President Jerrel: I'm going to get started, let us get through the business end and then we'll be able to go to the part of the program that you're here for. I see a couple of empty seats. That one is taken. You can come back here and sit along the side. You okay?

Unidentified: Yes.

President Jerrel: Okay. I'd like to call the Vanderburgh County Commissioners' meeting to order. At this time I would like to introduce to you the people before you. On my far right is Joe Harrison, Jr., the County Attorney; Pat Tuley, County Commissioner, is next to him; on the far left Charlene Timmons is our Recording Secretary; and Suzanne Crouch, County Auditor; Richard Mourdock, County Commissioner; and my name is Bettye Lou Jerrel and I am a County Commissioner and I would like to invite you to join me in the Pledge of Allegiance now. 
 

Approval of minutes

President Jerrel: The first item on the agenda is the approval of the minutes of the January 25th meeting.

Commissioner Mourdock: I'll move approval of those minutes. 

Commissioner Tuley: Second.

President Jerrel: I'll say so ordered.
 

Open bids - VC99-01-01, Heckel Road Bridge rehabilitation

President Jerrel: The next item on the agenda is the opening of bids for the Heckel Road Bridge rehabilitation. Is there a motion to permit those bids to be opened? 

Commissioner Mourdock: I'll move the opening of bids for VC99-01-01 for Heckel Road Bridge.

Commissioner Tuley: Second.

President Jerrel: So ordered.
 

Jerry Bryan - Purchasing Department

President Jerrel: The next item on the agenda, the Purchasing Department, Jerry Bryan has some purchasing issues.

Jerry Bryan: Okay, I'm Jerry Bryan the City/County Purchasing Director. The first item of business, permission to award APA027-99 which is the H & E transportation services. Bettye, I got with Tony on that.

President Jerrel: Okay.

Jerry Bryan: And if you read the information there, I don't think I need to go through all that.

President Jerrel: No, that's acceptable. Is there a question regarding this from either Commissioner? If not, is there a motion? 

Commissioner Mourdock: I'll move a motion to award APA027-99 for H & E transportation services.

President Jerrel: Is there a second?

Commissioner Tuley: Second.

President Jerrel: So ordered.

Jerry Bryan: Okay, the second item of business that I have is the award of APA013-99. This is the tire bid. This is the biggest bid that I have all year as far as quantity. There is over 4,000 items and I have summarized the award and Reis Tire has the bid now and we're going to split it with Reis Tire having roughly 80 percent of the bid and Master Tire having roughly 20 percent of the bid. Reis Tire has done a good job for the city and the county and he has a 24 hour service. He has 12 sets of police pursuit tires there to handle our emergency needs and I recommend that he be awarded the tire bid for another year.

President Jerrel: Okay, are there any questions? Question.

Joe Harrison, Jr.: I want to make sure, now this went to the Board of Public Works last week?

Jerry Bryan: Yes, sir.

Joe Harrison, Jr.: And they awarded the same bid accordingly?

Jerry Bryan: Same bid, right.

Joe Harrison, Jr.: Okay.

President Jerrel: Okay, is there a motion?

Commissioner Mourdock: I'll move award of the bid for tires as suggested or recommended.

Commissioner Tuley: Second.

President Jerrel: So ordered.

Jerry Bryan: Okay, the third item of business I have is the permission to award the trash removal portion that I have for the County Commissioners. Bettye, on this one the people, Jim Cameron and his people, do the residential side. This is the commercial side for me and BCC only has $1,250 out of a $73,000 total for the year, so I have to go before all the Boards and ask for their approval, so I would ask for your approval on this one.

President Jerrel: Alright, is there an approval of that, for BCC, is that the correct one? 

Jerry Bryan: Yes, ma'am.

President Jerrel: Okay.

Commissioner Mourdock: I'll move the award for trash removal as recommended.

Commissioner Tuley: Second.

President Jerrel: So ordered. You have to jump through a lot of hoops to get this finished don't you?

Jerry Bryan: Yes, ma'am. Thank you.

President Jerrel: You're welcome, thank you.
 

Welfare to Work Planning Council 1999 Gatekeeper funding allocation request

President Jerrel: The next item on the agenda is the Planning Council. Tim Suenram is here to present this.

Tim Suenram: I think you all have copies of a letter that the Planning Council sent to Tony last month. We have several recommendations in there as well as a request to approve paying the Private Industry Council for their work on the demonstration project. 

President Jerrel: May I ask a question?

Tim Suenram: Sure, please.

President Jerrel: Did you arrive at these percentages...I don't...I've not been active in your Planning Council, and I know Commissioner Mourdock has, did you arrive at the change these percentages based upon your past experience?

Tim Suenram: That's right, over the last two years.

President Jerrel: Two years.

Tim Suenram: These reflect roughly the percentages of the requests at this point. You, I'm sure, recall over the last two years I have appeared before you maybe on the average of every other month requesting to shift some funds from one segment to the other, so this basically is not a...we're not planning that this is going to be fixed by any means. We're still working to try to see if we can use more in job training and employment training, but at this point we thought it would just expedite the process more if it were approved this way and then we could ask to shift some funds back to job training.

President Jerrel: Are there questions?

Commissioner Mourdock: I would just add one thing to clarify that. The four items we have, the safety net, child care, transportation and employment and job training, when we initially set the program up the percentages were quite different than what you see there, but because that is reflecting what the current history is showing we think this is the best way to use the dollars. I would add the thing that has been most surprising to me and we've spoken of this several times, but we still continue to get very, very low requests for job training which going into the program I thought would be one of the hotter items and transportation we hear all the talk about the need for the night bus service and such and still that one remains very low. 

Commissioner Tuley: Could either Richard or Tim kind of go through the safety net again, the caps that are put on people because the one thing I don't want to see us doing is just a continuation of welfare.

Tim Suenram: Right.

Commissioner Mourdock: Exactly.

Tim Suenram: Basically, I would guess over 99 percent, I think is what has been reported to us through the Gatekeeper, has been for automobile repair, for needed repairs so the person can go to work or to job training and...lost my train of thought there. 

Commissioner Mourdock: Well, let me jump on the track for a minute while your train is derailed.

Tim Suenram: Please do.

Commissioner Mourdock: With that, Pat, the safety net feature is a one time only situation. It can be no more than $1,000. It has to be specific to maintaining employment or educational training that is going on. 

Commissioner Tuley: That's what I needed to hear.

Tim Suenram: That was the derailment right there.

Commissioner Tuley: That's fine. That's, you know...

President Jerrel: Well, is there a motion then to approve the reallocation of the percentages of income for those one, two, three, four, five?

Commissioner Mourdock: Okay, there is two other parts of the letter. Do you want to do those all at once or do you want to talk about each of those as well.

President Jerrel: Well, I thought maybe since this is the one that is dealing with the money maybe we can do that by itself and then hit the other two.

Commissioner Mourdock: Okay, I'll move approval of the recommendation for 60 percent of the allocation for safety net, 30 percent for child care, five percent for transportation and five percent for job training for fiscal year `99.

Commissioner Tuley: Second.

President Jerrel: So ordered. The second one now, do you want to address?

Commissioner Mourdock: Yeah, the six month clock issue. 

Tim Suenram: The feeling of the Planning Council was that currently, and really a little bit of history, when the subcommittees for each of those four categories met I don't believe any of us anticipated that all of the six month's clocks would be run concurrently but it was just understood that way and when the Gatekeeper program went up for bid I believe that that's the way it was interrupted by both who applied for that and that's the way it has been run up until now. We're recommending...in order that we can serve more people, perhaps, or that people can get more services that each six month...all four of them currently have a six month's expiration on them. Right now if a single parent were to come for child care services the clock on all four categories would start running when that first application was approved. The thinking of the Planning Council was that if for example in child care right now CCDF is available for people who qualify and our feeling was if at a later date someone got transportation or safety net or job training money at the beginning of the year and some time around October if the CCDF money ran out, which it did last year, then there would be also safety net available...I mean, excuse me, child care available for that parent. Our hope is that we can run...the Gatekeeper assures us it wouldn't be any trouble at all for them to keep track of the various six month periods and so our recommendation is that the clocks not run concurrently, but that they be self starting.

President Jerrel: May I repeat what I thought you said to me? 

Tim Suenram: Sure.

President Jerrel: If I would come to you for help and I needed it in child care but not transportation, employment job training or safety net I would not be denied that after six months?

Tim Suenram: That is correct.

President Jerrel: I could come back if I needed help in an area that had not previously been received?

Tim Suenram: That's right. That's currently not the case.

Commissioner Mourdock: Right. Right now the way it is set up is if you go in to get child care your six months starts and at the end of the six months you're ineligible for anything else.

President Jerrel: I understand, okay. Is there a motion concerning that?

Commissioner Mourdock: I'll move approval as recommended.

Commissioner Tuley: Second.

President Jerrel: So ordered. And then the final one, Tim.

Tim Suenram: Basically, it just opens up the eligibility for non custodial parents who are under court order to provide child support. Currently that's not the case. They're not eligible for IBAP funds simply because they don't have children living at home.

Commissioner Mourdock: And yet they're under court under to take care of that child.

Tim Suenram: Right, so our hope is if there are people like that who do qualify at least maybe they can get some additional job training or that sort of thing.

President Jerrel: Okay, is there a motion regarding that?

Commissioner Mourdock: So moved.

Commissioner Tuley: Second.

President Jerrel: So ordered.

Commissioner Mourdock: One last comment on this program as whole. I know you're meeting this coming Wednesday and I plan on being there for that one. The one thing I still want to see in more detail is the report of how the program is functioning. Largely I guess that would be statistical in the sense of how many folks have we helped through this program who are successfully making the transition off welfare and the second thing might be the human side of it as well. In other words, not numerical but how people are progressing through the system, so I'm going to keep putting pressure on you, Tim, on that one because I really want to see that we're not just...we haven't created a program that is just going to become a life unto itself. I mean, we want to make sure this thing works.

Tim Suenram: Alrighty. 

President Jerrel: Thank you very much.

Tim Suenram: Thank you.
 

Jail Committee - Overview of interim report

President Jerrel: The next item on our agenda is the Jail Committee overview. Are you going to present that?

Commissioner Mourdock: I will present that and I know Harris Howerton from Community Corrections is here somewhere and Eric Williams is here as well to speak a bit. So maybe if the two of you want to move to the microphone and add your two cents worth here as needed, but basically what you have before you tonight is the interim report that has been compiled as a result of the meetings of the Blue Ribbon Committee since last January. Very briefly, we discuss how that committee came to be formed. We explain why there are so many different elements of county government involved with the jail and the maintenance of the jail and the throughput of people through the jail. One of the key things that we've run across and there are a number of keys here, but the jail, of course, was originally built in 1969 and designed at that time to hold 276 inmates and since that time it has gone down in capacity because of changes in things like the Americans with Disabilities Act, other remodeling that had to be done. We were, we this Commission, the County Commission, was certainly notified of several consistent problems that previously existed with maintenance and also with overcrowding. You will have, if you review the report, you'll see we've listed several different things. For instance, the jail maintenance and upkeep regarding the physical conditions of the jail. Since the Blue Ribbon Committee began we've developed a system by which the Sheriff's Department and the Building Authority have a reporting system, a response system. When there is a problem it is reported promptly and now it is either weekly or monthly there is a report going back and forth on physical conditions of the jail. Previously it seemed both sides wanted to take somewhat of a hands off approach expecting the other to deal with it and that wasn't being done. Also regarding the overcrowding issue last year during the budget process the County Council agreed to, I believe, $285,000 for this coming year to provide 25 more beds at the Community Corrections facility and also 75 electronic monitoring devices. Along with that we've also hired two bail bond specialists, a job that Pat knows well from many years ago, to help keep people moving through the system. The judges have been supportive of that. And by the way, I failed to mention Judge Heldt and Judge Knight and I see Councilman Lloyd who are also involved with the committee are all here, so my apologies. With the issue with the Prosecutor's Office previously it was a practice referred to as double booking where people who were arrested for misdemeanors posted bond and then had to come back to court in 24 to 72 hours for the Prosecutor to officially file charges. That was a process situation that has since been changed. All this said, what we've done is we've found some items that we feel are leading to some level of overcrowding in the jail. However, to summarize this report in a few quick words I think the most important thing is to note that Vanderburgh County is not alone in this problem. There are literally hundreds of cities and counties around the country that are also looking at jail overcrowding, but importantly jail overcrowding itself isn't the problem, it is a symptom of a problem. Perhaps the best proof of that is that there have been a number of communities around the country that have doubled or tripled their jail bed capacity only to find out in six months they still had a full jail. The problem was that nothing in the system was changing. I think to the credit of all those on the Blue Ribbon Committee everyone has come forward trying to identify how their part of the problem can be part of the solution. This report that is before you tonight documents a number of reasons for the overcrowding, everything from stiffer mandatory sentences, to the police having a heavier workload, to increase in drug usage in the community. Again, those things aren't unique to Vanderburgh County. We have to assume some things for the future. One of them is that the sentence guidelines that come out from the state and the feds will always become more strict. It's not likely they're going to become less strict. National statistics keep showing that while violent crime is down our crime rate in this county is increasing and we expect that will continue to happen for one reason being that we are more and more of a regional center even though our population isn't going up but about one percent a year our jail population is going up four percent. One of the troubling things, one of the fastest growing segments of our jail is with women inmates. We don't have a good way to allocate space in the present facility. All that being said, our recommendations at this time, and hear this all the way through, our recommendation is not that we rush forward and build a new jail or even that we rush forward and start putting a funding program together to build a new jail, but the eight recommendations that we propose are to put a system together so that stakeholders, which is all of us who are on the committee basically, know at least five years in advance so we can begin to serve notice that a new jail is needed. We need to define other alternatives that might reduce overcrowding and thus defer the construction of a new jail. We want to try to locate possible funding sources outside of county government and methods of funding a new jail when it is required. There are certainly some communities now that are contracting with their state capitals, state government, to have funding provided by the state. That's something we want to look at. We do expect by the first of August that any further funding needs or action steps will be reported to the Commission and the Council. We're hoping that one to three members of the Blue Ribbon Commission will go to a special program at the University of Wisconsin next month, and Sheriff Ellsworth has agreed to use Commissary funding for that, to study how new design...new facilities might be designed, built and funded and we want to look at either contracting with private jail construction or operation, use the planning of new institution guidelines issued by the National Institute of Corrections, contracting for jail space perhaps in surrounding communities, contracting with the Indiana DOC for long-term housing is something we want to look at, and assisting in the design of a new facility when that is needed. One of the other things that we want to do is to have several public meetings as a committee to see what the public sentiment is towards Community Corrections. Are we a community that says throw away...put them in jail and throw away the key or are we a community that is willing to accept some level of risk by having more people on electronic house arrest. That is kind of two extremes, but is there something in the middle that the community would look for. So having a said a whole lot of a mouthful there I would look to the other members of the committee. Harris, please add whatever I left out or whatever needs to be said.

Harris Howerton: Well, I think it is interesting early on in the process, and it is a process, I think some of us might have thought we were going to get together, have a couple of meetings and decide to build a jail. What we did is adopt a method that is designed by the National Institute of Corrections. In fact, their report said to us that you all are doing the right thing. You put a group together, put the right people together, and thankfully Sue Ellspermann held us at bay from attacking one another on occasion, but we're following that process. It's a model that we can process. We're not dreaming it up, we're not trying to reinvent the wheel. There is a method to our madness and I think that what we have done is we've done all the things that NIC would suggest that we do and we should do, look to see who is in the jail, how many ought to be there and use some method for determining that. We've done that and I urge you, the Commissioners, to continue this and we're willing to help. Real quick, last week I was in Terre Haute with a Indiana Department of Corrections Committee, Standards Committee. Ralph Watson, the Director from Hamilton County has been on such a group committee for two years now and they have just did decide that they will be expanding Community Corrections and the jail. There are alternatives to just building a jail. We have to look at those and try to determine what is smart for us. Thank you.

President Jerrel: Thank you. Are there any other members of the committee that would wish to speak? Yes, Councilman Lloyd.

Russell Lloyd: Just we're going to have a similar presentation for the Council Wednesday and we've been going on this for a year and it has been a painstaking process, but I think everybody on the committee, especially lay people, we've learned a lot about the justice system. I think Mr. Mourdock touched on it. The National Institute of Corrections came in and did a study on our situation, they urged us to keep the Blue Ribbon Commission going, so I mean I think that's important regardless of where this leads. I would like to...you know, I plan on urging the Council to move the process forward and like you said, we're not sure exactly where we are going to end up and it is not a rubber stamp for a new jail and we're going to look at all the alternatives and we need to, you know, continue this process. I would commend your leadership, Richard, and I would urge you all to approve this.

Commissioner Mourdock: Thank you, Russ.

President Jerrel: Yes, Eric.

Eric Williams: Good evening. Excuse me. Eric Williams from the Sheriffs Office. On behalf of Sheriff Ellsworth first and foremost I would like to thank Richard and all the other members of the Blue Ribbon Commission for what they've done. That's on behalf of the men and women of the Sheriff's Department, particularly those assigned to the jail. You may not realize this, but to them it's at least a sign that the county and the powers are taking their best foot and putting it forward and trying to solve the problem because no one more than those guys and the women that are assigned to the jail realize what a serious problem it is. So we appreciate it. We know that we're going to work hard and we're going to continue to move forward in solving the problem. Just a little bit of updated information, we began the painting process of the jail today. We estimate it is going to be 20 to 25 weeks based on our current overcrowding situation and they way we're having to deal with moving people around to free up that space, so hopefully in approximately 25 weeks we'll be able to report back to you that the jail, at the least interior cellblocks and all the cells have been painted and are up to speed.

President Jerrel: That's good news.

Eric Williams: So it got underway today.

President Jerrel: Thank you very much.

Commissioner Mourdock: While he is not known for it outside of the office there, Eric is actually the computer geek of the Sheriff's Department and put together all the statistics. I did want to point out the one table because with the linear progression they've done in the year 2002 the average daily rate will be at 120 percent of capacity unless we fail...or unless we find some way to better deal with the situation. So just having real numbers as opposed to, well, it's getting more crowded than it used to be Eric has continued to present us with the daily counts each time we meet and let us know who is in the jail which has been really helpful. Judge Heldt or Judge Knight.

President Jerrel: We do have a letter that we can save for the final signing part that does reaffirm this position if you would like to move approval of that we can sign it.

Commissioner Mourdock: I will gladly move approval of the letter dated February 1st to Council President Curt Wortman.

Commissioner Tuley: Second.

President Jerrel: So ordered.
 

Approval of Sheriff Ellsworth salary contract

President Jerrel: Alright, the next item on the agenda is the approval of the salary contract with our new Sheriff, Brad Ellsworth, and you have that in your file and is there a motion to approve?

Commissioner Mourdock: I'll move the approval of the Vanderburgh County Sheriff salary contract as submitted in our file.

Commissioner Tuley: Second.

President Jerrel: So ordered.

Commissioner Mourdock: For the record, that approval is effective the first day of January 1999.

President Jerrel: Right.
 

First reading Ordinance prohibiting smoking in county government buildings

President Jerrel: Okay, the next item on the agenda is the public hearing for the ordinance prohibiting smoking in county government buildings. There have been a number of individuals that have signed up to speak and I think I'm just going to go down the list as I have received it. The ordinance has been distributed so there are several of them available and there are a number of offices that are designated in this ordinance and that is largely because we have not only our building, but we have leased space in the Old Courthouse and we have the County Garage and Burdette Park and soon to have the new center across the street. I'm going to ask our County Attorney if he has some comments to initiate the discussion and then we'll proceed.

Joe Harrison, Jr.: Thank you. What I think might be appropriate is just to read the proposed ordinance and I'll turn it back over to Commissioner Jerrel for comment from the public. The title is Ordinance Prohibiting Smoking in County Governmental Buildings. 

President Jerrel: Thank you. Any questions from the Commissioners before I begin calling the audience to speak? Is there...are there people that would like to come in out there? Okay. Alright, the first person that indicated they would like to speak is Sally Britt from the American Heart Association.

Sally Britt: Hi, good evening. Most people associate cigarettes and smoke with breathing problems, but that's only part of the story. Nine hundred and fifty thousand Americans die every year from cardiovascular disease, 600,000 deaths are caused by smoking year, so that is 44 percent of smoking deaths are caused by cardiovascular disease. Heart disease is the number one killer of Americans, but this is one time that we don't want to be number one. Not only smokers suffer from environmental tobacco smoke, it is a risk for non smokers also. Environmental tobacco smoke causes ten times as many cardiovascular deaths as lung cancer. Risk of death is 30 percent higher among people exposed to smoke at home or work. People exposed at work are even more at risk because there are higher concentrations of smoke than in the home. Being exposed to secondhand smoke increases your blood pressure, heart rate and the blood flow to the heart's arteries. It also causes the arteries in the arms and legs to constrict and narrow. Cigarette smoke causes the platelets in the blood to become sticky and clustered which makes your blood become thicker. The blood thickening causes deposits in the arteries which causes them to become elastic. This is when a heart attack can happen when all of these things occur. People who are already at risk for a heart attack can have their chances increased by being around environmental tobacco smoke, so if you already are at risk for a heart attack being around secondhand smoke is going to hurt you even more. People who have had a heart attack already are even more at risk when they are around the secondhand smoke. I could go on and on about the terrible risk to your health that secondhand smoke has, but I will only end with one more suggestion from the American Heart Association. It is printed in our brochures, the best way to safeguard your health is to avoid tobacco smoke as much as possible. Tonight we're here to ask your help in helping us to safeguard our health. Thank you very much.

President Jerrel: The next speaker is Wayne Kirk. 

Wayne Kirk: First of all I want to thank you all for letting me speak today. My name is Wayne Kirk and I am a student currently attending the University of Southern Indiana. I am heading a new college based program called Student Activist Organization or known as SAO. SAO has already been contacted by a number of students that are adamantly opposed to this new smoking ordinance. Our concerns range from number one, not enough information that links secondhand smoking to public health problems. Number two, reports released by our very own government that were falsified to mislead people and our growing weariness of government reporting so-called facts. Number three, we are concerned with the latest tobacco settlement between the states and the tobacco industry which has not helped reduce the tax burdens of the taxpayers in this state and elsewhere. Number four, we feel that this policy creates a second class citizenship that could further polarize the community in which we live in. Number five, we also question the issue of smoking even being proposed due to the fact that we have several factories that pollute the air constantly and note, I'm sorry, how could tobacco be worse than that? Number six, finally we disagree with the smoking ban because we feel that this will not help reduce the overall problem of smoking. These concerns are viewed by many college students here in Indiana and across the country. We cannot see the rationale of increased governmental intrusions upon the rights of people when our very own government has not informed us properly. Many students are starting to feel the rippling effects of the latest election results in the gubernatorial race in Minnesota. We feel that we have the ability to create change, one that would pursue a dignified result not more governmental laws that don't solve real problems. Also I would like to inform you that I do not smoke cigarettes and I am just as against the tobacco industry for misleading consumers and manipulating nicotine levels, but the same goes for our government which, as we all know, they can't be trusted either. Thank you very much.

President Jerrel: The next speaker, Johnny Kincaid.

Johnny Kincaid: Hi.

President Jerrel: Hi, John.

Johnny Kincaid: First of all I want to thank you for considering this issue. You know, and actually what I want to emphasize right off the bat here is that I really think that you've shown that you don't need an awful lot of education on this subject. The wording of the ordinance indicates that and the quotes that I've seen from members of this group in the press indicate that as well, so I'm not going to take a lot of time to spout statistics or anything like that. There are a couple of things though that I do want to really emphasize. One is that this is directly a health issue. It is not a personal rights issue. It is about protecting the health of individual people. That's first and foremost. The film that builds up on the inside of windows in a place where people have been smoking a lot, that film is tar. It builds up on the inside of car windows when people go for a long time without cleaning their windows and they smoke inside their car. That tar is really sticky and gooey and that's where nitrosamines which are the cancer causing agents in cigarette smoke, that's where they get trapped, so they make contact with the lung tissue when they're inhaled and there is tar in secondhand cigarette smoke. There have also been a lot of studies on the nicotine levels in people's bloodstream after exposure to secondhand smoke and what they test for actually there is cotinene levels in people's system when they are exposed to secondhand cigarette smoke, also elevated carbon monoxide levels as well. The other part of this issue, too, is actually a financial issue for the county which is what is going to happen with insurance rates, also with building maintenance costs. That film that builds up on everything and obviously costs extra money to be cleaned, so it is also a very sound financial move to make. I also want to mention one of the things that seems to continually come up in the opposition to these ordinances is references to the EPA study, Environmental Protection Agency study, being thrown out of court. First of all, this was done by a judge in North Caroline which I am sure that their major industry there had nothing to do with his decision, but also number two that is very important to keep in mind when you hear comments made about that study is the fact that the study was thrown out of court not because of bad science, but it was thrown out because the tobacco industry was not invited to be a part of developing the strategy for that study. Since their scientist weren't invited to the dance, essentially, they decided that they wanted to have this study completely thrown out. You'll also hear a little bit about slippery slope here perhaps in opposition to this, but I also want to bring up because it was mentioned about workplace smoking ordinances or changing in smoking policy in the workplace make a difference in the smoking rate within that organization, company or governmental body. When new policies are put in place that restrict cigarette smoking then a lot of the smokers make a decision that they at least want to make the attempt to try to quit at that time. Finally, in reading over the ordinance the only other thing that I would like to ask is a consideration of at least some of the shelter houses at Burdette Park and the pool area at Burdette Park. During the summer when I go to Burdette Park I find an awful lot of people that are smoking especially around the kid's pool, smoking actually in the pool and this presents a real safety and health risk for the kids that are there at Burdette. Thank you very much.

President Jerrel: Thank you. The next speaker is Susan Mulder. 

Susan Mulder: As Cancer Control Specialist with the American Cancer Society we are involved in a lot of different areas. Probably the area that gets the most attention is the area of tobacco. I think the reasoning behind that is the public is becoming more and more aware of not only of the dangers of tobacco, but also secondhand smoke. We at the American Cancer Society are involved in the ordinances because we know that 30 percent of all cancers are linked to tobacco use. Some of those cancers are linked to non smokers breathing the smoke of other's cigarettes. In 1993 the Environmental Protection Agency declared that secondhand smoke was a human carcinogen. Smoke from a cigarette contains over 4,000 chemicals. Some of those chemicals include carbon monoxide, formaldehyde, lead and hydrogen cyanide to name a few. I personally would not want to consume any of those chemicals. Also, four chemicals in secondhand smoke are known carcinogens and ten others are probable known carcinogens according to the Environmental Protection Agency. In 1986 two reports link secondhand smoke to the harmful affects of smokers. The US Surgeon General and the Expert Committee on Passive Smoking both concluded that secondhand smoke causes lung cancer in non smokers. Every year about 3,000 non smokers die from lung cancer. Persons exposed to secondhand smoke have about a 20 to 30 percent increased risk of developing lung cancer compared to those that are not exposed to secondhand smoke. Also according to the American Journal of Epidemiology and the New England Journal of Medicine there is suggestive data that also links secondhand smoke to other types of cancer such as the stomach, brain, leukemia, cervical cancer and also childhood cancers. Some of you may have noticed the pin that I am wearing. It's a pin that symbolizes the support for the many families in our communities whose lives have been touched by tobacco and death. In conclusion, the fight against cancer is a partnership. It takes the medical community, organizations, individuals and many other segments of our community including the County Commissioners working together to conquer this disease. We need to do this as a team and this is what we are seeing now. The County Commissioners have an opportunity to put the health and welfare of our community first. By voting yes on this ordinance you can make a difference and an impact on our community. If you vote yes on this ordinance you will have as much impact as if the American Cancer Society conducted 600,000 smoking cessation classes. That is a tremendous impact that you would have on our community. I would also like to encourage the County Commissioners to encourage a similar ordinance making the swimming pool area and the swimming pool at Burdette Park smoke free. We need to remember that our children are our future and we need to do all that we can to protect our children. Children exposed to secondhand smoke are three times more likely to get respiratory infections including pneumonia and bronchitis and they have a greater chance of developing colds, asthma and ear infections. We really appreciate your time and consideration in this ordinance. Thank you. 

President Jerrel: Our next speaker is Kathy Allen. 

Kathy Allen: Hello, I'm Kathy Allen. I work in the Civic Center in the snack bar and two of the people that I work with smoke, but thank goodness one of the persons that I work with, she is trying her very best to quit smoking. This is her second time trying to quit smoking because she had a heart attack. She is younger than I am and I am very, very thankful that she is trying, but I have an eye disease that I have had all my life and I don't want to give up my job but I can't stay in this environment with the smoking. I feel real strong about this ban being passed because I want to keep my job. I have to use a lot of medications especially these very expensive tears because of the smoke that I have to deal with. I just come to you tonight asking please pass this.

President Jerrel: Thank you, Kathy. Dr. Daetweyler.

Unidentified: I put his name down because he was trying to be here tonight, but he was on call. We were hoping he would be here tonight.

President Jerrel: Okay, our next speaker is Daniel Tweedall.

Daniel Tweedall: Good evening. My name is Daniel Tweedall. I'm a 16 year old junior at Central High School and a member of the class of 2000. I'm proud to be a member of this class because like so many of my fellow classmates I have chosen to live a smoke free lifestyle, but we did not reach that point on our own. It was because of the many hours put in by concerned parents and teachers who helped us see the importance in choosing not to smoke. For them I am very thankful. That is why I am honored to be here tonight speaking about something that I feel so strongly about. I come before you this evening to continue to do what those concerned parents and teachers did for me many years ago, to continue fighting for the health and well being for myself and others. This issue is clearly divided between two groups of people, smokers and non smokers. Whatever stance you take on this issue will upset one of the groups. As a teenager I too am faced with many difficult decisions, some of which can affect me for the rest of my life. What each of you must realize is that tonight you must make a decision that will not only affect your life, but the lives of the people of this city. Should a minor inconvenience be valued more than the quality of a person's life? Allowing smoking in county facilities would seem to support this. We are not asking anyone to stop smoking, only to do it away from others. Smoking is a personal choice that does affect the way you live. It is not right to ask non smokers to share the same consequences that they have chosen to avoid. Allowing smoking in these areas changes smoker's personal choice into public mandate. In an issue such as this you will not make both sides happy. The best resolution here is one that would be the most beneficial. I ask you tonight to validate the choice that the City Council, my classmates and I have made to not smoke and to validate your concerns for the health of the citizens of this city. Thank you.

President Jerrel: Next speaker is Judge Heldt. Oh, and Judge Knight. This is a team entry. 

Doug Knight: Oh, thanks.

Carl Heldt: I'm Carl Heldt from Vanderburgh Circuit Court.

Doug Knight: Doug Knight, Chief Judge, Vanderburgh Superior Court. We're here actually out of concern for the jurors who are required to be present during jury trials and most particularly the smoking juror. We are here, I guess, to request an opportunity for the court to deal with the smoking juror within the court building on a discretionary basis. These jurors are unusual in the scheme of the non smoking policy in several regards. First of all, they're not present in the court building voluntarily. They are required to be there by law. Secondly, they did nothing wrong in contrast to being in jail. No one is accusing them of doing anything wrong and they must remain there for extended periods of time and unlike the Coroner's Office they are still alive! Hopefully they'll be alive at the end of the process as well. It is our suggestion that in as much as jurors are not permitted to separate, they are required to be in the presence of one another and they are there for extended periods of time. We cannot escape the fact that there are certain jurors who cannot go one hour or two hours without consuming tobacco products. During those periods of time where they are not permitted to separate such as during deliberation there is no solution other than to allow them to smoke in the jury room. It has been our collective experience that this process has worked well and that through one mechanism or another the smoke is consumed by smoke eaters or voluntarily tolerated by fellow jurors. We would recommend that any ordinance that you pass with regard to the Courts Building permit smoking by jurors to be regulated by the courts on a discretionary or case by case basis. Perhaps Judge Heldt has something.

Carl Heldt: Yes, I would second what Judge Knight said and would like to add a couple of things. First of all one of our great concerns is that if there were a complete no smoking ban with no discretion of jurors I can foresee the possibility that a juror who smokes may tend to reach a verdict on a case just so he or she could leave the courthouse to smoke a cigarette which would not be fair certainly to the litigants. We are also mindful of the non smokers on the juries. To date we have been able to accommodate them when they have complaints as many of them very rightfully may have in regard to a smoking juror. What we're trying to do and what we're going to try to do more of in the future is to provide some place within the confines of the court if not the jury room itself where smokers might be able to go, if there are objections from non smokers, able to go for a smoke break or whatever without violating the requirement that the jury be kept together. It is a real problem. It is a real problem with the smokers and with the non smokers and what we don't want it to be is a problem for the justice system by confining smokers in an area for a long period of time where we just forbid them to have a cigarette. If we would have the discretion to do that. To date we've been able to pretty much juggle everybody's concerns and not make too many people unhappy, but is what we would do, quite frankly, if we would have to deal with an absolute smoking ban for juries.

Commissioner Mourdock: May I?

Carl Heldt: I might just say that I do have some language which we would like for you to consider that Doug and I just wrote out today and I'll leave you with a copy of it if I may. It simply says, however with regard to the County Courts Building smoking by jurors may be regulated by the courts at their discretion and we would ask for that accommodation. By the way, we take no position as far as the employees or the rest of the courthouse. We take no position either way whatsoever on that.

President Jerrel: Well, the Court Building would fall under the jurisdiction of the entire county square footage which is about 152,000 square feet so it is just lumped in. The only thing I'm worried about and I certainly understand both of the way you feel because I think it's a very real issue. I just worry about the non smoker is being favored over the smoker. 

Carl Heldt: Well, if we can...and I hope we can and do, if we can accommodate the smoker and the non smoker such as segregating the smokers when they want to smoke away from the non smokers but not separate from them. For instance, we can't leave the non smokers inside and have the smokers walk around and go outside to smoke because that is too much of a separation and secondly in foul weather it is not feasible. 

Doug Knight: And I might add for the very reason that there are tv cameras here when the juror...during deliberation if they go outside to smoke the first thing he is going to do is encounter a tv news camera. That's going to lead to some more difficult problems which we cannot solve other than a mistrial. 

Carl Heldt: We're not...I'm not speaking to the smoker's right to smoke. That's not--

President Jerrel: I understand, I understand.

Carl Heldt: I'm here for the problem, a real problem if you've got a seven, or eight, or nine, or ten hour deliberation. 

President Jerrel: What is happening in other courts that have become smoke free?

Carl Heldt: I have talked to a number of counties. We've been talking about this subject for months now. I've talked to a number of county judges. I've had one tell me in Warrick County that they just don't smoke. All the other ones I've talked to provide some accommodation to the smoker. Of course, the facilities are different in every county. I was at a conference this week where I raised the subject and one of the judges told me, well, when a smoker needs to have a smoke break we set aside another room next to it or even the courtroom itself which is next to the jury room for them to go do that and then come back to deliberations. There is a solution for every court.

Commissioner Mourdock: But in doing that are they actually separating them? 

Carl Heldt: Well, if--

Commissioner Mourdock: It sounds like they are.

Carl Heldt: Yeah, I think the concept of separation means, for instance, going home or leaving the building.

Commissioner Mourdock: Okay.

Carl Heldt: Anything outside of the environment. I think they could go to the next room as long as they are not out in public and not away from each other for any extended period of time. As long as the other jurors aren't deliberating while they're gone.

Commissioner Mourdock: Sure.

Carl Heldt: It's an accommodation problem. 

Doug Knight: We've even given consideration to have a smoking panel and a non smoking panel. Everybody that we've talked to that about suggests that it is not a good idea and probably would result in a reversal of the case. 

Carl Heldt: I might also say I talked to the Building Authority and brought them over to look at our jury rooms and talked about venting. We've tried to use some types of vents and filters and it's too expensive to vent outside the building. It's very expensive to vent outside the building. It's something we've been looking at for a long time. 

President Jerrel: You contacted me, may I have the names of the courts that you've spoken with?

Carl Heldt: I could get you a longer list if I can get back to my court, but I talked to Posey County Circuit Court, I talked to Warrick County Superior Court, I've talked to Gibson County Circuit Court and I just came back from a conference where there were probably 20 judges and if I can get back to my materials I can get you the names of all those courts.

President Jerrel: Because it is...it's a growing issue, so it's going to get addressed at one time or another. 

Carl Heldt: I would be very happy for you all to contact any county. If they have a solution that can help I would be delighted.

Doug Knight: Exactly.

Carl Heldt: In the meantime if I could just leave you with this.

President Jerrel: Sure, thank you.

Commissioner Tuley: Judge, did you have a talk with the federal courts over here to see what they do? 

Carl Heldt: I have not. 

Commissioner Mourdock: Is that a non smoking facility across the street? 

Commissioner Tuley: I don't even know. My assumption is that it is.

Joe Harrison, Jr.: A year or two ago it wasn't, but I don't know right now if it is or not. I don't know. I'll check. 

Doug Knight: Thank you.

President Jerrel: Okay, thank you. The next speaker is Jim Daniels.

Jim Daniels: Thank you. I also appreciate your considering this ordinance tonight. I'm up here tonight speaking in favor of it. I think the issue of whether smoking is a health hazard and if secondhand smoke is a health hazard is legend. There is enough science out there so that tells us that there is danger there and that is uncontestable at this level. To me the real question now becomes the power of levels of government to control people's behavior. I think that's an important issue and should be weighed very, very cautiously about how government at whatever level provides different laws to control people's behavior. I think the concern becomes, and I would say that the government does have the power to provide for a mechanism for the general public as well as workers in the building, and I by the way am a worker in this building, with a safe place to be and a safe place to work away from unnecessary hazards. Smoking in a building, in a government building, is a unnecessary hazard. We're not trying to take away...I would not suggest that this ordinance would take away the ability of someone who wants to smoke to be able to create a hazard for themselves in places where they want to do that away from other people or with people in smoking situations who are of like mind. That's not a problem. I think that if we want to live together in a society we have to understand a couple of things. Number one, we have to understand that freedom is not unrestricted. Freedom has to be restricted. I can't punch you in the nose. Well, maybe I could, but there is a law against that so there is a punishment for that, so my freedom to do that is restrict as it should be. That is restricted properly because that is preventing one person causing unnecessary damage to another person. Those are the same kind of laws that we have for traffic laws. You can't drive down a city street going 120 miles per hour because that is unnecessarily endangering other people. Secondhand smoke in buildings like government buildings is in the same, to me, kind of category. So while we're not saying that it is inappropriate, in a boxing ring it is appropriate to punch people in the nose, so it is legal to do that in the proper setting. It's legal to smoke in the proper setting. It's legal to go at high rates of speed in the proper setting in an automobile. I wouldn't ask you to stop those kinds of things. I would ask you to stop people causing unnecessary hazards such as smoking in buildings like this and I do believe you have the power to do that. I believe that we also have to understand that to live in society together we have to agree to a mutual coercion mutually agreed upon, so I think we have to limit our freedoms to get along with people. I think the people that are causing the most damage should be the folks that are restricted from causing that damage, not the other way around. So let's look at the segment of society that has the potential of causing the damage and that is the segment of society that needs to be restricted from causing that damage. I didn't think about the juror situation, but I disagree with the judges' statement of offering discretion because that doesn't solve the problem. That basically says as an example if we were standing in a courtroom right now and your offices were the jury chamber that means that a juror could come back out into the courtroom potentially and smoke in the courtroom thereby exposing everybody in the courtroom as soon as they walk back into the courtroom to that secondhand smoke. If you're in the same building with the same HVAC system, just like this building here, if you look at the non smoking areas in this building and I'm in quite a few of those all the time, you go anywhere close to a smoking area you can smell it, you can smell the smoke. You can smell smoke almost any place in the building because it's totally not smoke free. That's going to be the case with other folks. If you have a juror that is going to rule on a case or vote a certain way just so they can get out of the jury room so they can smoke faster you've got a problem with that juror on a whole other matter. That should be least of the problems with having that juror. You've got somebody that can't make a decision based on facts. If they're basing their decision not on the facts of that particular case before them they don't belong...they shouldn't be a juror to begin with. That's my feeling. Also, I mean, I just think that is the key consideration that you need to be looking at. Thank you.

President Jerrel: We have heard from everyone that indicated by an asterisk that they wished to speak, but is there anyone else that has had...yes, you would like to?

Unidentified: Yes.

President Jerrel: If you would give us your name.

Brian Majors: Brian Majors.

President Jerrel: Okay.

Brian Majors: My name is Brian Majors. I'm the Chairman of the Libertarian Party. It's seems to me there is a common theme that runs through here tonight about...against...I mean, for this smoking ban. It's the same theme that runs through every big government scheme to engineer society. We have to give up freedom to be safe. You know, less freedom equals more safe. I feel more safe with more freedom. Now there is a way that both people can be happy. Just a separate area for smokers well ventilated so you don't have to offend anyone's palate and everybody will be happy. You know, if non smokers don't have to breathe smoke and smokers get to smoke where is the confrontation? There is no need for a confrontation. If you would just pick a happy medium instead of the whole plate more people would be happy. You could please more people by accommodating smokers than by ostracizing smokers. You know, as far as...there was a time when Vanderburgh County...I remember when I was a kid in Vanderburgh County we were happy to be different than other northern parts. I remember I was raised not to like Indianapolis. It was just a prejudice I had. I mean, this doesn't...it's not racist or anything, I was just taught that most bad things in Indiana came from Indianapolis or from northern Indiana. Everything good in Indiana was down here. Now if you pass this ordinance you are slavishly following northern Indiana in banning smoking. A vote for this ordinance is a vote to make Evansville more like California, more like Indianapolis and less like the home that I grew up in. Now I believe strongly in this issue and I just would like to say please consider smokers. They are real people, they're not just a statistic. They deserve equal treatment with everyone else in society. Thank you.

President Jerrel: Is there anyone else that has not had an opportunity to speak? If you could...if I could just make a comment or two so that you can try to put this into perspective. We have several issues that exist in the building itself. There is a break room on each floor and, you know, it's difficult to say it can be a smoking break room, then that means anyone that doesn't smoke and doesn't want to go in there can't use the break room. It sounds easy to say we will have no smoking and accept that smokers may use a certain area. The School Corporation dealt with this about four or five years ago and each building became a smoke free building. A lot of that happened not so much because there were not people that smoked in the building. There were teachers and administrators in the building that smoked, but as they worked with students it becomes increasingly apparent if you are a smoker and you're teaching your students the dangers of smoking it becomes a situation where you have to deal with your own conscious and whether you're going to profess one thing but not do it, so the decision was made that the buildings should all be smoke free. That's one forward step for honesty in instruction and I know it was hard to do. I know this won't be easy to do either. It's going to be a difficult situation whether we do it or we choose not to do it. We're going to offend someone. So with that I'm going to ask...this is first reading, so no vote is official until after the second reading. Would you like to...am I describing this correctly, Mr. Harrison? 

Joe Harrison, Jr.: I was speaking with Commissioner Tuley about another matter as far as Burdette Park was concerned. Any amendment to the ordinance as advertised probably ought to be done on a first reading at this point then after the ordinance is passed on final reading we would then be obligated to publish the ordinance as passed so the public would have notice of the final ordinance. Obviously, down the road if there was a need to amend the ordinance as it is finally passed, certainly that could be done at some point like we amend ordinances...like this body does from time to time. My recommendation would be if there was any question about considering an amendment to the ordinance as--

President Jerrel: Presented.

Joe Harrison, Jr.: --presented in front of you it ought to be at this time or you don't consider a vote at this time as opposed to making a change after the first reading. I think it is appropriate to have the first reading be the ordinance that will be passed on final reading. 

President Jerrel: I would welcome any comments from Commissioner Mourdock or Commissioner Tuley.

Commissioner Tuley: Well, I am inclined to amend Section B3, which is dealing with Burdette Park to include the pool areas and designate certain chalets as non smoking as well. I'm not quite as inclined to the court's issue at this point in time. That may be something that can be revisited later, but I'm not real inclined to want to change that or amend that section, but I am inclined to amend Section B3.

President Jerrel: To include the pool area?

Commissioner Tuley: To include the pool area and certain designated chalets.

President Jerrel: This, Steve, is the issue of having designated smoke free chalets. 

Commissioner Mourdock: I think Mr. Kincaid also raise the issue about shelter houses in addition to the chalets.

Commissioner Tuley: I'm sorry, you're right. 

Commissioner Mourdock: I guess that would beg the same question then with multiple shelter houses there if we're going to say several chalets would be set aside for smoking are we looking to have several or perhaps one shelter house that is a smoking shelter house and others that would not be? Im looking to you, Steve, for guidance on that one. I don't know mechanically how well that would work if at all. For those of you who don't know, Steve Craig is the Superintendent of Burdette Park who is here with us. 

President Jerrel: We worried over this today, so this is not new, but it is difficult to determine what should be done.

Steve Craig: There is so many buildings at Burdette, I mean, we would have to figure out, you know, if we want to put a certain percentage as non smoking or, you know, I probably have a question to ask. If a building is rented on a Sunday and people smoked in it and it was not rented until the next Saturday with the smoke from the week before would that be considered a health hazard to the people that is not...or has it rented the week after that?

President Jerrel: Well, let's approach this from a sensible standpoint. We aren't going to reinvent the wheel all in one night. I'm going to make a suggestion which you and I talked about today and let the two Commissioners decide whether it makes sense to them or not. The inside of the chalets are cedar. That was more or less designed for that purpose to help remove the odors. I think we want to be sure that people realize we have a smoke free environment for them so we would provide some smoke free chalets and then the pool area, it doesn't make sense to have cigarettes where children that are barefooted could be injured. I mean, that just makes sense. I would be reluctant to try to supervise all the other facilities at the park. Do you...I don't know how we can...that's the only question I have.

Commissioner Mourdock: I think the biggest part of that question is one perhaps more of marketing than actually enforcement. Certainly I know there are some groups that when they're looking to rent a facility will not go to a facility if, in fact, they do not allow smoking. I think with the chalets it would be very prudent to have some of those...and obviously the opposite occurs, if I go to a hotel room and am asked do I want a smoking or non smoking room, so you can certainly keep those chalets, I think, somewhat separate. From the point though of the shelter houses it would be very difficult to enforce. I guess even in the chalets it is difficult to enforce. Again, it is more than what we're offering to the public perhaps than what we can logically enforce. 

Commissioner Tuley: The shelter houses would be much more difficult to enforce, I think, just because of family reunions and everything like that where you're going to have a mix of smokers and non smokers. So it would become a...I don't know about marketing as much as enforcement, but I think enforcement would be a bigger problem. I think the chalets, you know, we can do. Anybody that doesn't smoke obviously can walk into a room a know someone has been smoking in it. We might want to try the idea, and tonight we don't have to designate the numbers I wouldn't guess, just the concept. As far as the shelter houses maybe just designating one or two as smoke free and just see how that goes. If over time it becomes apparent that there is a large request for smoke free shelters that we could designate more. At least give people the opportunity to have one or two that are totally smoke free and the rest of them could be smoke--

Commissioner Mourdock: That certainly sounds prudent to me and, Steve, we don't need to put that specifics in the ordinance as far as which ones are and which ones aren't, but we could look to Steve to get back to us as far as what he recommends.

Commissioner Tuley: Yeah, just track it and see how the--

President Jerrel: So we would add the pool area as a non smoking area and provide smoke free chalets.

Commissioner Mourdock: Right, and certain chalets and shelter houses.

President Jerrel: And we'll work on how we do the mechanics of it.

Commissioner Tuley: The numbers, yeah.

President Jerrel: Okay.

Commissioner Mourdock: On the juror issue I guess I have a question for Judge Knight and Judge Heldt. If during the jury selection process the question was asked regarding smoking does that in any way get ahead of the problem? In other words, if someone said I'm a non smoker and I am very sensitive therefore I want to be excused from jury duty does that get them a pass? On the other hand, if a smoker...if a potential juror said to you, oh, by the way I smoke four packs a day does that give that person a pass? Is that something that has ever been part of the process or can it be? 

Doug Knight: No sooner than I sat down Mr. Roll was quick to point out to me that in no other facet of society do we accommodate addicts the way we do in the judicial system! 

Commissioner Mourdock: But it is legal. 

Doug Knight: I know of no legal disqualification because you smoke or don't smoke. In fact, in the err of accommodation it is not a legal disqualifier if you can't hear or you can't see or read. 

Commissioner Mourdock: That explains...never mind. 

Doug Knight: That explains the verdicts, yes. Some would argue that, but I'm not aware that it is a legal disqualifier and there could be occasions when an attorney would be particularly attracted to a juror who is either a smoker or non smoker depending on which way you want to frame the question and thoroughly object to the exclusion of that juror for fear that it will change the outcome of the case. He or she may firmly believe that and there is a limited number of strikes that they can use to excuse the juror. I do not believe that would qualify as a reason to get rid of a juror for cause. It would be expensive to one litigant or another to try to get rid of them because there is always going to be another smoker or another non smoker right behind them.

Carl Heldt: I'm going to say that I've never heard the question asked by any attorney or the court because frankly we've been able to date to fairly well accommodate everyone in one way or another, smokers or non smokers. What I hope we don't get to is where we have to excuse all smokers and excuse all non smokers.

Commissioner Mourdock: Right.

President Jerrel: We don't want that either and I don't think it will come to that. I think we can work something out, but I think that you have a good point, but I think maybe the point has been reached when society's greater issues are of more importance.

Commissioner Mourdock: One other thing to clarify, Judge Knight, when you were speaking you made the point that...if I can find the point, excuse me. Oh, you said the jurors can't go one or two hours without a cigarette. What about in the courtroom itself? Certainly they sit there for more than one or two hours at a time. Do they smoke actually in the courtroom?

Doug Knight: No, no, there is no smoking permitted, none whatsoever in the courtroom. We try to take breaks in the morning and in the afternoon and given the nature of lawyers they often make objections and that results in recesses where the jury has to go back to the jury room while the judge hears the arguments of the attorneys, so they get quite a few opportunities and snitches of time to smoke or be offended by their fellow jurors smoking. I think frequently some of the jurors will go into the restroom and smoke in that area, but the argument is still there that a non smoking male juror is going to use the male restroom where a smoking juror just smoked or the female vice versa. We've thought of the idea of a unisex restroom, one for smokers and one for non smokers. I guess we would have to put urinals in both restrooms at some added expense. Still the door comes open and the smoke comes out. I don't believe there is a way that we can totally insulate non smokers from the presence of smoke in some configuration in the air. 

Carl Heldt: One of the things that I'm hoping to do if space permits is to...if we can move certain probation people elsewhere is to use part of what used to be the old grand jury room which is on the other side of the restrooms as a smoke break room which is apart from the jury room. 

President Jerrel: For jurors only?

Carl Heldt: Correct, while they're deliberating.

Commissioner Mourdock: But that's a good--

Commissioner Tuley: That's a...yeah, go ahead. I know where you're going with this because I'm thinking now I'm going to have about ten officeholders who are already going to be mad at me for voting the way I think I'm going to end up voting and then if we make it where the Courts Building someone could sneak off--

President Jerrel: Doesn't have to comply.

Commissioner Tuley: --even though they're not part of the jury...I don't know how you would control that.

Carl Heldt: I'm talking about jurors, juries only.

Commissioner Tuley: I know that is what you're saying, but how do you control it?

President Jerrel: That's what you're saying--

Commissioner Mourdock: But how do we know...yeah.

Commissioner Tuley: How do you control it? Is there a key that the room will be locked except for that period of time or how would you do it?

Carl Heldt: No, it's like any other room. How are you going to enforce any of it?

President Jerrel: That's right.

Carl Heldt: There is no smoking in any room including the jury room.

President Jerrel: Well, we'll hear about it though. 

Carl Heldt: Except the jurors at our discretion. Our employees won't be able to go in there to smoke, we won't go in there and smoke, nobody is in there to smoke except jurors when we say they can, that's the proposal. 

Doug Knight: Where the jury is in session and they are a juror and that's all we're talking about. 

President Jerrel: Well, we've done one amendment. We can proceed as our attorney said tonight with what has been added and if we feel inclined to start all over again the next hearing we can do that or you can add anything you want tonight or you can move approval as is. 

Commissioner Mourdock: Pat, any comments?

Commissioner Tuley: It is a problem, but I don't know that we're going to solve it tonight. 

President Jerrel: Okay, I'll entertain a motion.

Commissioner Mourdock: Alright, let me just make a quick comment or two because first of all I really appreciate the fact that we have an issue here that brings out so many people from the community. We have so many meetings, you wouldn't believe it when there are four or five people there and it seems that no one cares what happens within Vanderburgh County government, so on an issue like this that may seem rather contentious I just appreciate the fact that you all came forward to state your opinions. Also, I always like to reflect on what I hear at these things and Mr. Kirk made the comment that this will not reduce the overall risk of smoking and I agree that's probably true. You raised the issue, Mr. Kirk, whether or not there really was good scientific data saying it was a health risk. Let's assume for a second that that is true, that it's really not a health risk. Are we inconveniencing people by causing them to go outside? No doubt about it, that's it, but by the same token I don't know that any of those people who are somewhat inconvenienced have ever also gone outside and taken a deep breath and said, oh, nice fresh air, I'm offended by this. That's what we have is we have a lot of people who are non smokers and even a few who are that get overwhelmed by the smoke that we have in this building at times. Mr. Kincaid mentioned the maintenance issue and that's a very real one and every day as we look across the street at the new auditorium it's going to cost a lot of money to keep that place clean periodically going in along those high walls cleaning that stuff down is not going to be a cheap thing, it is not going to be necessarily an easy thing. Mr. Tweedall, I guess has left, but he made a great point about we're not asking anyone to quit smoking. I am libertarian enough, small L, that I don't think the government has the right to say to people you shalt not smoke a cigarette, but I also think that in county government we have the right, if you will, and the obligation to act somewhat in a leadership position on this issue. You know, it would be very easy for us just to say, well, it doesn't really matter because maybe it is secondhand smoke, maybe it really isn't a health risk, but I would like to think those of us who get elected to these offices can make the point to send a message not just to kids but to adults too that smoking isn't something that they should do because clearly those who do smoke are putting their health at risk. Finally, Mr. Majors, you made the comment less freedom equals more safety. Well, again, maybe that is somewhat true and you said that smokers ought to have an area that is well ventilated and that, you know, we could put in a separate but equal, if you will, smoking area that is ventilated and by gosh the smokers deserve that because they are not hurting anybody and yet on the other side of that if we did that we would be causing all the non smokers in the county to pay more tax dollars to fund the development of that HVAC and all those other things. It's clearly a double edge sword. Having said all that, I will move on first reading the approval of the ordinance prohibiting smoking in county buildings as submitted with the exception of the Burdette Park areas that we spoke of. 

Commissioner Tuley: I will second.

President Jerrel: I will ask...roll call on a first reading? 

Commissioner Mourdock: It's a good idea.

President Jerrel: Commissioner Tuley?

Commissioner Tuley: Yes.

President Jerrel: Commissioner Mourdock?

Commissioner Mourdock: Yes.

President Jerrel: And I vote yes. Second reading and any new information will be next week and I appreciate all of you coming and making your comments.

Commissioner Mourdock: Two weeks.

President Jerrel: Two weeks.

Joe Harrison, Jr.: No, next week.

Charlene Timmons: I'm sorry.

President Jerrel: Next week, I was correct.

Jim Daniels: Can I ask you a quick question? As a procedural matter did I understand the attorney to say or you to say, Mrs. Jerrel, the only opportunity for amendments is on first reading, is that correct?

President Jerrel: That's what we did tonight. Thats not precluding...that' not against any legal standard.

Joe Harrison, Jr.: That was my preference, but that is not a--

President Jerrel: That' not a standing...no.

Joe Harrison, Jr.: No.

Jim Daniel: Okay.

Tape change
 

Various 1999 Board appointments

President Jerrel: I'm going to move ahead. The next item on the agenda is the appointments of the Home Inspector Licensing Board, the License and Disciplinary Board and the EMA. Tony, would you want to...you have some information for us or do you have all the information? Okay.

Commissioner Mourdock: I have it. I would nominate for the Home Inspector Licensing Board as Home Inspector, Chuck Zehner, and for the Residential Building Contractor, Ron Dauby. 

President Jerrel: Is there a second to that?

Commissioner Tuley: Yes, there is a second.

President Jerrel: I'll say so ordered.

Commissioner Mourdock: And for the License and Disciplinary Board I would suggest or nominate Commissioner Bettye Lou Jerrel. 

Commissioner Tuley: I'll second.

President Jerrel: I'll say so ordered.

Commissioner Mourdock: As an appointment to the Emergency Management Agency I would move the appointment of Maury Nichols. 

Commissioner Tuley: Second.

President Jerrel: So ordered. 
 

Any group or individual wishing to address the Commission

President Jerrel: Is there anyone else that wishes to speak to the Commissioners tonight? 
 

John Stoll - County Engineer

President Jerrel: Hearing none, we'll move to the County Engineer. 

John Stoll: First of all Ive got a supplemental agreement for the bridge inspection contract. This is for an increase of $5,950. This is for an additional inspection on the Franklin Street Bridge. It has some end type connections that require a special inspection by INDOT standards and we need to have that done to be in compliance with the guidelines for the bridge inspection. This is funded 80 percent federal/20 percent local so the $5,950 only 20 percent is our cost. 

Commissioner Mourdock: Is that with Beam, Longest? 

John Stoll: Yes.

Commissioner Mourdock: I'll move approval of the change order for...what is it, Beam, Longest and Neff, I think.

President Jerrel: I'll second and say so ordered.

John Stoll: The next item I've got is a street acceptance request for the Burkhardt/Lynch Business Park. This is for 425 linear feet of Loehrlein Drive, 725 linear feet of Frito Lay Drive, 850 linear feet of Toney Lane, 300 feet of Toney Court, 475 feet of Hank Avenue, 250 feet of Fitzgerald Road and 2060 feet of Interstate Drive for a grand total of .97 miles. 

Commissioner Mourdock: I'll move approval of the street acceptance as recommended by the County Engineer.

President Jerrel: Ill second and say so ordered.

John Stoll: Next I've got a request for approval of street plans for the widening of Red Bank Road associated with the Eagle Plaza Subdivision. The yellow lines shown on the plans is the limit of the state's right-of-way and the green line is the south limit of the county's portion of the road. The widening of the road consists of constructing additional northbound and southbound lanes. In conjunction with that there is going to be a raised median installed on Red Bank Road and in the portion of the road that INDOT controls they've already issued a permit for their work up there north of the yellow line and for safety and traffic flow reasons they have required that raised median. Of the median 150 feet is in INDOT right-of-way and about 76 feet is in the county's portion of the road. All in all out of the plans that are there only about 165 feet is the county's responsibility. That's the distance between that green line the yellow line. Given all that it is recommended that the street plan be approved. 

Commissioner Tuley: John, just so we can enter it into the record you and I and Joe met to discuss the plans and read the minutes of Site Review or which committee was it? Actually, it wasn't a formal committee was it? 

John Stoll: Right, it was a meeting of all the involved parties to discuss that development.

Commissioner Tuley: Yeah, because there was some concerns from the developers where the Taco Bell and all that is about the potential for blocking off or denying...I shouldn't say denying access, there would still be access, but there would not be a left turn or whatever into that with that median in there.

President Jerrel: Are you talking about right up here?

John Stoll: Right here.

Commissioner Tuley: But the bulk of that median is going in, the county's portion of that is beyond that actual entrance if we look at the plans and the way they've been submitted.

John Stoll: Correct.

Commissioner Tuley: So we really don't Ahave a dog in that fight as such. 

John Stoll: Right.

President Jerrel: This part is city?

Commissioner Tuley: City and then state.

President Jerrel: State?

John Stoll: The city's portion is south of that green line there.

President Jerrel: Okay, down in here. 

John Stoll: Correct.

Commissioner Tuley: After we met I met with the developer again and he had expressed some concern that somewhere along the line that he had heard was going to try to verify that the state had some plans to block off the one entry that allows left turns off of the expressway.

John Stoll: Half way between Red Bank and Rosenberger?

Commissioner Tuley: Right, but you...when I talked to you before the meeting you said that's...you have no knowledge of any such plans to do that.

John Stoll: No.

Commissioner Tuley: In fact, that's the only one we have that does cross...it doesn't allow straight across, but it does allow a left turn for people going westbound on the Lloyd Expressway.

John Stoll: I don't know of any plan for that, but even if that did take place traffic could still get to this site coming off of Rosenberger because those frontage roads have been constructed in front of Schnucks and in front of Steak and Shake and all that does connect all the way through over to Rosenberger, so even if the state did take that step there is still going to be access through Rosenberger.

President Jerrel: I've been talking to Rose about Rosenberger and, you know, at certain times there is a real problem, you know, turning on the north side going east and she indicated that the reluctance of the state to change the timing on that or to put in that extended second turn lane would be that it would slow down the Lloyd traffic, you know, considerably. I don't know, I've just asked her to start looking at some issues that are going to be facing us out there and making some recommendations on what we could do. Rosenberger is partly city and part county.

John Stoll: Right.

President Jerrel: It's a joint, but I've got that in the mix with Carpenter Creek and all the other little adjunct issues that relate to that west side.

Commissioner Tuley: But let's go back to one point though. The state has approved this and the basis when you had that committee meeting the biggest issue was why that should not be left...or should have that median in there was strictly an issue of safety, correct?

John Stoll: Correct.

Commissioner Tuley: That was the biggest underlying issue.

President Jerrel: So you're talking about our portion?

Commissioner Tuley: That portion that is in...well,--

Commissioner Mourdock: This is state, this is county.

Commissioner Tuley: City and county really would address the safety issue and traffic flow just by virtue of the fact--

John Stoll: Right.

Commissioner Tuley: --given the short distance between the intersection with 62 and Red Bank there is enough room for three cars maybe?

John Stoll: Right.

Commissioner Tuley: To line up and then block up traffic and impede the flow of traffic and the safety for the drivers. The only reason I am bringing this up is because, you know, the developer expressed some concerns and I did, I met with these two and then I've met with the developer on the other side and it is unfortunate that we couldn't find a way to move this down and find a way to line up so that there is, but given the situation out there this is probably the best we can come up with in terms of safety and traffic flow, correct? 

John Stoll: Right, the other issue we had was that is located about at his southernmost point where he has access on Red Bank and also that is about the only location where his frontage road can come in and have reasonable visibility down Red Bank in both directions so he was constrained by that in putting his east/west frontage road in and then, like you said, the traffic flow problems of the left turns into that frontage road there by Taco Bell could with increased northbound traffic it is going to block that road and that in turn will permit left turns from being able to turn into that Taco Bell driveway which in turn would block traffic...run traffic out on the Lloyd Expressway. 

Commissioner Tuley: Even if the developers of the other side had been brought to that initial meeting it would not change the fact of the reason this plan is like it is, correct?

John Stoll: Not that I could see. The only alternative I guess that was discussed at that meeting would be taking that road as it exists now and running it further south to make a fourth leg in the intersection where Hahn is constructing Pearl Drive, so it would run further south before it ties into Red Bank Road. 

Commissioner Tuley: Okay.

Joe Harrison, Jr.: The bottom line is that the state is the one who--

Commissioner Tuley: That's what I was going to ask.

Joe Harrison, Jr.: --made this recommendation or who is requiring this action.

John Stoll: Right, they have already issued their permit on this.

Commissioner Tuley: Yeah, and I think that is the key.

Joe Harrison, Jr.: It has nothing to do with the county as far as requiring that median.

John Stoll: Right, we don't control what is north of their right-of-way line. 

Commissioner Tuley: Okay.

President Jerrel: Okay, is there a motion regarding this?

Commissioner Tuley: Having been assigned this side of town or taking this side on my own, I don't see how we have any choice but to go ahead and approve...or recommend approval of it based on Joe's final comment there that this is the state's plan and we really don't have Aa real dog in this fight. 

Commissioner Mourdock: I'll second.

President Jerrel: So ordered.

John Stoll: The final item I've got is a request to approve street plans for Section II of Broadlawn Subdivision. This is located off of Heinlein Road. This subdivision is just east of Edinborough Subdivision and the access to this sub is through Edinborough. The street plans that you've got there in front of you have been approved by the Commissioners in the past. The developer did not get the subdivision recorded in the amount of time allotted by APC, so their approval is expired and that is why these plans have to be brought back again for approval. There have been a couple of minor changes made as far as getting rid of some plastic pipe that they had called for underneath the streets and that change was made, so with that I would recommend the plans be reapproved.

President Jerrel: Is there a motion?

Commissioner Mourdock: So moved.

Commissioner Tuley: Second.

President Jerrel: So ordered. Have you gotten all the bids opened, too? 

John Stoll: That's all I have unless you've got questions. 

President Jerrel: Well, you want to go ahead and do the bids very quickly and then we'll get to...while John is here.

Joe Harrison, Jr.: Yes, I had a chance to open the bids regarding the Heckel Road Bridge rehab. It's VC99-01-01. 
 

Company name	Amount bid
Gohmann Asphalt & Construction Inc. Clarksville, IN	$461,000.00
Deig Bros. Lumber & Construction Evansville, IN	$274,921.00
Phoenix Construction Company Evansville, IN	$422,659.28
CCC of Evansville, Inc. Evansville, IN	$241,405.88
Ragle, Inc. Newburgh, IN	$361,603.00

Let me check my figures here one more time on one. Okay, I would ask that the Commissioners take these bids under advisement and review them for their responsiveness.

President Jerrel: Is there a motion to that effect?

Commissioner Mourdock: So moved.

Commissioner Tuley: Second.

President Jerrel: So ordered.
 

Erik Bentle - County Garage

President Jerrel: I'm going to go back to the County Garage now so John can take those with him. You want to give your report, Erik? 

Erik Bentle: Erik Bentle, County Garage. I have three bids I would like to present to the Board. These are bids for new chain saws. As you know, January has been a rough month for the Garage. With all the ice and the thunderstorms we've had several trees down. It's really frustrating when you get out at 2:00 in the morning and you've got a tree across the road and the chain saws won't work. We are requesting that we get six new chain saws and six cases for the Garage. 

Commissioner Mourdock: Six cases?

Erik Bentle: For the chain saws.

Commissioner Tuley: Carrying cases.

President Jerrel: Carrying cases.

Erik Bentle: To store them in. 

President Jerrel: And you have the money in your budget?

Erik Bentle: Yes.

Commissioner Mourdock: How were they bid, Erik? You said you had these bids. Did you just go out for prices?

Erik Bentle: We just went and got these estimates from different companies. 

Joe Harrison, Jr.: With the new ordinance, the new county ordinance adopted last year we can...Commissioners can do this. 

President Jerrel: Oh, we can? 

Joe Harrison, Jr.: Yes.

President Jerrel: Oh, okay.

Joe Harrison, Jr.: As long as the amount is under...I think it's under 5,000 bucks. What is the amount?

Erik Bentle: They're all around a little over $1,500, yeah.

President Jerrel: $1514, $1578.

Erik Bentle: The lowest bid we had is from Stephan's which is $64 cheaper than the rest of them.

President Jerrel: What is your recommendation? 

Commissioner Tuley: I think she is asking you.

Erik Bentle: Oh, are you asking me? 

President Jerrel: Uh-huh.

Erik Bentle: I recommend that we go with Stephan's. They're a reputable company and if we have any work that needs to be done to them that we can't handle they can do it locally for us.

President Jerrel: And they are the low bid.

Erik Bentle: And they are the low bid, yes. 

Commissioner Mourdock: So moved.

Commissioner Tuley: Second. 

President Jerrel: So ordered.

Erik Bentle: The other thing I have, I apologize for my weekly report. It is on the computer and I forgot to run it off, so I'll have it to you first thing in the morning. 

President Jerrel: Okay, just a comment. We had a safety meeting Thursday and during the discussion period after the meeting it was...we talked a little bit about preparing the Garage to better participate in the Impact Communities preparedness in case of a natural disaster, so Sherman Greer is going to...he has taken new plans and we do have new plans in our office and I have asked him to conduct an in service, so we will this next month when it is convenient have an in service for all of the staff so that we're prepared for our role when we have a disaster. 

Erik Bentle: Now are you, the three Commissioners, going to attend that? 

President Jerrel: I plan to be there and I would think if either Commissioner is in town they would like to come, too.

Erik Bentle: Okay, I appreciate it.

Commissioner Tuley: When are you going to do it? 

Erik Bentle: Thank you.

President Jerrel: Well, we're going to--

Commissioner Tuley: You have to establish the date?

President Jerrel: Yeah, with them. I'll get back with you.

Commissioner Tuley: Just let me know. 

President Jerrel: I'll let you know Monday. 

Commissioner Tuley: Okay.

Erik Bentle: That's all I have.

President Jerrel: Thank you. Is there a motion to accept the report that we do have? 

Commissioner Mourdock: So moved.

Commissioner Tuley: Second.

President Jerrel: So ordered.
 

Tony Greubel - Superintendent of County Buildings

President Jerrel: Superintendent of County Buildings. 

Tony Greubel: The reason I was late for the meeting tonight I attend an Airport Advisory Team meeting at the Evansville Regional Airport. I'll submit what I turned in for that meeting as my report. The review on an update on jets trying to get more jet service here and then I was talking about fixed base operators. We're going to send two letters, one to Comair and one to Atlantic Southeast Airlines thanking them for providing us jet service and asking and hoping for the day when they can provide us with all jet service. Right now half their flights are turboprops. That's really all I have to report.
 

Joe Harrison, Jr. - County Attorney

President Jerrel: Okay, Joe, do you have some additional reports? 

Joe Harrison, Jr.: I passed out in front of you I got a response today from IDEM from Janet McCabe regarding the Koch Label issue. I just opened the letter up right before I came over tonight, but it looks as if I need to speak with her concerning what, if anything, the state may be able to do in looking at that issue a little closer as far as the VOC compounds that you all asked me to check into that might be able to be retained in some fashion by the city or county. It looks as if IDEM though does not have any specific rules or guidance that they can provide to us concerning the circumstances that I outlined in my letter to them, but I am going to speak with them and hopefully I'll get some more information if any and report back to you.

President Jerrel: But they didn't say no.

Joe Harrison, Jr.: They didn't say no, but I'm not...I think--

Commissioner Mourdock: Is this one of those situations where it's easier to get forgiveness than permission?

Joe Harrison, Jr.: I don't know. I get...it's my feeling that the city and county may have to enter into some dialogue and find out what their intention is with respect to the permits. That's the key.

Commissioner Mourdock: What whose intention is? 

Joe Harrison, Jr.: Koch.

Commissioner Mourdock: IDEM you mean? Okay, Koch.

Joe Harrison, Jr.: Or both, but you know what is Koch's intent with respect to their permit. 

President Jerrel: Like if they want to retain that--

Joe Harrison, Jr.: Yes.

President Jerrel: --in order to sell their facility.

Commissioner Mourdock: Right, it is an asset. 

President Jerrel: Yeah, it's an asset.

Joe Harrison, Jr.: I think that is the issue.

President Jerrel: Yeah. I appreciate your doing this. At least it is starting. You know, who knows.

Joe Harrison, Jr.: The other issue was that I had, the Safe House lawsuit, the Court of Appeals did deny the petition to reinstate the appeal on the 25th of January, so counsel for Mr. Ross still has the opportunity to appeal further to the Indiana Supreme Court and if he does so he'll have to do that within the next 30 days, so I'll keep you posted as to that particular issue. I think I had one more...oh, yes. Regarding the surplus auction I received a quote today from Curran Miller. They handled the auction last spring, in May I believe, and they are willing to serve as an auctioneer on either May 11th or May 18th, they can do either one, beginning at 10:00 a.m. on either of those dates. They would be agreeable to conduct the auction for the same fee as last year which was $1,000, so they would be willing to do it for the same price. They agreeable to either date, so I believe there was a motion made for May 11th, so if you all are agreeable--

Commissioner Tuley: Is that on the Commissioners' sale of property?

Joe Harrison, Jr.: Yes.

Commissioner Tuley: So that wouldn't involve...doesn't involve you as Secretary?

Suzanne Crouch: Donna usually helps. It's really a Commissioners' sale.

Commissioner Tuley: Right.

Suzanne Crouch: But Donna helps.

Commissioner Tuley: It wouldn't involve anybody from the Treasurer's Office then either would it?

Joe Harrison, Jr.: No, it's not a tax sale. 

Commissioner Tuley: That's what I mean. It's not a tax sale, it's just our sale.

President Jerrel: So it's either the 11th or 18th.

Joe Harrison, Jr.: The motion, I think, last week was the 11th.

Commissioner Tuley: Was the 11th with the 18th as a backup.

President Jerrel: Backup, okay. Do we need to reaffirm that or just leave--

Joe Harrison, Jr.: Well, if you're agreeable to this proposal then I will contact them and say let's go with May 11th on that day under those terms. 

President Jerrel: Okay, is there a motion to approve the--

Commissioner Tuley: Yeah, for that price Ill move approval.

Commissioner Mourdock: I'll second.

President Jerrel: I'll say so ordered.

Joe Harrison, Jr.: That's all I have, thank you.

President Jerrel: I just have a letter...I left a letter that Mike Robling brought down to me, I put a copy for Richard and Pat, concerning, you know, the right-of-way and John Stoll...is John still here?

Commissioner Mourdock: Uh-huh.

Joe Harrison, Jr.: Yes.

President Jerrel: John, let me give you this letter. Its my copy, but it relates to...Mike Robling's letter to the Wrights about us needing that right-of-way so we can get on with our...because we can't get the grant money from the state or anything until that all gets worked out. 

John Stoll: Do you have another copy because Mike gave me a copy of this today as well.

President Jerrel: Okay, well, then...no, I didn't know. I just wanted to make sure you had one. Okay, thank you.
 

Steve Craig - Burdette Park

President Jerrel: We also have Steve Craig. 

Steve Craig: I really don't have much outside of what was in my reports and that.

President Jerrel: Well, we do need to make some decisions regarding a couple of those issues that you brought up last week or two weeks ago about the bumper boats.

Steve Craig: Oh, yeah.

President Jerrel: And you also want to...you're proceeding with Morley on the--

Commissioner Tuley: Discovery house.

Steve Craig: On the Discovery Lodge. On the site plan on that what I was waiting for on that I was told that the money that we reappropriated through the state as soon as it comes in Morley has sent me back a figure price and I will get that to you.

President Jerrel: Okay, and then we can act on it.

Steve Craig: You can act on that when the money comes up.

Commissioner Mourdock: Have we looked at the pricing on that, Steve? I see a copy of the letter with the dollar amount here. Is that something where again you talked to several different people or how did we get that price?

Steve Craig: No, the thing from Morley, he had approached me, I think Danny Leek, and we had...John and I had talked to his new assistant at the time. When his assistant quit he came to me and explained to me, we went over this and what we were going to need. Just to get to square one we have to have everything that is done on that piece of paper and at the time he offered his services time and material just to do it and whatever it came up to and we decided that we would probably want a number which we had talked about it might make the price go up a little bit, but he had came back and is going to put up to but not to exceed price which I think--

Commissioner Mourdock: That was the language I read that I just wanted to clarify because there is such a thing as a not to exceed price and this says, and I quote:

President Jerrel: Right.

Joe Harrison, Jr.: I'm sure he could go back and have him--

President Jerrel: I'm sure he would change that, don't you?

Joe Harrison, Jr.: --change that.

Commissioner Mourdock: Let's just clarify that, it's a not to exceed price.

Joe Harrison, Jr.: And you want them to consider this next week or the week after anyway, so you can make--

Steve Craig: We were waiting...Joyce had talked to the lady from the state and as soon as that money was approved she is supposed to tell us so that well know and we were going to act on it then.

Joe Harrison, Jr.: You might want to contact them and see if you can get that changed. It would be not to exceed that amount, whatever that amount is.

Commissioner Mourdock: And, John, did you get a chance to look over this as far as the various engineering things that are being done? 

John Stoll: Yeah, I looked over it.

President Jerrel: Wasn't Dan--

Commissioner Mourdock: Danny Leek.

Steve Craig: Danny Leek.

President Jerrel: No, no, I'm talking our Dan--

John Stoll: Farvardin.

President Jerrel: Yeah, our--

John Stoll: Former assistant.

President Jerrel: --former assistant who was going to work on this and thats the reason that we went this way or that Steve started looking for somebody since we didn't have a man in the house. Okay, well we're going...as soon as we find out about the appropriation okay from the Tax Commissioners we'll come back and do this. 

Steve Craig: Okay. Another thing, I guess we ought to set up a time where we can hash over these buildings because it's a unique position that we're in. Some of our buildings have, you know, really good smoke eaters in them. We installed them when we remodeled them and some of them are screened in buildings, you know, and--

Commissioner Mourdock: By way of suggestion I would say the next time your advisory group gets together have them make a recommendation back to us. 

President Jerrel: You're going to go--

Commissioner Tuley: Excellent suggestion.

President Jerrel: Your staff needs to look at that. You all need to...you've got a better handle than we have.

Steve Craig: Yeah, we kind of, you know, we went through them and there is no smoking...I mean, you can smoke in all of them. We went in every one of them and all you can smell is cedar, you know, because we've got the ceiling cedar, the walls are cedar, you know, that was part of our game plan. We always had a problem a long time ago of them smelling smoky, musty, like beer, you know, if there was a beer party the night before. We did one building in cedar and we come the next day after it's cleaned and it smells like cedar, so that was the point I brought up. If you rent the building on Saturday and next Friday night or Saturday it's rented, I mean, I don't know those smokes, secondhand smoke is dangerous. I didn't want to get...Im no expert on it. You know, we smelled more smoke in our buildings from our fireplaces than you do cigarettes now.

Commissioner Mourdock: Maybe we should cedar panel the jury rooms! 

President Jerrel: Let's just say...maybe we could...when is your next advisory meeting? 

Steve Craig: It should be the second Wednesday of this month. 

Commissioner Tuley: The 10th.

Steve Craig: I think it is. 

President Jerrel: Okay, well maybe we could...if you don't mind, would you want to send a note down here to Tony and I'll send it to the Commissioners and maybe one or more of us can come out when you have your advisory...then you can talk about it and then we can leave and they can make a recommendation to us. 

Steve Craig: Yeah, because I mean they would have to go out...they have not been in the buildings any more than maybe say you or, you know, other people that would make a decision whereas we should take the people out and let them see the buildings and that. I definitely think we ought to set chalets apart.

President Jerrel: I agree. 

Steve Craig: I mean, to me that's...we haven't had a lot of requests, but you know the ones we do I would like to take care of those. The swimming area, I agree with that too, but would this be just the area where they are swimming or would it be like the upper deck or would there be no place at all because the one guy brought up an interesting point. He said, you know, why don't we try to please everybody instead of just half the people, whether it be half non smokers or half the smokers. I don't know, you know, at the swimming pool area I wouldn't be against it banned from the swimming area all together, but do you allow the people to go off up in the woods up in the upper deck or something and smoke?

Commissioner Tuley: I would consider it being closed, the swimming area which is fenced off, the building, you know. Once you get beyond that I don't know how that would...that's part of the park and that's not totally banned.

Steve Craig: You know, like the concrete area around the pool and that stuff, to me that is the swimming area and then we have outer reaches even in the aquatic center. You know, like the one upper deck is 80 steps up and sits on the side of the hill.

Commissioner Tuley: But that's within that compound. I think it just makes it easier--

Commissioner Mourdock: Just by definition you're saying once you walk through that fence--

Commissioner Tuley: Once you pass through that gate you're in a non smoking area.

Steve Craig: Okay, well, see that goes back to the theory then we're really making half the people mad and half the people happy.

Commissioner Tuley: We make that happen every week when we vote.

Steve Craig: Yeah, I was wondering is there a solution where we could, you know, make everyone happy or try to at least appease everyone. I'm not saying that's my...I'm just saying the guy to me had an interesting point. You know, instead of trying to please just half of them why don't we try to please everybody.

Commissioner Mourdock: That's a noble goal, but it's an unachievable goal, Steve. I think it's...I think Pat's...I agree with him.

Commissioner Tuley: I think it would make it much easier on you and your crew if we just designated this whole area because then if you get them smoking here and someone comes walking down the steps smoking a cigarette and, oh, I just don't want to go into that.

Commissioner Mourdock: Let's alienate half of them and know which half it is.

Commissioner Tuley: Yeah.

Steve Craig: Okay.

President Jerrel: Okay, well, anyway let's see if we can't come to grips.

Steve Craig: I'll get you a date on the Advisory Board meeting and if you guys want to come and we'll all talk.

Commissioner Tuley: You know what you're probably going to end up with, Steve, you're going to end up with a lot of people walking out of there and standing outside that main entrance there smoking.

Steve Craig: That goes back, I mean, is that the complex? Do you run them down into the parking lot? Do you put them up in the woods?

Commissioner Tuley: No, really as far as...now, I don't know. Maybe it needs...I think I'm clear on it. Once they pass that gate and enter that complex they're inside and that's non smoking, but if they are standing outside and that's one way to maybe try to appease those others that you think maybe need to be appeased a little bit that way they don't have to walk 15 miles out of the park or out away from the pool, they can just walk out through that gate and be out front. 

President Jerrel: What you're saying too is that you can have a sign that clearly says--

Steve Craig: No smoking beyond this point.

Commissioner Tuley: No smoking beyond this point or whatever. That's what I'm trying to get at. Yeah, I'm not doing a very good job of it, but that's what I am trying to get at.

Steve Craig: Yeah, well, that's what I was kind of getting at. I mean, I didn't know because we do have a unique situation with the upper deck, but that's bringing back the point they walk down the deck and smoke when they are back into things again. Every building is going to be like that. We can have a non smoking building but then they smoke on the porch.

President Jerrel: Right.

Steve Craig: It's just a unique situation. Every building is different other than the chalets. 

President Jerrel: Well, we don't want to make it impossible and get caught up in the minutia, but I do think there is...we're here to support no smoking in public facilities.

Steve Craig: I agree.

President Jerrel: As best we can. Okay, thank you.

Steve Craig: Thank you. You all have a nice evening.

President Jerrel: You too.

Commissioner Mourdock: I'll move approval of the Burdette Park as filed...or Park report as filed.

Commissioner Tuley: Second.

President Jerrel: Alright, and I say so ordered.
 

Weekly reports

President Jerrel: How about Soil & Water District and Ozone?

Commissioner Mourdock: I'll move approval of the Soil & Water District and the Ozone Officer's report.

Commissioner Tuley: Second.

President Jerrel: So ordered.
 

Consent items

President Jerrel: You have the consent items in front of you. Do you have any questions about any of them or is there a motion?

Commissioner Mourdock: Motion to approve as filed.

Commissioner Tuley: Second.

President Jerrel: So ordered.
 

Old business

President Jerrel: Any old business? 

Commissioner Mourdock: We skipped scheduled meetings, but just to clarify we will not meet two weeks from tonight. 

President Jerrel: That's right.

Commissioner Mourdock: No old business.
 

New business

President Jerrel: Any new business?

Commissioner Tuley: No.

Commissioner Mourdock: One quick one. February 24th, which I believe is a Wednesday evening, West Side Improvement Association has asked us if we would like to attend their annual meeting. They're looking at several, surprise, west side issues, particularly Carpenter Creek, so I told them already I would be attending and make sure the two of you were aware.

President Jerrel: Thanks. Suzanne and I just talked, we're going to be in Indianapolis and likely...we could be back, but then we couldn't be too.

Commissioner Tuley: Yeah, what night is that? 

President Jerrel: The 24th.

Commissioner Mourdock: The 24th. 

President Jerrel: Is that a...?

Commissioner Tuley: Wednesday. I think I can probably be there. They'll have some issues I'm sure besides Carpenter Creek they would like to talk about.

Commissioner Mourdock: Right.

Commissioner Tuley: Traffic and--

President Jerrel: Well, if you would explain why I'm not--

Commissioner Tuley: One thing I did want to bring, it has nothing to do with ACommissioners' business, but Suzanne and Betty Hermann representing the GOP and Rick Borries and Pat Tuley representing the other side, the Democratic side, yeah, hosting the annual Hasenpfeffer on Saturday, February 27th at the Germania. 

Commissioner Mourdock: At 11:00 a.m. as I recall. I will do my best although I am supposed to be in a ten mile run that morning so we'll see if my ankle--

Commissioner Tuley: Well, go run and then come eat rabbit. 

Commissioner Mourdock: Drink beer!

Commissioner Tuley: Drink beer! You can drink beer if you run ten miles.

Commissioner Mourdock: Yes, I can. I can't drive, but...

President Jerrel: Okay, is there a motion to adjourn?

Commissioner Mourdock: So moved.

Commissioner Tuley: Second.

President Jerrel: So ordered.

The meeting was adjourned at 7:32 p.m.

Those in attendance:

Bettye Lou Jerrel Wayne Kirk 

Richard E. Mourdock Johnny Kincaid 

Patrick Tuley Susan Mulder

Joe Harrison, Jr. Kathy Allen

Suzanne M. Crouch Daniel Tweedall

Charlene Timmons Doug Knight

Tony Greubel Carl Heldt

Jerry Bryan Jim Daniels

Tim Suenram Brian Majors

Harris Howerton Steve Craig

Russell Lloyd John Stoll

Eric Williams Erik Bentle

Sally Britt Others unidentified

Members of the media
 

Vanderburgh County
Board of Commissioners

Bettye Lou Jerrel, President

Richard E. Mourdock, Vice President

Patrick Tuley, Member

Recorded and transcribed by Charlene Timmons.