VANDERBURGH COUNTY

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS

JUNE 9, 2003

The Vanderburgh County Board of Commissioners met in session this 9^th day of June, 2003 at 5:35 p.m. in Room 307 of the Civic Center Complex with President David Mosby presiding.

President Mosby: I would like to call to order Board of Commissioners meeting of Vanderburgh County, June the 9^th, 2003. Introductions are as follows; Tammy McKinney, Superintendent of Buildings; Kevin Winternheimer, Corporate Counsel; Commissioner Fanello; myself; Commissioner Crouch; Auditor, Bill Fluty; and Recording Secretary, Madelyn Grayson. Please stand and say the Pledge.

(The Pledge of Allegiance was given.)

President Mosby: Thank you. Do I have a motion to approve the minutes of the June 2^nd meeting?

Commissioner Fanello: So moved.

Commissioner Crouch: Second.

President Mosby: I have a motion and a second. So ordered.

President Mosby: First up, Phil Lawrence, permission to open bids for batteries.

Phil Lawrence: We opened APA008-2003, batteries, at the Board of Public Works meeting this morning. This is a quickie. We haven’t put any time into looking at any numbers. These are raw numbers. The two bidders were Holderfield Battery and Batteries Plus. I would like permission to take those under advisement.

Commissioner Fanello: So moved.

Commissioner Crouch: Second.

President Mosby: Motion to take bids under advisement. So ordered. Is there anything else?

Phil Lawrence: No. I’m done.

President Mosby: That’s it, huh? Okay.

President Mosby: Next Joanne Alexandrovich. Eight hour ozone designation.

Joanne Alexandrovich: Yeah, I’m Joanne Alexandrovich, the County Ozone Officer, and I would like to thank you for allowing me to speak today. Before I start I would like to introduce Dona Bergman, she’s the Director of the City of Evansville EPA, with whom I’ve been working quite closely. There may be some others in the audience who are interested in this issue tonight. I’m here to discuss nonattainment designations for the eight hour ozone standard. For background I submitted a brief issue report. As I move along, and maybe before we start, if you have any questions please ask. Okay. This issue has been pending for a long time. However, I waited to speak with you until today because we were waiting for the USEPA to issue a proposed implementation rule. That was issued on May 14^th. I was hoping that the rule would give us some idea of how a nonattainment designation would actually affect Vanderburgh County. I can tell you a little bit of how it might. Where are we now? Currently the monitors in Vanderburgh County do not measure in exceedance of the standard, they don’t violate the standard. So, we’re technically, I suppose, in attainment. We are expecting to see a dramatic improvement in ozone levels, lowering of ozone levels next year, because of reductions of oxides of nitrogen by utilities. The so called NOxSIP call is requiring utilities all over the eastern half of the U.S. to reduce their NOx, one of the ozone precursors. By the way none of the local sources required to reduce NOx emissions are located in Vanderburgh County. They are all outside of our county. Just on Wednesday IDEM indicated that they will be advising the governor most likely to recommend Posey, Warrick and Vanderburgh County as nonattainment for the eight hour ozone standard. Posey County currently right now is the only monitor in this part of Indiana that has recorded a violation. That’s, I think, why they’re doing that. What will this designation mean for us? Our values are very close to the standard. That’s kind of why our next door neighbors have gotten an exceedance, and we’re in compliance with the standard. Because of our levels, we’re not likely to require new pollution control on small businesses, like gas stations. Also it’s very highly unlikely that we’ll have to implement any emissions inspection program for vehicles. So, that, I don’t anticipate that coming down the road. However, the proposed rules have options and we don’t know what final option will be chosen, but going by USEPA’s preferred option, that won’t be likely. The one thing that will affect us, and could affect us dramatically, is we’ll be required to implement nonattainment new source review, or otherwise known as NSR. What that means is until we’re redesignated in attainment, probably around 2007, any major source wishing to move here, anything that’s 100 tons per year of NOx or VOC, or an existing source that wants to upgrade at 40 tons per year will have to implement the lowest achievable emissions rate. Which is basically the best controls you can put on a plant, and also obtain offsets. So, if they are going to emit 40 tons more in Vanderburgh County, they are going to have to offset that somehow by finding reductions in the region. USEPA in their proposal may provide some relief to these new source review requirements, but that would mean we would need to submit a plan by April of next year. I’m not sure we’ll be able to do this. It may require complex modeling, and rule making, as you may know, that is a slow process. Additionally, the EPA is also reforming their new source review rules, and it’s not clear how this reform will affect our nonattainment new source review, should we have to be under that rule. So, where we’re going from here, I’ll be keeping, and I have already been keeping a close eye on the ozone values as the season progresses. There’s a table in the back of your briefing that may need some explanation, but that kind of gets us to where we need to be. I’ll make sure that I notify you if any of our six monitors in Posey, Vanderburgh and Warrick show a violation of this standard. We’re still a little ways away. So, we’re still in compliance. We’re continuing our ozone alert forecasting, in order to protect public health, as well as ask the public and industry to make voluntary emissions reductions, if they can. How this forecasting program works, we basically have emissions all the time. People drive their cars, and operate their factories, but one thing about ozone is it’s very dependent on the weather. So, we keep a close eye on the weather and the weather forecast, and when conditions are favorable, or right for ozone, that’s when we implement an alert. Dona helps me with that. Also, which I mentioned in my briefing, we are working on putting together a set of materials in support of either two cases for Vanderburgh County. Either an attainment recommendation, or a deferred recommendation. We’ll send that information to IDEM, the USEPA, and the governor as well. I might in a week or two ask this Board to submit a letter backing this recommendation. You might decide to write a letter, or contact the governor yourself. Finally, we will remain diligent in trying to keep emissions down in the region, both through planning process and emission controls, because good air quality is extremely important for public health. Any questions?

President Mosby: Questions?

Commissioner Crouch: If I understand you correctly, you are under the impression that the recommendations to the governor currently are going to be that Vanderburgh County be in nonattainment along with other counties, even though, currently, we are in attainment.

Joanne Alexandrovich: That’s correct.

Commissioner Crouch: And tell me in simple, layman terms why that, you know, why that is. I have the utmost respect for you and Dona, and, you know, I think we’re very, very fortunate to have two individuals of your quality here in Vanderburgh County, and working in county government. But, explain to me why that’s being considered, and if you have any idea of what the economic ramifications of that would be for Vanderburgh County.

Joanne Alexandrovich: Okay, first let me thank you for your support, on behalf of Dona and myself. The question on why IDEM is choosing to recommend those three counties when Vanderburgh County shows attainment, is asking me to interpret their thoughts, which they haven’t explained very well. I will say that comes from EPA guidance which says to look at the MSA, or the metropolitan statistical area as the causative factor. The emissions coming from the more populated area. So, our MSA actually also includes Henderson County, but they’re not recommending anything for Kentucky states. The governor of Kentucky will send that to USEPA. You can make that area larger or smaller according to USEPA guidance, depending on what things like emissions inventories look like. How the weather affects the ozone problems is (inaudible) an issue. Where new development might be occurring. IDEM has also said in the past they considered that Gibson might be sort of part of our MSA now, and possibly within the next year or so the office of management and budget might show that to be the case. They set the boundaries. Why they are saying this, I think there is also an historical factor here. If you look at the recommendations, they don’t use that MSA requirement for some of the other places. For instance, Dearborn and Ohio County near Cincinnati, it’s part of the Cincinnati MSA. Cincinnati has got worse ozone levels than we do, but IDEM is recommending those for attainment. So, did that answer that question?

Commissioner Crouch: Out of the 92 counties, how many have actual monitors in them?

Joanne Alexandrovich: I think it’s around 25. I could tell you exactly. I would have to look it up. I think it’s around 25.

Commissioner Crouch: A simple kind of comment would be that it seems that those of us who have monitors, who are taking measures and working very hard to be on top of this situation are maybe being treated a little differently than perhaps counties that don’t have monitors in them?

Joanne Alexandrovich: That’s true. That’s true around the country, not only in Indiana. It’s what’s known as the monitoring disincentive. If you’re not required to install a monitor based on population benchmarks, you’re better off not installing one. Because if you don’t monitor a violation, you don’t have to address it. Unfortunately, that doesn’t address possible public health implications.

Commissioner Crouch: And there would be an economic impact on us being declared in nonattainment, is that not correct?

Joanne Alexandrovich: Yeah. If there were potential industries that wanted to move into Vanderburgh County, or let’s put Posey and Warrick together as the nonattainment area, it’s a high probability that they would just look elsewhere. Because of that nonattainment designation, the expenses of the controls, and the expense is going to vary based on the industry. Utilities were asked to reduce their NOx because it was the most cost effective thing. If you’ve read anything about it, those controls are costing utilities millions. So, it’s not cheap. Also getting the emissions offsets is something that locally we haven’t done. I’m not sure Indiana has been all that successful in finding offsets. So, that’s a big deal. There’s kind of an opposite economic effect on all of this. One thing that comes with a nonattainment designation is something called CMAQ, congestion mitigation air quality road funds. Which I know you guys have heard about. If we’re in nonattainment, we will lose, excuse me, if we go into attainment we’ll lose the funds that we had previously. Which I spoke to Rose Zigenfus, and I think locally it’s about $450,000. Was it $450,000?

Commissioner Fanello: John, don’t we have a project that we just got some CMAQ funds for?

John Stoll: Green River/Millersburg.

Commissioner Fanello: Green River/Millersburg, and that project is, total cost on that project?

John Stoll: Around a million.

Commissioner Fanello: How much are CMAQ funds?

John Stoll: 80/20.

Commissioner Fanello: Okay.

Joanne Alexandrovich: I think on average over the last ten years, since we went into nonattainment in 1990 for the previous standard, it’s been averaging about $450,000 a year. So, if we go into attainment, we would be sure to keep those funds. I’m not sure that’s the best way to look at it.

Commissioner Fanello: Well, we would have to come up with them, if we lost them. We’re already in design phase for the Green River/Millersburg Road. So, I don’t know if we would keep those.

Joanne Alexandrovich: Whatever is there, you would already have. They are reauthorizing the transportation act, and they may change the formulas. So, it may not be there anyway. Did I answer, I think, all the questions?

Commissioner Crouch: Yes, and I’d like to see this Commission really be very vocal and strong on the leaving Vanderburgh County in attainment.

Joanne Alexandrovich: Well, the EPA expects comments from the governor by July 15^th. So, if between now and July 15^th we stay in attainment of the standard, I think we have a case, so. Thanks.

President Mosby: Is there any other questions?

Commissioner Fanello: Just let us know when you get some kind of letter drafted.

President Mosby: I was going to say–

Joanne Alexandrovich: So, you would like me to draft a letter for you?

Commissioner Fanello: I think that would be very wise.

Joanne Alexandrovich: Okay.

President Mosby: With your information, if you’ll draft it, I mean, I’ll be more than glad to sign it.

Joanne Alexandrovich: Sure.

President Mosby: Or all three of us can sign it, or however we want to do it, but–

Joanne Alexandrovich: I anticipate within the next two weeks.

President Mosby: Just keep us informed of any info that you get, so that we can stay aggressively ahead of it.

Joanne Alexandrovich: I’ll do that.

President Mosby: Okay.

Joanne Alexandrovich: Thanks.

President Mosby: Thank you. Are there any other questions? Dona, did you want to add anything? I’m not trying to put you on the point.

Dona Bergman: Joanne and I are....my name is Dona Bergman, I’m the Director of the Evansville EPA. We have jurisdiction within the city of Evansville, and four miles out of the city limits, but not outside of Vanderburgh County. In addition to that we run and operate the monitors in Posey and Vanderburgh and Warrick counties that are showing these ozone levels. First off I would, I cannot imagine doing this job without Dr. Alexandrovich. She’s a tremendous researcher, she’s a wonderful number cruncher, great colleague. I really could not do my job without her. I really appreciate her friendship and her support. I’m a lot less of a scientist, and a lot more of an environmental geek, I guess, than Joanne is. Basically, the bottom line is if Vanderburgh, Posey and Warrick counties go into nonattainment for ozone, and especially if Henderson County in Kentucky doesn’t, then any economic development in this region is going to be south of the river. Now, that means we have no control over their emissions, we get no revenue from their taxes, their payroll is probably going to be more in Kentucky, and as far as, from my standpoint the worst thing is we’re going to still get their emissions. A good example of that is the Thoroughbred Power Generating station that was proposed for Muhlenburg County, Kentucky. That’s only 60 miles away as the crow flies, but it was going to put out 5,000 tons a year of nitrogen oxides. You cannot tell me that that wouldn’t have impacted our air quality. At least during some weather patterns. The other thing that I would really like to mention is Joanne’s research has shown that it’s not an upwind, downwind thing in this area. We’re sort of more like a large serving platter. Not really a valley, but a serving platter. Depending on the air mass, and where the air mas is coming from, we can get and receive ozone precursors from almost any area in this region. So, it’s definitely a regional problem. It’s definitely going to need a regional solution, not just designating one, or two, or three small counties nonattainment. Thank you.

President Mosby: Are there any questions? Thank you, Dona.

President Mosby: Next we have Community corrections.

Commissioner Fanello: I will go ahead and start that discussion. I attended the Council meeting last Wednesday, and if you remember we had asked the Council to take a look at adding some money onto the $2 million grant that we’re going to be receiving from the state for construction of a new community corrections facility. Several of those Councilmembers thought that maybe we could get better cost estimates. They thought the cost estimates were too high. I agreed to come back to this Commission and let you all know that. I’m sure you probably all read, obviously, read the articles in the newspaper, but they wanted us to explore lower cost estimates, because, you know, we’re facing, you know, some budget constraints. So, they’re trying to, you know, pinch dollars where they can. I spoke with Joe Fistrovich from the Department of Corrections, and he is the Finance Director there. He is the one that we met with when we, the Sheriff and I met with him originally. Then we went to our second meeting with a couple of the Councilmembers, he was in that meeting as well. The question from the Council was, you know, if we could extend the June 30^th date? Mr. Fistrovich’s advice was that we do not extend that date, due to the state needing money, and they would really like to know what our plan is, and how we plan to proceed spending the money. So, if we had to extend it one or two weeks, he thought we could ask for it, but he did not recommend it, because they were getting ready to go into some hearings over the next week or so about actually transferring money. If there was any indication that we weren’t going to use that money, we could lose it. So, he thought it would be in our best interest if we went ahead and got a letter to the state by June 30^th. So, I mean, I’ve done some research, and I’m sure both of you have as well, and probably talked to other people. So, I guess, I would just kind of open up for discussion.

President Mosby: First of all I’ll say that I did....Jimmie Raben, or Councilman Raben, President Raben called me on Thursday morning and asked me if I could meet with him, and I’ll just say a local contractor over community corrections costs. Because he thought the costs that United Consulting had give us as an estimate was very high. So, I agreed to meet with President Raben and a local contractor, because the costs that we were basically given were somewhere around $125 to $130 a square foot. He seemed to think it could be done for $70. Before I go into a lot of this, I’m going to go ahead and pass these out. What you’ll see here, and what I’m giving you is design guidelines for Community corrections facilities, and then three or four facilities that have just been completed recently, explaining a lot of how the architects have come to the conclusion they’ve come to on their price. So, on the second page you’ll see three facilities and the square footage number that these facilities cost, and how big they were. On the front you’ll see the guidelines that have been set by the American Correctional Association. When I met with Jimmie and the local contractor, and the local contractor was basically told if I wanted to build a 23,000 square foot building, what would it cost me? Well, that’s a good start, but it’s not going to get you to where you need to be. Because the thing that you have to keep in mind when you are looking at it is, number one, we want to be as conservative as possible. When we talked to the architects, and I’ve talked to them on several different occasions, we told them we wanted nothing more than what we had to have. But, you have to have the guidelines and the codes that have been set forward. Basically, what it amounts to is if you look at this structure, regardless if you want to fully sprinkle the structure or not, it’s going to have to be fully sprinkled for fire. The structure will have to have fire rated exterior walls, and possibly some fire rated interior walls, due to the fact that it is housing residential people. You have to have one shower per eight males, or females. You have to have one toilet per eight females. You have to have one toilet per ten males, and half can be urinals. You have to have one wash basin per six males or females. This facility will have to have cameras, recording equipment, and monitoring equipment in the dorm and on the exterior. Occupancy separation is something that you have to take into consideration. Facility/operations rating, and that’s something that the Sheriff is going to have to get involved with. It’s not something that I can, at this point, tell, you know, the architects. When I say that it becomes much more restrictive if it’s institutional, and it’s less restrictive and cheaper if it’s residential. That will be determined by the way the Sheriff decides to house these people. The corridor attaching the facility, it’s not going to be just a door that opens and closes. It’s like they said, due to the American Correctional Association, these doors will have to be steel, they will have to be sliding, and if somebody would decide to come out of the jail, as we were transporting a community corrections person back and forth, they have to be locked down if somebody is going to try to escape. These are some of the things, I don’t think, that people are taking into consideration when they say, oh, yeah, we can build it. I mean, I talked to three people today, local contractors, people that have done this for probably 30, 40 years that said if you told me that you wanted to put up a shell, I would probably give you that price. Depending on what kind of fixtures you need in it, what’s going to be on the floor, what’s going to be on the walls, he said, nobody, three different people told me, said nobody can give you a price on that, because they have no bids, they have no specs to bid off of. So, we cannot give you that. I think what we really need to do, we need to look at getting an architect on board, and let the architect maybe meet with some of the local people. I’m all in favor of that. I would love to see us meet with the locals. Let’s show them what, you know, the standards and the codes are going to be, and based on the ACA, you know, make them familiar with it. Maybe they can give us what they think would be a close estimate, so that we can be as conservative as possible, and build, you know, what we can afford. I would hate to see this Commission jump out and think for $70 a square foot that we’re going to build a community corrections facility, which will equal to about 256 beds, 23,087 square feet, at $70 a square foot. We design that, we bid it out, and we can’t build it, we’re going to turn right around, folks, and pay to redesign it again. It’s not going to be the architects fault when we do that. It’s going to be our fault for jumping the gun. I think we really need to be conservative. We need to get an architect on board. Somebody that can sit down with some of the locals, explain how much plumbing and whatever is going to go into this building, and see what it can be built for, and we need to design it off of that. We don’t need to say that it’s going to cost us $70 a square foot, and jump out and bid something. We’re going to design something and bid it out, and we can’t build it. If we have no extra money, and the $2 million is all that’s available to us, we’ve made one big mistake. That’s where I stand, and as I said, you know, you’ve got comparisons here that shows you Hancock County was built for $161 a square foot, Dubois was built for $118 a square foot, LaGrange $140 a square foot. Dubois is a pre-engineered metal building, the same as we was talking to a local contractor about. It’s just hard for me to believe with all these prices that $70 a square foot in Evansville, or half of what some of these other counties are, is going to fly. I don’t believe that, and I think we need to do some education here first, and then look at what we could possibly build for $2 million. I’m open to any questions.

Commissioner Crouch: This is more of a legal question. Is there anyway we can ask for requests for proposals without going through the formal bid process to see if there are people, local companies out there that given the information that’s been shared with us today, would give us some idea of what was feasible?

Commissioner Fanello: Well, how are you going to put out a request for proposal when you don’t have any specs–

President Mosby: We don’t have any–

Commissioner Fanello: to propose? These aren’t specs here, these are standards.

President Mosby: That was the problem I was running into Thursday when I met with President Raben and a local person. You know, there is no specs on what we really need. It’s kind of like are you going to have two doors in this building? Or are you going to have 52 doors? 52 is going to cost more than two. We have, you know, that’s why I mentioned the plumbing. You know, we can’t just put 12 showers in for 256 people. The code says you will put one in for every eight. So, we have nothing to bid off of. We have nothing to get a request for proposals on. What I say is we do, we get an architect on board who can go out and meet with the contractors and get an idea of what they think the cost would be based on the restrictions and the codes that we’re going to be under, and then come back and say maybe it’s going to come in at $100 a square foot, we can design something off of that, and then bid it out.

Commissioner Crouch: So, the issue is, if I’m understanding correctly, and I might not be, but we’re wanting to see what we can get for $2 million, and we’re wanting to see if there are local companies that perhaps, you know, can be competitive in that process. If that’s the case, is there any merit in sending these specs out and seeing if we get any response from local companies? And telling them that $2 million is our budget.

President Mosby: I would hope–

Commissioner Crouch: Not specs, but guidelines. Whatever these codes are.

Commissioner Fanello: Well, these are guidelines. It’s not a building program or a design. What needs to happen is an architect needs to work with local contractors and come up with specs so that we can bid it out on the open market. I think, I was a little confused last week by what Councilman Raben was saying, because I got the impression, and I could have, you know, been wrong, but I got the impression that he wanted us to go get one local contractor, and have that local contractor come up with the specs and do the project. Well, as I understand it, and, Kevin, correct me if I’m wrong, but, I mean, these kind of projects have to be bid out. So, I think what we’re saying here is that we need to get an architect on board who can, excuse me, talk with local contractors, and explain these guidelines to them, and see, you know, what they think after they see these guidelines. Because, I spoke with a local developer this morning who told me the exact same thing that Commissioner Mosby, and I don’t even think, I don’t even know if it was the same developer, but who told me that I can build you a shell of a building for that price, but I can’t tell you what it is to finish out the interior until you spec it out. I said, well, you know, depending on what standards are involved, are the prices going to increase? And he said, most definitely. So, until you can give me something to bid off of, I can’t give you an estimate. So, we need to have specs. You know, just like we’re going to have, like, I don’t know how many...I’ve been told we’re going to have four volumes for the jail as a bid package. I mean we need to have a bid package going out.

Commissioner Crouch: But, and, I guess, my legal question was never answered. Is there, you know, does the process allow for that? I know we went through that with the jail design, that we had requests for proposals, and consultants, and architectural people submitted proposals. I mean, is there, does the process allow for that?

Kevin Winternheimer: Are you talking about to select the architect? Is that what you’re talking about?

Commissioner Crouch: No, I’m saying does the process allow for us to give these guidelines out, or to somehow advertise them, or to put them out there, and see if there are local companies who would give us requests for proposals, or, you know, give us an indication that this is something that they would be able to do for $2 million.

Kevin Winternheimer: I do not think that would be practical in and of itself for the reasons that were stated here. Before they get down to talking prices, they need to know a lot more details I think than what you’ve got here. I think that’s what Mr. Mosby is talking about is having the architect sit down with some of the contractors and say, just give us some ballpark figures of what you’re talking about. I mean, you could, but I don’t think you’re going to get a meaningful response. Particularly if you’re looking at about two weeks getting that response back before the deadline. I think if that’s what, if you’re trying to get some rough estimates, I think you’ve got to move ASAP on that to give them time to even give it some consideration to get a price. Because it varies so much as to what the final end product is. I know, I’ve seen projects where this is a little bit analogous on a design and build, and you can get a very cheap product when you do a design and build. Unless you are very careful, it’s not going to be the product you anticipated, because the assumption is that you want the cheapest possible, not the cheapest workable. That’s, the architect will give you, try to give them guidelines as to what is, in fact, workable, not the cheapest thing that will meet the specification, or these general guidelines, because that may not be, in fact, what you want. There probably are a hundred different ways of accomplishing these different rough guidelines. They are just rough guidelines without giving them anything meaningful. That would be like saying design me a house for my family. I mean, okay, what do you want? You know, it could be anything from a one bedroom to a five bedroom. What do you want? What do you need? What can you afford? Just saying these are the guidelines, I need something for prisoners, and, you know, that doesn’t tell them a whole lot. I don’t think the contractors...there is so many different ways to accomplish the task.

Commissioner Fanello: As I understand it, I mean, these are just some, look like some bullet point guidelines, as I understand it from talking with an architect today. There a 115 page document that governs community correction facilities. One chapter of that document is devoted to, you know, building a facility, and the building of the facility comes after the many chapters of how you’re going to run the facility. So, there is a lot of detailed, intricate information in here, and putting a piece of paper out with some bullet points on it, is not going to get us back the information we need.

Commissioner Crouch: I agree we need to hold to the June 30^th deadline. We’ve known about that for some time. What exactly does the state need from us by June 30 in order to commit that money?

Commissioner Fanello: They need a plan on how we’re going to proceed, or how we’re going to spend the money. If, you know, we were to go ahead and say we’re going to contract with an architect and get this thing moving, that would make them happy. If we’re just going to sit around here for the next three or four weeks and try to come up with pie in the sky estimates, then, no, that’s not going to make them happy. They want some firm commitment that we’re moving forward.

President Mosby: I guess, some of what I was, I guess, trying to get at, maybe in a little bit more detail is, I think, even before, I guess, an architect would sit down with local contractors, an architect is also going to have to sit down with the Sheriff and decide how this facility is going to be run. My understanding is I think there is what they call institutional and a residential. Institutional being very much more restrictive.

Brad Ellsworth: Like a prison.

President Mosby: Right, and it’s a whole lot more expensive. If it’s more residential, from what I understand, there’s more freedom to go, which also gives you less fire rating on your walls, because if there’s doors leading to the outside, in the case of an emergency or a fire, where somebody could hit a button, and in 15 seconds the doors will unlock, and let them go out into a fenced in area. It’s cheaper in the residential route than it is the institutional route. We have to sit, you know, an architect is going to have to sit down with the Sheriff and decide this before he can really even give a contractor an idea of how restrictive they are going. If it’s restrictive and it’s institutional, your interior walls are going to be three and four “r’s” fire rated, due to the...I mean, we have a definite, you know, liability there if we’ve got 250 people locked in a building, and something happens.

Commissioner Crouch: Refresh my memory, when we hired the current architect for the jail, did we not hire them and pay them to do the jail, community corrections, and juvenile detention combination of all three? So, we are going to be paying additional architectural fees on top of that?

President Mosby: Right. When we ended up in the final negotiations with the architect, we negotiated with them to build a jail facility, not to exceed $35 million, and that’s how we ended up at the 500 beds, and went from there. We really went backwards at it. We backed out of it rather than go forward. No, we had just a contract to build a jail facility. This facility will be hooked to the jail facility with a corridor to be able to utilize some of the support out of the jail facility. So, that we can utilize some of that.

Commissioner Fanello: Just as a refresher, I mean, when we took, we did not take requests for proposals, you know, in the jail when we hired the architect. We took request for qualifications and, I think, we got about ten or 12 back, and we narrowed it down to less than six, I think, and then brought them all in and interviewed them in a Commission meeting. So, those were all based on requests for qualifications, because at that time we weren’t even, excuse me, I’ve got a cold. We weren’t even sure we were going to build a community corrections facility or juvenile detention facility, because we weren’t sure what the budget was going to be. There was discussion of whether the $35 million was the total budget, or was it a $35 million construction budget. I think that led to some confusion, because when the Council said $35 million, there was some confusion that, as I understood it from people that they did not know if that meant $35 million construction dollars, or $35 million project dollars. There’s a difference. The total project includes hard costs and soft costs. Construction dollars is construction dollars. So, but we did just take requests for qualifications when we hired the jail architect. Does the Sheriff have anything that he would want to add?

President Mosby: Are there any other questions by any member of the Commission? Any comments that you would like to make?

Brad Ellsworth: Brad Ellsworth, Sheriff of Vanderburgh County. I think this is the document, it’s the ACA local detention facilities document that you were referring to. It’s kind of strange, because it refers more to prisons and not jails, because those are different standards, the AJA puts those out. It does call in to community corrections, and how secure, like Commissioner Mosby was saying, how secure we’re going to make this. We are going to be able to save some money, I think, because this won’t be an institutional grade building. We’re not going to need the, we’ll probably have push bar escape doors on the dorms that they can go out. We’ll just send the troops out to round them back up. We wouldn’t need the perimeter fence, because these people are sentenced, and if they get out, it’s a bad thing, but where we have our Safe House now, if they go out the back door, we put out alerts and put out warrants for them. So, there’s things that we’ll have to do, because of fire ratings, and they are residential, and certain codes when you house people. There are certain things in these standards that we won’t have to do. Some will just be for, like Commissioner Mosby said, running the facility. You can’t have 250 people in there with one toilet to service them all, or one shower. That will be, you know, the guideline is 12, or one per 12, and those are pretty good guidelines to follow to try to get people out to work, and things like that. So, I don’t know what else to really add at this point. Unless you have questions for me, and my point of view.

Commissioner Fanello: Do you have a point of view?

Brad Ellsworth: I’ve forgotten, if I did, I’ve forgotten at this point. We’ve discussed a lot, I wish I had, you know, more to add at this point. There are a lot of intricacies there. Some of the security things that, you know, the computers have to talk back and forth. The thing that is going to save us money in this is that our community correction guards are able to walk over to the jail. We’re going to be using some of the guards from over there, and because we can reduce guards over there, is that we are going to not have to hire so many in the jail. The computer system will all be the same, the security system will be the same. The fact that central control in the jail will operate some of the things over at community corrections, those are all things that are going to save us money, but they are also things that add costs to that just, you know, our term is the over glorified pole barn sitting out there by itself. So, I think it is one project. It is, you know, the only way we’re going to make this work, I think, is opening it on the same day, so that all those employees can be there, they’re in place, and some will work at community corrections, some will work in the jail. It’s, I think it’s an inter-mixed project. We’re not going to just see one go up, and then the other, and then expect them to talk to each other and interact. Other than that, I would answer any questions from what you all heard.

President Mosby: Are you comfortable with what you heard tonight?

Brad Ellsworth: Absolutely.

President Mosby: I mean, getting an architect on board who will work with you. I mean, and you just said something a minute ago with the residential that we didn’t even need the perimeter fence. That was something we were talking about today, to have a fenced in area, but you say we don’t need it. I mean, that’s fine.

Brad Ellsworth: I don’t think you would have to have that like this guideline says, because you’re letting them out to go to work at 8:00 in the morning, if there would be a fire, let’s get them out of there. If they go 100' instead of 50, I think we’re okay. I think it’s different than a preajudicated inmate.

President Mosby: I guess, that’s why I think they need to talk with the Sheriff, and he can maybe tell them some of the things we don’t need in turn of two or three people I was talking to today. I mean, these are some of the things they thought we would need. You might be able to enlighten them to where we can save money. I mean, because we have to be very cost conservative here.

Brad Ellsworth: There could be some confusion over a document that Chief Williams and I provided, and it was more, and we were really trying to show how simple this could be, you know, what we were really needing. Basically, it was two or three classrooms, or a large classroom with the sliding walls to cut into three. Possibly, if we go with the bigger number, two male dorms, one female, but actually able to be seen by one guard at one time. You know, two guards guarding these inmates at any one time. Of course, the bathroom facilities we didn’t draw in. Offices for the case managers and those employees, but, I think, like I said, that was our rendition done on a home computer, not an architectural design. So, I think that’s what some people took to people and said, what can you build this square for. It had none of the guts. I don’t want to say that led to confusion, but that was the shell saying this is something about as simple as we need, but it didn’t show any of the wires and the toilets.

President Mosby: I’ve seen it, but I don’t have a copy of it. That is the document that I think was being passed around.

Brad Ellsworth: It was a good thing, but it was just an example of how, you know, how simple of a building we really need as far as a floor outlay, but there’s more to it than that.

Commissioner Fanello: Sheriff, let me ask you, now our current architect who’s working on the jail, I know you’ve spent a lot of time with them here and up in Indianapolis, and I know you’ve discussed community corrections with them. Do you feel they have a good understanding, and are you satisfied? You’ve told us that before in the meeting that you’ve been very satisfied with them.

Brad Ellsworth: Usually community corrections, and we’ve been going into this truly as if, not as if we were going to do it, we knew it was an option, but it always was there in the discussions that if we do this, then we have to do this. So, we’ve kind of–

Commissioner Fanello: So, they’ve been kind of working and they’ve kind of laid out this master plan of the jail and what could happen if we put community corrections, and what could happen if we put a juvenile center–

Brad Ellsworth: And connect that, and that’s the way we’ve done these staffing...in fact, we presented at the Council last week was, we presented three different staffing plans; one with the jail alone, the 512 bed jail, then one with 144 beds. But all that kind of intermingles, that staffing design is around if we meld those two entities together, the supervision and all that.

Commissioner Fanello: I guess, what I’m trying to get at is there is a base of knowledge there from working with them.

Brad Ellsworth: Absolutely, and we’ve talked about, and they’ve really talked about it. They know that we don’t need jail type hardware in community corrections. We’ve always talked about this, I don’t know what they call it, the pre-engineered steel.

Commissioner Fanello: Pre-engineered metal building.

Brad Ellsworth: The only thing I’ve heard that we might get concrete a few feet up in the, what we call the living area so that you don’t see this metal siding get dented and a rock from a lawnmower, you know, gets thrown up and this thing looks like trash next to a new building in a matter of a year. I know the estimates, and what they’ve said from day one, and we won’t know until the bids come in what this thing is going to cost. But, I know the estimates on the jail were anywhere from $180 to $220 per square foot. The $220 may be high, and this one they were looking at $119 (Inaudible. Tape flipped to other side) the cheaper construction building. But, there are going to be things that we can incorporate; the security consultant, the kitchen consultant, that’s a mute point, because the kitchen is totally in community, or in the jail. The security consultant, Arnold O’Sheridan, I think, is the name of the company. That’s things that he’s going to be able to do while he’s working on the jail, you know, how many cameras do we need over here in this thing that is not going to double an expense. I’m fine, I think everybody wants to save money, and spend as little as we can, but they’re so ingrained in this project, and the two projects are so ingrained together, I’m comfortable with them.

President Mosby: Are there any other questions? Or any comments? Anybody in the audience?

Commissioner Fanello: Well, I would say to get us to where we need to be with the DOC, that because of the synergies that exist currently with the current architect working on the jail, and the knowledge, the base of knowledge that they have developed with Sheriff Ellsworth and Chief Deputy Williams, that we go ahead and proceed contracting with them to design a community corrections facility that will come in at a $2 million, with our $2 million budget.

Commissioner Crouch: I am speaking from memory, but I was under the impression that the $35 million budget that was set in place by County Council was for the jail project, which would include not only the jail, but community corrections and juvenile detention. And that the architects that were hired would be doing work for all three of those. Now, Commissioner Mosby shared with me tonight that at some point in time in the final negotiations that changed, and I wasn’t aware of that. I guess, if that in fact is the case, and the $35 million budget is for the jail only, and the fees that are being charged are for that facility only, and we’re not looking at a $2 million budget for a new facility, I believe we should go out for requests for qualifications again for, you know, for architects to do the community corrections with a new budget, and as a separate project.

Commissioner Fanello: Well, help me to understand why when we have an architect on board that has a base of knowledge, and has been working on the project for two years, and, basically, knows how the community corrections facility is going to work with the jail facility. Excuse me, help me to understand what could be gained by that, when if we brought a new architect on board, they would have to go back and, basically, redo what’s been done.

Commissioner Crouch: Well, and my point is that the $35 million, and the architectural contract, and the fees that were put in place, in my opinion, was for anything connected to the jail project. So, if in fact that is not the case, and they’ve been doing work on community corrections, and we’ve now arrived at a point where we want to pay for the design of that facility and hire an architect, then I think in fairness we ought to treat it as a separate project. Even though it’s very intertwined, and go out for requests for qualifications. That’s my opinion. You may not agree with that.

Commissioner Fanello: Well, I don’t agree with it, because I think it’s more political in nature than anything. You know, they have worked for the past two years, you know, helping us, and they have out of the goodness of their heart come up with a lot of this information and not got paid for it. Community corrections was not part of the project. When we sat here and negotiated the contract, we knew that. Everybody sitting at this table in an open meeting knew that $35 million was not going to build a jail, a community corrections facility, and a juvenile detention facility. So, that was not the contract negotiated when Commissioner Mourdock was sitting here. I mean, under what you’re saying, then I would have to say that, you know, the community corrections project should be coming out of the $35 million then, if I’m understanding what you’re saying. That we should be building a juvenile detention and community corrections from the $35 million.

Commissioner Crouch: I think that was, as I understand it, the original intent of Council. That’s not the direction that we’re going in, and we’re getting $2 million from DOC.

Commissioner Fanello: I wish $35 million got us all three of those projects, but if you look at the projects built across the state, you’ll find that it doesn’t give you $35 million. I mean, I read the comments in the newspaper on Saturday from Councilman Raben, and I don’t really know what is all behind that, but I think what we need to look at here is taking a common sense approach to getting this done, and getting it done for the best bang for our buck. You know, they have developed a wealth of knowledge over the past two years from working with Sheriff Ellsworth and Chief Deputy Williams, and I can’t see just flushing that knowledge away, and, you know, bringing somebody on board who is going to have to go and, basically, get themselves up to speed and still work with our current architect. What we might run into is we might end up getting charged more, because now they are going to have to work with our current architect in understanding how this is going to work with the jail. So, actually, I think we could end up spending more money than saving money.

President Mosby: Let me just say something. In speaking with President Raben on Thursday, and President Raben said he was very aware of the fact that architectural engineering fees probably run between 7% and 8% of the total project. I think that’s why he thought United’s fees were very high in the document that he had looked out, not keeping in mind that United was looking at approximately a $4 million project. Knowing that the fees should be between 7% and 8%, you know, that is something we will keep in mind before we ever sign anything, so that we can be very cost conservative, and that we would probably look at something cheaper than 7%, due to the fact, and I think the Sheriff mentioned it a minute ago, when you look at your security and you look at your cameras and your recording equipment, they are all going to be hooked into one central location, which is going to be over in the jail, and that will be monitored, I think, in that one location. So, it’s only going to make sense that we have one architect who is going to work on all this, and he will put in the cameras, and he will know where the cameras and the recording equipment need to be, and he’ll know exactly how all this hooks in to one central location in that jail. Keeping in mind that he knows the design of that building, he will know where to design that corridor that goes over to the community corrections, and it’s going to be the most feasible, cost conservative way to get from one to the other. I think we’re going to be, I think we’re going to defeat our own purpose if we try to get two architects on one project that have to be hooked together. I mean, we’ve got one guy over here trying to decide where to put cameras and recording equipment and where to put a corridor. When we’ve got an architect over here that’s already built the building. I think, you know, we know, and President Raben said it that fees need to be between 7% and 8%. We are very aware of that, and on $2 million I can pretty well figure, you know, what that needs to be, and I can assure this community we will be cost conservative, and we will look at that and we’ll make sure we get a whole lot better deal.

Commissioner Crouch: You know, we very well might end up with the same architect for both, if we do go out for request for qualifications. I just think in fairness since they’ve turned into two separate projects, that would be the fair thing to do. We very well may end up with the same.

President Mosby: I don’t think they are two separate projects. I really don’t. I mean, I heard the Sheriff stand right here and say that all along they have talked about this, and how they can intermingle the detention officers, the correction officers, and how they can work together staffing wise, the whole nine...I mean, they are going to be hooked together with a corridor, the cameras, the recording equipment, everything is going to operate the same. They are not two separate projects. The only reason they became two separate projects is because this county decided not to fund both of them and do both projects at the same time. Luckily, with the help of the Sheriff and members of this Commission, we were able to secure $2 million we didn’t have. $2 million we don’t have to add one penny to, and this has become a viable project now. It is one project. It is not two projects.

Commissioner Fanello: I would just add, you know, we took requests for qualifications from about 12 different architects, and those are still the same architects today, as I understand it that are out there, but if I thought that we were saving money, or doing anything that would benefit us by sitting here and choosing a different architect, I would, you know, I would agree with you, but with the synergies that are in place right now, I don’t really see how that would really be logical.

Brad Ellsworth: Brad Ellsworth. The only comment, additional comment that I would make is, the Commission it’s important to remember how many times, and I haven’t read the contract, the original contract with United/DLZ in a long time, but what was spelled out in there, I know that we and the Council or the Commission and the Council have asked them to go back to the drawing board a number of times. They’ve been in the old jail, and said go up in the old jail, and what do you think we can do with that. I know we went up, and they were doing measurements and square footage. We went to the old Safe House and did things there. They went with us to 20 different sites in this county and looked at things. You know, I just know we went back and said okay now go figure us a 40 bed facility. Or now go figure us a 200 bed facility. I know we’ve sent them back and forth to the drawing board several times, and, like I said, I don’t think that was an itemized bill. Now, we may be paying them a lot of money, but if it was itemized there’s a lot of stuff they could say not in the contract, not in the contract, not in the contract, and got away with it. Now, maybe, like I said, in order to do business that’s not a good way, but I think it’s important to remember that.

President Mosby: Have they ever refused you at any point on anything? That you know of.

Brad Ellsworth: Not me. I don’t know what they have with you or the Council, but it always sounded like we were back doing more work after–

President Mosby: I think they are working with you more than they are us. I mean, I just wondered if you ever had any problem at any point in time.

Brad Ellsworth: No. Not at all.

Commissioner Fanello: I would just say every time I’ve asked them for a cost estimate or an explanation on why something is being done, and I’ve sat in on some of the meetings that the Sheriff and Chief Williams have been in on with the architect, and, you know, I’m in a service business, and when you’re in a service business, you do do a lot of things that you don’t ever get compensated for. It happens that way because you want to develop a good client relationship, and I think they have gone above and beyond what they were originally contracted to do. So, I mean, I think they’ve been very helpful, and they’ve been very helpful when they’ve been working with the Sheriff and Chief Williams. So, like I said before, you know, I think there are synergies that exist there, and there’s a cost savings by having one architect on board, instead of hiring, you know, two architects. So, I would just move that we proceed with negotiating with the current architect to design this community correction facility, and live within our $2 million budget that was given by the state.

President Mosby: I was going to say, we had a motion on the floor to move forward and trying to see what we could get for $2 million and meet with local contractors of the community. Do I have a second? I will second that motion. So, the motion was to meet with United and try to come up with what we can get for a $2 million figure. I say so ordered.

Commissioner Fanello: I would just say that we need to go ahead and draft a letter to the DOC, and, I guess, since we only have two Commissioner doing that, that the letter will come from the President and Vice President. If Patty White would draft that letter, and we need to get that up there that we are proceeding with getting an architect on board, and securing the $2 million. You know, I’m happy that, you know, we are being very cost conservative here, and we’re trying to live within a budget, and, you know, having one architect instead of hiring two architects makes budget sense to me.

President Mosby: Any other comments?

Madelyn Grayson: May we make a tape change please?

President Mosby: Sure.

(Tape Change)

Madelyn Grayson: Thank you.

President Mosby: Moving on, public comment. Is there anybody from the public that would like to speak? Please come forward. Just state your name and address.

Tyra Sikkink: My name is Tyra Sikkink, and I own a home at 213 Washington Avenue. I’m here to discuss an incident that happened earlier today. I called the Mayor’s complaint line, because I was treated very disrespectful by Paul Hatfield today. The lady that answered the phone at the complaint line connected me to, I’m sorry, what was your name?

Patty White: Patty White.

President Mosby: Patty.

Tyra Sikkink: Patty.

President Mosby: Okay.

Tyra Sikkink: And she told me that she could discuss it with you guys. I thought as long as you were meeting tonight, I would come and explain it myself.

President Mosby: Okay.

Tyra Sikkink: As you all know the tax appeal process is not pleasant. I’m sure all of you have heard about it from people. So, it’s an unpleasant situation anyway. We were at the counter and the lady was helping us fill out the paperwork, and we had a few questions about it. We were asked if we wanted to sign the waiver. It’s a 30 day waiver that gives the appeal process, I guess, unlimited amount of time. We said, no, because we weren’t given a 30 day extension on paying for our taxes. Well, apparently that upset the lady at the counter, and I said I know it’s not your fault, but this is, you know, these are my concerns, and this is my opinion. I also have a problem with some of the statements that Paul Hatfield made in the newspaper. That if we can’t afford to live down here, we should sell. Well, if we all decided to sell tomorrow, it would be really hard to sell all of our houses for what we’ve at least put into them. So, I said if Paul Hatfield had a backbone he would be up here supporting you guys, instead of sitting in his office, because the lady said she was so upset, she had been through this for six weeks of people complaining, and I was trying to say, I know it’s not her fault, but she’s the one at the counter, and she’s the one I’m going to be asking these questions to. So, one of the other girls went back and talked to Paul. She came out and said he will speak to you, and we said can we bring the news crews back there with us so we have witnesses to what’s being said. They said, no. So, we went back there, and he was very disrespectful. He was cussing at me, and yelling at me, because he said I was treating his employees rudely. When I didn’t raise my voice. I asked questions, which I believe is my right to ask questions to the appeals process, to make sure I completely understand what’s going on. That gives him the right to yell at me. They could hear him all the way out across the front desk. The news reporters heard him also. I don’t feel like I deserve to be treated that way, when all I’m doing is asking a question, or asking several questions. He used very vulgar language. He said “GD”, and several other one’s that I can’t repeat. When I call, I’m told that no one has any authority over him. He is it. Until the next election. I just don’t understand why someone can treat people that way, and get by with it. Does anyone have any explanation?

Commissioner Fanello: Commissioner Mosby, explanation?

Tyra Sikkink: I’m not a troublemaker, but I’m upset enough today that I need to voice what happened.

President Mosby: I totally understand where you’re coming from. I wouldn’t expect anybody in my office to treat you that a way. I wouldn’t treat you that a way. I mean, there’s no doubt, I’m an elected official. I mean, I think Kevin can tell you that, I mean, he is a member of the township, and, I mean, he is an elected official. No, I don’t have jurisdiction over him, and I don’t put him in his office. I mean, it’s basically the people of the community of Pigeon Township who put him there. As to say I condone it, no, I mean, I don’t, and I wouldn’t treat anybody that a way. If you came in my office tomorrow, I mean, regardless of how mad I was.

Tyra Sikkink: Well, I was also told that I better be careful because since I do have an appeal, and he is in charge of those appeals that now I’m going to be scrutinized, and treated unfairly. I was told that by someone in his office. That scares me too.

Commissioner Fanello: Can you please repeat your name?

Tyra Sikkink: Tyra Sikkink. T-y-r-a, and the last name is S, as in Sam, i-k-k-i-n-k. I’m not a troublemaker, but that...it’s really bothered me all day, and I’ve called everybody I have phone numbers for, and everyone’s said at the next election you can vote not for him.

Commissioner Fanello: Well, I’m sorry that you had that experience. I think, you know, elected officials have a duty to treat their constituents with respect, and listen to what they have to say.

Tyra Sikkink: Yeah.

Commissioner Fanello: I’m sorry that you had that experience.

Tyra Sikkink: I mean, that’s all I expect. You know, I don’t expect everyone to always agree with me, because I’m not always going to like, you know, what the outcome is, but I do expect to be treated fairly and with respect. He really, he said he would do whatever he wanted to. If I didn’t sign the waiver, he would get to it whenever he “GD” well felt like it.

President Mosby: Kevin, do you have any, I mean–

Kevin Winternheimer: No, I don’t really have anything to add, I think you both have summed it up very well. Hopefully, that, whoever told you that, that that would not be the case. If you feel you did not get a fair assessment, you need to pursue your appeal. They are exactly right, you and the other voters are his boss. I think we saw in this last election how the difference that two or three can make in an election. So, you and all your friends and neighbors and everybody need to get out the next election and keep voting the way you feel is right.

Tyra Sikkink: He told me that people wouldn’t remember. I’m going to make it my business to personally make sure they remember the way...that the article that was in the newspaper, and the way he treated me, because it’s just, it’s not right that he can get by with that. Do you have something to say?

Tim Mills: My name is Tim Mills. We are not from Evansville. We’ve been here four years. We’ve invested a tremendous amount of money into the historic area. We’re in the process of opening a restaurant at the corner of Second and Oak in the old Bargetown Market. We have bought a lot of property that’s distressed, probably should be torn down. I’m not sure if the county and the city really realizes what has happened, and what is going to take place in the next several years. We have neighbors across the street from us, elderly that have already put their houses on the market and bought condos, because they can’t afford to live their anymore. So, you know, I’m not really sure if this Commission can help with the matter. It’s a very serious matter. You know, we’re always hearing on the news let’s rebuild downtown, let’s rebuild Main Street. How do you expect to do that? You know, just like Main Street, taxes doubled on Main Street. How do you expect businesses to come in, and residents to invest money in an area that they are going to do, they are paying for, what? The Mayor makes a deal with Vectren so we pay for Vectren’s taxes for the next 20 years, because the other townships don’t pay it. Pigeon Township pays it. I know you guys don’t make all the laws, but you are involved in public service, and you are the higher power here in Vanderburgh County. I really don’t think the total ramification of what’s happened is understood by a lot of people. A lot of people want to sit out on the east side, or whatever and say, oh, my taxes went down a little bit. Our taxes, I had a house, and my taxes went up 1000%, and the house is not liveable. I bought a house, I bought a slum lord house that lives next door to me that had eight apartments and two bathrooms. You go halfway into the house and the floor drops 18" from the roof down. If it were in any other neighborhood, it would be condemned. They assessed that house at $108,000. You know, give us a break. We put a lot of money into our homes, sure, they are worth money, they are probably worth more than what they’ve been assessed, but a new home, what do you got to do, change a light bulb? Fix a toilet that don’t flush all the time? An historic home, you put money into it every, single day. You know, it’s just not right. Downtown Evansville will never be anything unless the county and the city are willing to get behind it, and find out ways that we can get tax credits, different things. You know, try to raise money for the school system, couldn’t get it through on a vote, so, what do they do? They hammer us in Pigeon Township, because what comes out of Pigeon Township, taxes for the school system. The school system is not in trouble anymore, huh? One township cannot pay for everything. Just because 150 people own homes down there...Paul Hatfield made a statement, oh, they are rich people down there, they can afford it. We’re not all rich people down there. Not even close. We pay probably the highest utility bills in the city, because we can’t insulate our homes. We’ve got to go to get approval to have our windows changed. As some of our neighbors found out, it wasn’t a very easy thing. They had to hire attorneys and everything else just to replace their windows where they can have more energy efficient windows. So, we need help. If you as public servants want to see the downtown area move forward...which, if the city was smart it would be using that as an incentive for tourism, and to bring people to this town. Most cities do. That’s why you’ve got so many programs now on t.v., HGTV, you know, you’ve got a million shows on historic. But, this city, what do we do here? We condemn it and tear it down. Let’s save what we have. Once it’s gone, it’s not coming back. So, any help we can get we would appreciate it.

President Mosby: I can honestly say, Tim, I’ve talked to some people in that area down there, even though I know it’s the city, we’re county. I’ve talked with some people that own homes like you’re talking about, historical homes that, I guess, experienced the same thing you did, taxes went 600%, 700% on them. I would be the first to say that if there was anything that I could do to give tax breaks to distressed property or historical homes, I would do it. I agree with you, these people take on some very big financial difficulties in restoring the older homes in the community. I even had one woman tell me she don’t live in Evansville, but she owns two of them. She said, believe me, given the fact I could sell both of them tomorrow, I don’t care what happens to them. She said I would get out of them just for the pure and simple fact I can’t afford to pay the taxes on them anymore.

Tim Mills: I own 11 properties down there.

President Mosby: I would agree with you, there needs to be some tax breaks for historic or distressed properties, to see them put back on the market, and put back into living conditions. I don’t know, at this point, what this Commission could do, but I would be willing to talk with the corporate counsel and maybe the people over in the city to see if there is something that we could do. Maybe it has to be at a state level, I don’t know.

Tim Mills: I think it may have to be at a state level.

President Mosby: Where the tax credit for historical homes, but, I guess, commend you on what you are doing, for owning 11 of them.

Tim Mills: Well, we appreciate it, but–

President Mosby: I’m sorry you got treated the way you did.

Tim Mills: Yeah, it was really uncalled for. It really was. Especially for someone that we pay their salary. So–

President Mosby: I think I know the story on the windows too.

Tim Mills: Huh, yeah, I’m sure you have.

President Mosby: I know about the windows too.

Tim Mills: So, if you know a good candidate to run against him next, we will support them.

Commissioner Fanello: I’ll just say thank you for you investment, you know, in the city, and remember we do have a Mayoral election this year, and you may want to take these issues up with–

Tim Mills: We’ve already gotten involved, and we’ve already talked to that person today.

Commissioner Fanello: You know, Indianapolis has done some wonderful things to rejuvenate their historical district. I know someone who actually buys properties down there, and they renovate them, and there is some awesome tax credits associated with that. So, this city ought to take a serious look at some incentives to get people to develop.

Tyra Sikkink: We’ve only lived her four years. We don’t have a lot of time invested. We could leave if we wanted to. It’s just there is so much potential here. We hate to see it wasted. You have to give people incentives to take on these big projects. Otherwise, it’s just, it’s so labor intensive and time consuming that, unless you truly are passionate about it, you just don’t have the time or the money. Then once the tax issue comes into effect, you either put a new roof on the house, or you pay your taxes. If you don’t put a new roof on your house, it doesn’t do any good to pay your taxes, because the house is going to fall in. So, it’s just a bad situation. I appreciate your time.

Tim Mills: Thank you.

President Mosby: No problem. Thank you. Is there anybody else in the public that would like to speak? Seeing none.

President Mosby: Any Old Business?

President Mosby: Any New Business? Department head reports, County Engineer, John Stoll.

Commissioner Fanello: I’m sorry. We did not have a quorum at Solid Waste, so just for everybody’s information, you were in here when that happened, but no quorum. So, we are going to try to have a meeting next Monday at 4:30.

President Mosby: Patty, remind me of that.

President Mosby: Go ahead, John.

John Stoll: First I would like to request to go to County Council to appropriate $700,000 for the Stockwell Road culvert project. This is the one that is needed to, basically, get the flood plain elevations down to where they currently are. I spoke with the consultant, American Consulting, they feel that that should be more than enough money, but I wanted to make sure we have enough money in the account, so the funding issue doesn’t slow the project down. Since we only have a six month window to get the whole thing completed. I don’t have an account number yet, but we’ll get that established as well.

Commissioner Fanello: I would move that we let John ask for that appropriation.

Commissioner Crouch: Second.

President Mosby: So ordered. That is coming out of Bridge Fund, right?

John Stoll: Right. The second item is just something that I wanted to bring to your attention. None of you were in office back when this subdivision was approved, but there is going to be a change on Seib Road. Back when Stone Creek Subdivision was approved some of the residents had some concerns that the intersection of Seib Road at Kansas was too close to the intersection of 57 and Kansas. So, as part of the project, the approval of this subdivision, the project will result in Seib Road being realigned about 400' west of it’s current intersection. Then the pavement will be removed at that location. The reason I wanted to bring that to your attention now is because the contractor plans on getting started on this project sometime probably around the middle of next week. Seib Road could be closed for up to two weeks while this connection here in this cross hashed area is being constructed. So, in case you get any questions about it, that’s what’s going on. Like I said, this approval was granted several years ago, and I don’t believe any of you were in office at that time. But, it will be a significant change to Seib Road, from what everybody’s been used to over the years. Other than that, I don’t have anything else. This was already approved as part of the road plans for the subdivision, so I’m not aware of anything that needs additional approval. I just wanted to make you aware of it, since you might get some phone calls on it.

President Mosby: I had one question, John. Since you said you didn’t have anything else. I went out and looked at a sidewalk the other day, and I can’t remember where it was at. I can’t think of the name of the subdivision. It should have been an 18" green space between the curb and the sidewalk–

John Stoll: Oh, Windemere.

President Mosby: Yes. The gentleman asked me if I had any problem with it. I really don’t.

John Stoll: Okay.

President Mosby: I mean, I don’t know if it’s something that this Commission needs to act on. I think it was originally set up.

John Stoll: Somewhere in that sub there would have to be a transition.

President Mosby: Okay.

John Stoll: He was in a section where it called for the separation between the sidewalk and the back of the curb. So, somewhere they would have to transition it. It was just supposed to be on a different lot than that one the way I recall it. If it’s okay with you, then we’ll just leave it as is.

President Mosby: I don’t really want to speak for the other two, but, I mean, I can honestly say, I mean, the way they rounded the curb, it looks nice, and now that they’ve ended at the fire hydrant, it’s going to make for a good transition right there where they are going to landscape that, and offset it by 18". My opinion, I think it’s going to work a whole lot better than up the hill, where all of a sudden you were going to have two sidewalks–

John Stoll: Because it didn’t match.

President Mosby: So, at least there’s a way of making the transition now.

John Stoll: Okay.

President Mosby: So, I don’t have a problem with it. The other two Commissioners might want to go look at it. It’s in Windemere Subdivision, I think–

John Stoll: Section four.

President Mosby: Yeah.

John Stoll: It’s off of Kansas Road and Highway 57.

President Mosby: You would probably have to contact Chris Combs, I think. Who’s the other guy? I’m not even sure. There’s two of them.

John Stoll: I believe Dan Buck’s involved in section four as well.

President Mosby: But, that’s not one of his. It’s Chris and whoever is building with Chris.

John Stoll: Off the top of my head, I don’t remember.

President Mosby: I just happened to be out that a way, and one of them had asked me if I could run over, and I did. It looks nice.

John Stoll: Okay.

President Mosby: Is there any other questions or comments of John? Seeing none. Thank you, John.

John Stoll: Thanks.

President Mosby: County Highway. Rick Dickinson is with us tonight. Dennis is out of town.

Rick Dickinson: Yeah, Rick Dickinson, County Highway. You got my report. I don’t know if there’s any questions or not.

Commissioner Crouch: Rick, there was gentleman who called me at home. I don’t know, I believe he’s called the highway, Michael Dillbeck. I believe he said his address was 2920 Harmony Way. I don’t know if the other two Commissioners got a call from him. He had indicated that there is a pot hole, or a hole that has been continually refilled by the Highway Department, and that the excess of debris is sitting in the right-of-way. John, do you know about this? Is that why your walking up? Oh, you’re walking out.

President Mosby: He’s trying to get out before he gets into this.

Commissioner Crouch: Anyway, the gentleman indicated that he’s made numerous requests to get that removed, and it hasn’t.

Rick Dickinson: Was that address 2029?

Commissioner Crouch: 2920 Harmony Way. I have his phone number. I can e-mail it to you tomorrow, or call you.

Rick Dickinson: That would be great.

Commissioner Crouch: Get that to you.

Rick Dickinson: I’ll take care of it first thing in the morning, as soon as you call.

Commissioner Crouch: Okay, thanks, Rick.

Rick Dickinson: I’ll be in at 6:00. So, that’s the best time to catch us.

Commissioner Crouch: I’ll call you when I get up.

Rick Dickinson: What I’m saying, if you call me at 6:00, that’s when I’m making out the sheets though. I can make sure I get somebody out there. If not, we got people out there who can stop. I’ve got something about the LST that’s coming to town, which is a great thing. The city and Mulzer’s and there’s a bunch of people pitching in to do this thing. I believe David knows more about it, or Commissioner Mosby knows more about it than I do.

President Mosby: I can, I’ve attended, I guess, six or eight of the LST meetings now, and the one’s I’ve been able to make. I guess, the county was first called into this project wanting to see what we could make available, and maybe help with the liability and the insurance, and some things like that, because the committee that has put this together has done it with zero dollars. Everything has been donations from there, from the Nut Club to whoever. It was going to be very, very costly for the county to research liability insurance for the LST. The city at that point got involved, and they went ahead and leased the property from the people down there, and it’s now city property. They are leasing it, and they are providing all the insurance on that project. To make you familiar with it, if you know where Marina Pointe is, this is going to sit right below Marina Pointe, out in the river. What this committee has done, along with Industrial Contractors, Mulzer, and everybody else, they’ve got some ramps that they are going to bring down from Cincinnati that are going to go out to the LST. Industrial has went down and cut a ramp down to this, and they are going to redo the whole parking lot. What they have asked the county to participate in is possibly just putting a rough surface on this parking lot area, and down to the boat, so that they can actually back handicap accessible vans down to the LST, to the ramp, and make this accessible for most of the people, probably, that worked on this LST, or worked on the LST’s when they were here in Evansville. What they’ve asked the county to do is okay to just put a rough surface, no smooth coat, no finish coat or nothing, on the gravel to make it accessible for them, the elderly and the handicapped. The city is going to run handicap busses to and from all day long. Then they are going to make just a little circle in and out. So, I would bring it up, I would make a motion, I guess, I don’t know if I can as President. I would make a motion that the county participate. Bill Nix from Industrial is going, he’s going to grade out everything, stake it off. At their expense, Mulzer is going to donate all the stone and everything. They just want to know, since we had our own paver, if we could pave it for them.

Commissioner Crouch: Do you know what cost that is?

President Mosby: Not exactly. I mean, we haven’t got the...we’re waiting for Industrial to do all the staking off and the measuring. I don’t have an outright cost on it. We’re, I know we’re going to be down in the area doing some work on Waterworks Road. I think, we’ve got that set for the next week or two. I told them if they could get this done and contact us, you know, by then we would try to hit it while we were in the area so that we didn’t have to run back and forth, and have the expense of moving equipment. I’m not a paver, I’m going to guess $15,000 or $20,000, or something. I don’t know if it would even be that much. I’m just guesstimating.

Commissioner Fanello: So, you said–

President Mosby: I don’t know the tonnage or anything.

Commissioner Fanello: –materials would be donated?

President Mosby: The materials for the base and everything. We would just be donating our time, and just the rough surface.

Commissioner Crouch: And that would be in the neighborhood of $15,000 to $20,000?

President Mosby: That’s a wild guess on my part. You know, because Bill Nix hasn’t got it all done yet. I mean, Bill’s doing all the grading down to the planks. Industrial I should say, not Bill. Industrial is doing all that. Mulzer is going to furnish any kind of base, or whatever we need. Or for Industrial to put on. All we need, all they want us to do is come in and pave the part of the parking lot and the ramp down, so that they can back down to it.

Commissioner Crouch: Legally do we need to do anything?

Kevin Winternheimer: I would prefer that you have a motion approving it. That way there is no question about it.

President Mosby: I know it’s city property. I mean, they have leased the property. I know we just did a parking lot for the city not to long ago at one of their buildings.

Rick Dickinson: The city and county have pretty much worked together. I mean, if we need something the city has...we’ve borrowed a milling machine before. We went out and just paved a salt barn for them. It’s kind of–

President Mosby: I know it’s city property, I know we’ve worked on city property before. That was my, I guess, one of my biggest concerns is that it would have been private property. Since the city has leased it, the city has taken on the insurance and all the liability. I don’t, I went down and looked at the area. I don’t have a problem with this. I would make the motion that we would make the contribution to the LST, or the LST committee to help them with the paving of the handicap accessible.

Commissioner Crouch: And if I second it, who would order it?

President Mosby: I will. I’ll do both. I’ll let somebody else make the motion, if they want to. Or if you want to make the motion, I’ll–

Commissioner Crouch: I’ll be happy to make the motion. You know, with the stipulation that it doesn’t exceed the cost that you put out there.

Commissioner Fanello: I’ll second that.

President Mosby: I will say so ordered. Just for information to the other two Commissioners, this is July the 11^th through 22^nd that the boat should be here.

Rick Dickinson: Hopefully it will be here forever.

President Mosby: Well, that is the second part of this. They are trying to land this boat permanently. This boat is looking for a home. It’s looking for a city where LST’s were actually built. I guess, I didn’t know much about LST’s until I got on this committee, but now I know we built the most LST’s back during the war. So, I mean, it’s been a pretty exciting committee to sit on, and listen to all the people, the stories.

Rick Dickinson: It’s a pretty neat story, the people that brought it over, the youngest one was 72 years old.

President Mosby: Twenty-nine guys that worked on the boat went over and got it and brought it back. They said they couldn’t do it, but it’s here. They are looking for a permanent home, and we’re in the running for that too. Anything else, Rick?

Rick Dickinson: As long as she remembers to call me tomorrow. This is something that is personal. That lady and gentleman that was here. I agree with them 100%, because I’ve got a rental property down there, and it’s, that’s terrible, what they did to them people down there.

Commissioner Fanello: Taxes?

Rick Dickinson: Yeah.

President Mosby: Okay. Thank you, Rick.

President Mosby: County Attorney.

Kevin Winternheimer: No report tonight.

President Mosby: Superintendent of County Buildings.

Tammy McKinney: The only thing I need to add is a late pink slip from Burdette Park. I need to add that to the Consent Items.

President Mosby: Okay, for Render? Yeah, I seen that.

Tammy McKinney: It was laying on the table.

President Mosby: Yes, I see it. Yeah, here it is.

Commissioner Fanello: Motion to add late pink slip.

Commissioner Crouch: Second.

President Mosby: So ordered. That’s it? Okay.

President Mosby: Burdette Park.

Gary Hohman: Okay. Do you need an explanation on the reasoning behind this late request? Our existing night watchman suffered a heart attack Friday night. Mr. Render, who had previously been our night watchman, is coming out of retirement.

President Mosby: Okay.

Gary Hohman: You have before you our work report. The only other thing that I would like to add, since your last meeting all of the facilities at the Aquatic Center are now up and running. We are just hoping Mother Nature will be a little bit more cooperative than what they have been in the past, in order to boost our revenue, and get our patronage back to where it should be.

President Mosby: So, we are swimming in the pool? Our water samples are okay?

Gary Hohman: Yes.

President Mosby: Good. We had one minor problem, I think we blew a tank, but that’s it.

Gary Hohman: Blew the side out of it. That’s the second one, sir. The tank blew, but then Saturday one of the lines coming to the tank ruptured, and we had a geyser going about 25' to 30'.

President Mosby: I was just aware of the tank. I guess, that was Saturday morning at 8:00 when I was talking to Steve, so.

Gary Hohman: This was a little bit later that afternoon.

President Mosby: That happened later.

Gary Hohman: Thank you.

President Mosby: Thank you. Any questions of Gary?

Commissioner Fanello: The only other thing I want to add, I know you included in our packet a letter about the discount for park employees. I think this Board ought to consider, you know, some discounts for all of the county employees. I know that we hand out some passes, and I can’t remember how many passes we hand out off the top of my head. But, I did receive an e-mail from an employee who, you know, kind of reminded me that for those with larger families, those passes only may last one, one and a half times. So, I still think we ought to consider some kind of discount for all of county employees for Burdette Park.

President Mosby: I mean, and that’s something that, I guess, we could discuss at one of our meetings.

Commissioner Crouch: Should we ask the Advisory Board perhaps to come up with some recommendation?

Commissioner Fanello: Maybe, yeah, we ask them to come up with a recommendation for all county employees. Something that would be cost effective for–

Gary Hohman: They meet the third Wednesday of each month, which I think their next meeting would be the 19^th or somewhere.

President Mosby: the 18^th.

Gary Hohman: The 18^th.

President Mosby: Well, that’s just within a week and a half.

Gary Hohman: The reason that this was brought up, I mean, I brought this to their attention was that I could not find anywhere where a Burdette employee was given any type of discount for purchasing of a pass. I personally was wanting to do this as a reward for my grandchildren. For their elevating their grades. I apologize for the commotion that it created as a result of this. I am with you wholeheartedly in that I do think that county employees and Burdette employees, it needs to be looked into to give them some type of incentive to utilizing the facilities that we do have at Burdette.

Commissioner Fanello: Right, I mean, we don’t, we’re not able to, because, I mean, we’re a government, we’re not able to give them a lot of benefits that they get out in the private sector. So, I think this is one way of rewarding them. Like you said, we have an excellent facility out there, so.

President Mosby: Does this Board want to make a recommendation to the Advisory Board? Or do we just want the Advisory Board to–

Commissioner Fanello: I would ask that they come up with a recommendation, like Commissioner Crouch said. You know, something that wouldn’t be cost prohibitive for, you know, Burdette Park.

Gary Hohman: You’re speaking of on a county wide basis.

Commissioner Fanello: On a county wide basis.

President Mosby: Right. So, I mean, we’re talking what, 800 employees?

Commissioner Fanello: Yeah, all county employees.

Gary Hohman: What was the number? I mean, that’s one thing that they are going to ask, the total number of employees that would–

President Mosby: I’ll ask the Auditor, how many are we paying today?

Bill Fluty: It’s under 800.

President Mosby: Under 800. 750-775. 750-775. 799, no. I would just say, yeah, we’re looking at somewhere around 750 employees.

Gary Hohman: Okay, I will give these numbers to them, and ask that they evaluate it. I don’t know, like I say, whether they will be able to come up with.

President Mosby: Do all county employees have any type of an I.D.? Do we have a county I.D.?

Commissioner Fanello: No, and that was something that was brought to my attention by somebody else. I can’t remember if it was the Building Authority, or another employee made the suggestion. You know, the city has like their little passes or I.D. cards. Maybe we ought to do something like that in the county.

President Mosby: Well, I mean, I’m just thinking of way that they could distinguish a county employee. I mean, if they didn’t have a county I.D. of some type. I think the Sheriff even–

Madelyn Grayson: How about a paycheck stub?

Gary Hohman: Either that or each department print–

President Mosby: I was thinking more of a picture. I mean, paycheck stubs, you...the Sheriff did tell me at one time that they could take I.D.’s, or pictures and put them on I.D.’s if we just want to carry one. I mean, I carry a Fire Department I.D. in my billfold, with a picture on it. So, maybe if we come up with something, we’ll try to come up with a way that they could go down to the Sheriff’s Department, have a photo I.D. taken, and it would state, you know, their office and everything.

Gary Hohman: Okay.

President Mosby: If they ask that question, how are we going to identify them, tell them that we are working on it.

President Mosby: I think we had Ozone, Soil and Water.

Commissioner Fanello: I’ll make a motion that we accept Soil and Water’s report.

Commissioner Crouch: Second.

President Mosby: So ordered.

President Mosby: Consent Items.

Commissioner Fanello: I make a motion that we accept the Consent Items.

President Mosby: As amended, with the addition?

Commissioner Fanello: As amended, with the addition.

Commissioner Crouch: Second. Just a question on the courts surplus of computers. How are we going to notify the not-for-profits? Or do we, you know, that we have excess computers? Do we have a–

Tammy McKinney: I have a list where non-profits have requested. Whatever is left over, I mean, we’ll just keep those, and then as a non-profit needs them, they’ll come before the Board and request how many computers they need.

President Mosby: I think Councilman Hoy has been interested hasn’t he?

Tammy McKinney: Yes, and I have that letter.

President Mosby: Gary, do we have all we need at Burdette? I mean, as far as the new Day Camp Discovery Lodge, do we need anymore? Computers.

Gary Hohman: Right now all of the computers that we have are surplus equipment that has been passed down. We do have presently enough right now to operate, as we are operating right now.

President Mosby: At one time were they looking for some computers for just the kids to work with?

Gary Hohman: Yes.

President Mosby: I mean, did we ever run across anything?

Gary Hohman: Yes, they are completely...we’ve been stockpiling those for a couple of years.

President Mosby: Just as long as we’ve got everything we need first. I mean, that was my concern.

Commissioner Fanello: Well, how do we let the other county departments know? I mean, are we going to send out a letter?

Tammy McKinney: I’ve sent out a memo.

Commissioner Fanello: You’ve sent it? Okay.

Tammy McKinney: I sent them out a memo about a couple of months ago, and they had until the end of May to respond to me.

Gary Hohman: One question, Tammy, I don’t–

Tammy McKinney: Sure.

Gary Hohman: –know what the date, or how much a need there is for updating those that you may have, or the one’s that we have to what you might have now. If you don’t mind, I can ask our Day Camp Director to possibly see what type of units you have, and if she wants to change some of those.

Tammy McKinney: I think we gave you the highest standard, because you had so many programs to be put on it.

Gary Hohman: Okay.

Tammy McKinney: I can check with Tim Van Cleave. I know also we gave you more than you requested too.

Gary Hohman: Yes.

Tammy McKinney: In case you had any break down.

President Mosby: So, I have a motion on the Consent Items, and a second. I’ll say so ordered.

Commissioner Fanello: Motion to adjourn.

Commissioner Crouch: Second.

President Mosby: That one is never hard.

Commissioner Fanello: We never have a problem getting a second on that one.

President Mosby: No. A motion and a second. So ordered.

(The meeting was adjourned at 7:11 p.m.)

CONSENT ITEMS:

         Travel Requests:

         Health Department Center Assessor              Supt. Of Bldgs.

         CommissionersAuditor

         Employment Changes:

         Superior Court                Health Department         County Highway

         County Council               Sheriff Department         Burdette Park

         County Clerk                   Prosecutor                      Voters Registration

         County Assessor

         Requests for Service:

         Superior Court                County Assessor

         Election Office: Surplus of Fax Machine.

         Courts: Surplus of Computers.

         Auditor:

         Submit A/P Vouchers.

         Kronos Maintenance Software Agreement.

         County Clerk: Submit Monthly Report for March 2003.

         Those in Attendance:

         David W. Mosby             Catherine Fanello           Suzanne M. Crouch

         Kevin Winternheimer      Bill Fluty                          Tammy McKinney

         Madelyn Grayson           Phil Lawrence                 Joanne Alexandrovich

         Dona Bergman               Brad Ellsworth                Tyra Sikkink

         Tim Mills                         John Stoll                        Rick Dickinson

         Gary Hohman                 Others Unidentified         Members of Media

         VANDERBURGH COUNTY

         BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS

         David W. Mosby, President

         Catherine Fanello, Vice President

         Suzanne M. Crouch, Member

         Recorded and transcribed by Madelyn Grayson.