. The grant could supplement or replace about $400,000 in city funds. No action or vote was required. Police Department FY27 Replacement and Expansion Vehicles - Staff requested authorization to use approved capital improvement funds to purchase and replace vehicles, including three take-home vehicles for recruits completing field training and one vehicle from the department's normal replacement line. - Council approved the vehicle purchases by voice vote. BMX Facility Improvements - The Building Department reported a building permit application for a new structure at the city-owned BMX facility. Because the existing ground lease requires city approval for improvements, the drawing had been reviewed and approved by the building official and the permit awaited council approval. - Dean Johnson, representing Richard Wyatt Johnson/ROIJ, said the structure would protect the $70,000 starting gate from weather, improve the facility's appeal, and would be donated to the city at no cost. - Council approved the BMX facility improvements. Executive Session and Adjournment - Council voted to enter executive session, stated that no action would be taken from it, and then voted to adjourn.

The Milford Economic Development and Code Enforcement Committee met on July 27, 2026, to discuss potential modifications to the deed restrictions governing signage within the Independence Commons business park on Airport Road. Planning Director Rob Pierce presented the issues with enforcing the current restrictions and the lack of a variance process for property owners. No public comments were provided during the public comment period. Public Comments & Testimony - No members of the public provided testimony or comments during the meeting. Discussion Items - Independence Commons Deed Restrictions (Signage): Planning Director Rob Pierce presented the issue, noting the deed restrictions were created in 2008 and amended in 2016 and 2023. The restrictions require monument signs to use individually mounted reverse pan channel letters with internal lighting and construction of stone or brick. He noted that several existing signs in the park (Boys & Girls Club, a medical office) do not comply with these restrictions, creating enforcement inequities for incoming businesses. Pierce initially recommended eliminating the sign-specific deed restrictions and relying entirely on the city's zoning code. - Committee Concerns and Direction: Committee members debated the importance of aesthetic consistency versus business flexibility. Councilwoman Gales supported retaining aesthetic standards to ensure uniformity but advocated for removing overly prescriptive requirements (mandates on specific materials and channel letter types) and adding a formal variance process for property owners. Councilman Maribella raised concerns about fairness for owners who complied with the original restrictions. Councilman Perez confirmed that the discussion applied solely to Independence Commons on the north side of Airport Road. Councilman Memorial referenced a specific pending sign application (Cscape). City Manager Chris Coleman framed the proposal as an effort to balance regulations across the city's business parks. - Revised Staff Direction: Following the discussion, Planning Director Rob Pierce agreed to redraft the deed restrictions. The revised restrictions will: remove specific mandates on materials and channel letter types; retain a requirement that signage must be compatible with the architectural features and colors of the building it serves; and establish a variance pathway through the Planning Commission for property owners seeking alternative signage. Key Outcomes - The committee did not take a vote on the substantive changes to the deed restrictions. - Directive Issued: Planning Director Rob Pierce was directed to draft revised deed restrictions for Independence Commons. - Drafting Principles Established: - Remove specific requirements for individually mounted reverse pan channel letters and stone or brick construction. - Retain a requirement that signage must be compatible with the architectural features and colors of the building it serves. - Include a variance mechanism allowing property owners to request deviations through review by the Planning Commission. - Next Steps: The revised deed restrictions will be presented to the full City Council for a vote. - The meeting was adjourned with a unanimous vote.

The Milford Planning Commission met on July 21, 2026, with four members present after roll call. The source packet contained no written agenda or minutes, and no minutes were identified in the packet for approval. The meeting included a brief public comment period, a decision on a preliminary site plan, and the second workshop for the 2028 Comprehensive Plan update. Public Comments & Testimony - No public comments were offered; no one signed up in person or joined online during the 15-minute public comment period. New Business: PSP-302-2026 Maston Trade Yards Preliminary Site Plan - Planning Director Rob Pierce presented the application as a permitted-use preliminary site plan for a vacant I-1 limited industrial property along Maston Circle. The project proposes five flex office/warehouse buildings totaling 203,690 square feet. - Staff stated the proposed uses are permitted in the I-1 and OC1 districts and that the project is similar to the previously approved PUGS 2 project, with rearranged buildings and essentially the same, or slightly larger, square footage. The applicant received two Board of Adjustment variances on June 11, 2026, reducing the 200-foot non-industrial boundary setback, the same variances granted under the earlier PUGS 2 approval. - Applicant Cliff Mumford, a civil engineer with Davis Bowen & Fidel, and Ryan Mitchell, construction director for property owner Jack Lingo Asset Management, described the redesign: more rectangular buildings, a rear stormwater pond to reduce fill, two access points, and parking and loading spaces that meet or exceed requirements. They agreed with staff's analysis. - The applicant requested one site-plan waiver from Chapter 230-20K's six-inch upright curb requirement for the north side of Building 5, using precast wheel stops to allow runoff to sheet-flow into a swale. When asked whether the waiver could later apply to other locations, staff responded that the commission can grant less than shown but generally not more; other areas could be raised as design work continues. - Commissioners asked about bicycle parking, which was included and required by code, and about delivery vehicles; the site is designed for a 67-foot tractor-trailer, though typical tenants are expected to be plumbing, electrical, and trade contractors using box trucks. Workshop: 2028 Comprehensive Plan Update - The workshop was the second for the 2028 update. Consultant BJ DeCourcy from the University of Delaware assisted with the discussion. A scheduled conversation with the Carlisle Fire Company was postponed because no representative attended. - Staff summarized city council priorities from its April workshop: collaborate with the Milford School District; coordinate with the fire company; ensure robust community engagement; address housing affordability without concentrating low-income housing in one ward or area; explore recreational opportunities, including a possible community recreation facility; and continue work with the Delaware State Housing Authority on SJR8 zoning and land-use reform. - Public engagement so far included a late-May open house at the public works facility, an online community questionnaire from late May through the end of June, and a National Community Survey mailed to 3,000 randomly selected households, with 361 responses, a 12% response rate. Public feedback ranged widely, from anti-growth comments to suggestions to eliminate single-family zoning. - Commissioners raised concerns about process transparency and demographic diversity. DeCourcy noted the survey responses appeared predominantly white, with roughly 2% Black or African American and negligible Hispanic representation, and staff noted that demographic questions were optional. One commissioner encouraged outreach to underserved communities. Staff said housing, transportation, and possible agency experts such as DSHA and DelDOT would be addressed in future workshop sessions. Position-Statement Deliberation - DeCourcy reviewed state-required position statements, presenting existing, conservative, and optimistic options for several topics. - On population and housing growth, the 2018 plan position was strongly pro-growth, describing Milford as prepared and poised for growth and seeking to become the riverfront gateway to southern Delaware. Commissioners generally favored an optimistic but non-apologetic tone, with explicit attention to balancing growth with public services and serving a mixed population of retirees, younger workers, families, and varied incomes. Housing language was expected to include affordable rentals, starter homes, and a range of housing types. - On expansion of boundaries, commissioners favored a conservative statement emphasizing infill, redevelopment, and build-out inside the city before annexation. They discussed whether to use will or may for entertaining annexation requests within the urban growth boundary. The UGB has not changed since 2008, and roughly 30% of land inside city limits is vacant, down from about 40% in 2018. - On development of adjacent areas, the draft position would not extend municipal services beyond the UGB and would coordinate with neighboring jurisdictions. A commissioner noted that growth in Sussex County just outside the UGB is the largest external pressure, and recommended adding both counties and intergovernmental coordination, especially because properties in the county can avoid participation in the hospital-area transportation improvement district. - On redevelopment, community character, and land use, commissioners supported welcoming redevelopment of vacant or underutilized properties, including residential rehabilitation in the downtown development district, and asked to preserve historic character and include arts, culture, and open-space identity. The general land-use statement was adjusted to emphasize a balance among employment, retail/service, and community while preserving intrinsic characteristics and natural features. - On critical community development issues, commissioners identified lower median household income, housing affordability, relatively high poverty, workforce training and economic opportunity, transparent decision-making, and outreach to households with limited English proficiency as themes to develop in the plan. - On infrastructure, commissioners and DeCourcy described water, sewer, and electric utilities as relative strengths; the main pressure points identified by public input were recreation/green space, traffic, police/EMS/fire services, and schools. DeCourcy described the city's sustainability and green-infrastructure practices as already partly ahead of current state requirements. - DeCourcy also reported on new state legislation signed into law on July 13, 2026, creating statewide transportation improvement districts and requiring municipalities and counties in growth zones to allow at least four dwelling units per acre in their least-dense residential zone. He estimated Milford's least-dense R1 zone at about 4.35 units per acre, so the city appears likely to be compliant. Key Outcomes - The Planning Commission approved PSP-302-2026 Maston Trade Yards preliminary site plan by a 4-0 vote, including the requested curb waiver. Commissioners stated the plan meets Chapter 230 and Chapter 200 standards, is compatible with the I-1 zoning district, and the applicant demonstrated a need for stormwater conveyance and appropriate variance relief. - The Carlisle Fire Company discussion will be rescheduled. - DeCourcy will draft revised position statements based on the commissioners' direction and bring them back for review at future workshops. Staff expects to hold roughly one-and-a-half-hour workshop sessions, adjusting for normal business and public hearing schedules. - The motion to adjourn carried.