• The proposed animal sanctuary is on about 11.5 acres of donated land on Hartly Road.
• First State Animal Center and SPCA plans to provide a home for about 10 animals at a time, mostly older horses and livestock along with a few dogs.
• A public hearing on the plan is scheduled for 6 p.m. Thursday, March 6 at the Kent County Regional Planning Commission meeting in Dover.

A proposed animal sanctuary near Hartly has led to a stampede of questions about how many animals and what kind will be housed at the property.

The plan is on the agenda at the Kent County Regional Planning Commission’s public hearing at 6 p.m. Thursday, March 6, at the County Administrative Complex, 555 S. Bay Road, Dover.

The hearing is also accessible by phone by calling 1-408-418-9388 with access code 23399384113 and online with instructions on the county’s website.

First State Animal Center and SPCA is proposing a home for animals like horses and other livestock and a few older dogs, according to John Parana, First State’s executive director.

The residential and agricultural property, about 11.5 acres at 3048 Hartly Road north of Halltown Road, has been donated to the animal center which operates at 32 Shelter Circle, Camden.

The county’s category for this proposed use is “commercial kennel,” and that has probably led to the speculation about what is planned, Parana said.

Some people on social media have said the sanctuary will be housing dozens of dogs, perhaps aggressive dogs, with concerns about all the barking.

“That’s been the major complaint,” Parana said, adding that the animal center has received dozens of phone calls asking if it’s true. It is not, he said.

“We will have primarily larger animals that have been neglected, abused or are in need medical attention and a place to live out the rest of their life quietly,” Parana said. “A lot of them have been used as work animals, but the owners don’t have the resources to care for them anymore.”

More: Laurel rescue takes in 30-plus animals in seizure case of horses, donkeys, goats, more

County Assistant Planning Director Kris Connelly said the definition for “commercial kennel” comes from the county code: “any building or land used for the housing, breeding, training or care of animals for commercial purposes. This use includes animal hospitals.” 

No limit to the number of animals has been specified in the applicant’s proposal, Connelly said.

Parana said about 10 animals will be at the property at any given time, mostly ones referred to First State Animal Center and SPCA by government agencies like the Delaware Department of Agriculture.

At least one caretaker will be at the site 24 hours a day.

“We will have a few dogs, but they won’t be vicious,” Parana said. “They will mostly likely be terminally ill, and we’ll be keeping them comfortable.”

An example would be a dog with diabetes whose owner can’t afford insulin and isn’t available to give the dog shots at the required times.

“People don’t adopt a dog like that,” Parana said.

More: Delaware man denied request to retrieve horse killed in hit-and-run from landfill

Another main complaint Parana has seen from opponents to the sanctuary is that it will hurt property values in the area.

“We are working with the county to create a park-like setting,” Parana said. “The property is fenced in now, but the county requires a privacy fence around the entire property and over 200 trees as buffers, and we will do it. We need a place for these animals.”

He said the area near the property has multiple commercial businesses, including a scrapyard, a concrete and asphalt recycling center, an automobile body shop and even an Amish kennel that breeds and raises dogs.

While the staff at First State Animal Center and SPCA has received complaints and has seen social media comments against the proposal, they have also received about 300 comments of support from people who think the sanctuary is a good idea, Parana said.

On the center’s Facebook page, the staff posted “an urgent answer to all the phone calls we are receiving” in response to what they described as “misinformation being spread in the Hartly area.” The post gives information about what First State Animal Center is planning at the sanctuary.

The property is in the county’s 6th District, represented by District Commissioner Paul Hertz, who didn’t immediately respond to a call or email Wednesday afternoon about the proposal.

After the public hearing March 6, the Regional Planning Commission is scheduled to make a recommendation about the animal sanctuary at its business meeting at 6 p.m. Thursday, March 13.

Reporter Ben Mace covers real estate, development and business news. Reach him at rmace@gannett.com.

Role of green energy and the region’s power grid operator

While some blame the skyrocketing utility bills on fees associated with renewable energy programs, Vavala argues that both those fees and rising natural gas prices contribute to only a small fraction of a person’s bill.

While Delmarva paid almost $13 million into the state’s renewable energy portfolio last year, charges related to renewable compliance makeup around 3% of a customer’s bill, according to those reviewed by WHYY.

“Yes, there is a component of the bill that’s related to transmission costs and supply costs. Yes, there’s a component of the bill that’s related to green energy and programs to support that,” Vavala said. “But it is not the key driver in what we’ve seen in terms of this phenomenon occurring for our customers.”

Adding to confusion among ratepayers, Delmarva last November began to include a breakdown of delivery and supply charges on its bills.

Customers have always paid these charges, but they weren’t previously explained on their bills. Delaware residents said they were shocked to learn for the first time that these distribution fees account for more than half of their bill.

Though customers have always paid for delivery and supply, Delmarva bills indicate Delaware residents paid slightly more for the supply of gas in January, which had nothing to do with green energy, but rather cold temperatures.

“Weather does cause increased demand, and so supply-demand crunch, price goes up. So, the reason that people’s bills are going up so high is that, in part, they’re using more, and, in part, the price that is set by the wholesale market, which is also increasing,” said Shelley Welton, presidential distinguished professor of law and energy policy at Penn Carey Law and the Kleinman Center for Energy Policy.

The supply price increase for Delmarva customers in January shows a hike of about 1 cent per 100 cubic feet over December’s bills.

A spokesperson for Delmarva Power said it purchases about half of what it projects it will need in the summer when prices are low.

“Locking in prices, also known as hedging, seeks to limit the impact of wholesale price volatility that may occur throughout the year,” said spokesperson Zach Chizar. “We also continue to make upgrades to our Liquefied Natural Gas Plant in Wilmington, replacing and upgrading systems that give customers a more predictable gas cost rate so that we can secure more natural gas and avoid challenges during peak periods.”

Adding to the shocking cost could be that some January bills encompassed 36 days, rather than the typical 30 days.

One of Meyer’s proposals includes working to expand the state’s renewable energy portfolio.

“The more we get — solar, offshore wind, various alternatives — will help us expand the diversity of energy sources, increase the supply of sustainable energy sources, and in many cases, sources that are good for the environment for the long term,” he said.

Welton said decreasing reliance on natural gas could help control prices. States that rely heavily on natural gas are facing greater energy costs than in areas that use more renewable energy, she said. Like many, she points to the region’s power grid operator, PJM Interconnection.

“You have tons of new resources lined up asking to connect to the grid — and these are mostly clean energy resources. And if you’ve got these resources online, if you’ve got a lot more capacity in the region, you would see prices start to come down. But PJM has been very slow to help these resources connect to the grid,” Welton said.

While freezing temperatures and the resulting usage drove up utility bills in January, costs of electricity are also determined by a complex pricing system overseen by PJM and are expected to climb for Delawareans starting in July, regardless of the weather. That’s because of an increase in certain electricity generation fees, called capacity costs, that the grid operator announced last year. The move will impact 65 million residents in the Mid-Atlantic and Great Lakes regions. In January, PJM agreed to a price cap after Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro sued.

Delmarva’s Vavala said it’s important PJM incentivizes and encourages all forms of generation — whether that’s renewables, nuclear or traditional forms of power such as natural gas. He also calls for improved transparency in the rate-making process and about investment portfolios.

4-minute read

• Delaware has historically been a popular state for corporations to incorporate due to its clear and consistent corporate laws.
• Recent court decisions in Delaware have expanded the definition of key legal concepts, creating uncertainty for businesses.
• Proposed amendments to Delaware’s General Corporation Law aim to provide clearer definitions and procedures for corporations.
• The authors, involved in drafting the amendments, argue they are intended to restore confidence in Delaware’s corporate law system and benefit both investors and corporations.
• The goal is to create a more predictable and balanced legal environment for businesses operating in Delaware.

The best umpires in baseball are those you don’t notice. The same could be said of the game of business. In that arena, the state of Delaware has acted as the nation’s umpire for 125 years, providing a playing field of corporate laws so clearly marked, consistent and fair that businesses can focus on performing for the benefit of their shareholders, their customers and our country. These very features have allowed Delaware to go unnoticed, while they led eight out of 10 newly public companies and more than two thirds of the Fortune 500 to choose to incorporate here.

But suddenly, Delaware is attracting attention. This week, lawmakers proposed changes to our General Corporation Law, placing the business world’s focus squarely on the umpires. In response, as predictably as fans aggrieved by a call, some commentators have questioned the motivation behind the bill. They intimate that it wrongly serves the interests of specific political agendas, companies or individuals. Most often they point fingers toward Elon Musk, whose pay package was famously invalidated in a Delaware court. 

We can say this, as individuals who responded to the call from Delaware’s governor and legislative leadership for assistance drafting the proposed amendments that represent an attempt to reestablish long-accepted rules once familiar to the Delaware courts and are nothing less than a sincere effort by public officials to protect the interests of their constituents.

Two aspects of the legislative process have drawn particular attention: the participation of private citizens in drafting the bill, and the speed with which it was introduced. These are reasons for praise, not suspicion. Delaware Gov. Matt Meyer and bi-partisan lawmakers sought our help crafting legislation to restore confidence in Delaware as a trusted venue for incorporation. They turned primarily to us and Leo Strine, Jr. — a former chief justice of the Delaware Supreme Court — for our understanding of the nuances of Delaware law. They certainly did not seek us out for the cohesiveness of our political views (we include one Republican, two Democrats, and a former president of the ACLU in Delaware), nor our loyalty to Musk. Although we have different political perspectives on many things, we have a long, shared commitment to the integrity of Delaware corporate law.

The swiftness with which the state Senate introduced the bill is also laudable. Meyer, to his credit, responded within weeks of being in office to the growing crisis. Multiple companies, including Meta, had begun to consider alternatives to Delaware as their state of incorporation. We understand other companies are also considering whether to vote on the question at their upcoming annual meetings, with proxy season beginning next month for many public companies. The time to address concerns about Delaware’s continued value as a venue for incorporation is before play starts, not after the game has begun.

The proposed amendments answer those concerns, and their substance confirms that they were not drafted to serve any one company or individual. They respond to a trend in Delaware court decisions that has evolved rapidly in recent years, where changes to judge-made law have made it easier for shareholders to challenge company actions in court, often by expanding critical concepts beyond earlier boundaries. Take, for instance, the conflicts of interest among board members that trigger powerful shareholder derivative lawsuits. Previously, courts found such conflicts only when board members had a financial stake in a disputed transaction or material entanglements with someone who did; now they perceive conflicts over mere social ties between individuals, using a standard so loose that it becomes relevant whether one director was a guest at another’s family wedding or in pictures on social media.

Similarly, courts had long given heightened scrutiny to transactions between companies and their “controlling shareholders.” But that term has expanded from its natural meaning — someone who owns half or nearly half of a company’s stock — to include “superstar CEOs” who supposedly control investors through sheer force of personality.

These decisions have created an unknowable strike zone when companies try to anticipate lawsuits. Worse, in using nebulous standards, they have made it impossible for corporations to know if they are complying with Delaware law. When an advantageous deal comes before them, corporations do not know if they should swing or not.  

Close observers have watched and worried over this trend for years. In fact, two important articles, one of which goes back to the turn of the century and was co-authored by the late Chancellor William Allen, Strine and then-Vice Chancellor Jack Jacobs, and another co-authored by Strine, Jacobs and Hamermesh, identified the principles underlying the current legislation as reflecting Delaware’s traditional approach to corporate law. The articles, which both predate Musk’s loss on his compensation package, addressed ways in which those traditions were under stress. The current bill reflects a good faith attempt to ensure that Delaware corporate law, as was understood and applied for many years, can be relied upon. It is designed to reaffirm what it was until recent years and to address departures from that tradition that have caused legitimate concern among companies in all industries and regions.

The amendments offer clearer, brighter-line definitions of key terms like “disinterested director” and “controlling shareholder.” They also establish procedures that offer safe harbors for companies to use in transacting with controlling shareholders or where members of the board have conflicts, so they can do the right thing and be confident that, if they do, they won’t be sued. Another provision places reasonable limits on a shareholder’s right to examine a company’s “books and records,” which has inflated over time to cover emails, text messages and other material that goes beyond that term’s normal and intended meaning. 

Opinion: This billionaire corporate law smash-and-grab could destroy Delaware’s economy

These details may not excite anyone not steeped in corporate law. Yet non-specialists who only see the rules being changed deserve an explanation, so that the quick answer — it’s all Musk — can be seen for what it is. Assisting the Legislature and the governor with statutory drafting has been an inspiring exercise in sound government — one joined by lawmakers and citizens with varied economic and political interests, united only in our desire to serve Delaware by ensuring that investor and manager interests are fairly balanced. That exercise will serve its purpose if, after enactment, long-standing principles of Delaware law that maintain high levels of protection for shareholders, in a way that also gives corporations needed clarity, are restored.

As a result, the playing surface in Delaware’s business arena will be more definitively lined and fairly balanced than it has been in years. With the proposed amendments, Delaware as umpire has yelled “play ball!” After that, it can again recede from view, a comforting and reliable backdrop to the competition that is rightly at the heart of the game.

William Chandler III is a partner at Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati and a former chancellor on the Delaware Court of Chancery. Lawrence Hamermesh is a professor emeritus at the Widener University Delaware School of Law.