| | Back | Home | Email | Search | Weather | | ||||||||||||||||||
|
Vanderburgh County
President Mosby: We will reconvene
the County Commissioners for, I am looking for my notes here, May 7, 2001.
We started at 4:00 p.m. so if you are wondering why we are reconvening,
we've done been in session. Introductions, we have with us tonight, Tammy
McKinney, Superintendent of Buildings; Counselor Phil Hayes; Commissioner
Fanello, myself, Commissioner Mourdock, Auditor Suzanne Crouch and Recording
Secretary Madelyn Grayson. Approval of the minutes from the April 30th
meeting?
Commissioner Fanello: So moved. Commissioner Mourdock: Second. President Mosby: I have a motion,
second and so ordered.
Commissioner Mourdock: I would suggest that before we go to the other items, just to wrap up from our previous two hours. I know that there were a couple of folks in the audience that want to hear what we are going to do with that information. I think that we need to state publicly. I think when we first talked about how we were going to proceed with all of that, we said that we would take it under advisement for two to three weeks and then reconvene and then basically hash publicly through that and decided who we wanted to begin negotiations with or potentially go to a second round of interviews potentially. So, I just want to want to go on the record, is that still the schedule? Commissioner Fanello: I think two weeks, in my opinion, two weeks is adequate for me. But- President Mosby: I would say that in two to three weeks I would have a decision and I am not looking for another discussion or a short list. Commissioner Mourdock: Well, I hope not either. It is not my intention. But, I was leaving open that possibility, we did put that in the letter just in case we come to, if all three of us come in here with a different name then we want to have that option. So, the 21st of May, both of those are colored red, what's, the holiday is the 28th? President Mosby: Yes, the 21st that's Memorial Day weekend, so May 21st is fine. Commissioner Fanello: That's President Mosby: The 21st is not a holiday, is it? Commissioner Mourdock: Well, why is it red then? Commissioner Fanello: I don't know. Suzanne Crouch: The 28th is the holiday. Madelyn Grayson: We have rezoning and drainage that night. Commissioner Fanello: On the 21st? Suzanne Crouch: The 28th is a holiday. Commissioner Fanello: Which is another discussion. Are we going to meet on Tuesday or not have a meeting that week? Suzanne Crouch: We didn't advertise it. Commissioner Fanello: Okay. President Mosby: You did advertise? Suzanne Crouch: No we did not. Commissioner Fanello: Didn't. President Mosby: Did not advertise. Okay. Suzanne Crouch: We didn't to meet on the Tuesday after the Monday. President Mosby: Then we almost need to do it on the 21st, if we are going to do it. Commissioner Mourdock: Okay, I will formally move then that we take under advisement the presentations that we heard today with the schedule to reflect that on Monday, May 21st , at our regular Commission meeting, we will have an open discussion to make final selection for the architect for the new jail project. Commissioner Fanello: Second. President Mosby: I have a motion and a second. I don't believe they could hear what you were saying. It's a motion to make final the design architect for the jail. So, that will be on May the 21st. We will put that on the agenda. Commissioner Fanello: (inaudible) President Mosby: First reading of ordinances, Phil Hayes. Phil Hayes: If I may ask, Madelyn, you have the Central Dispatch and City County Human Relations, the Sheriff's department, the Abandoned Vehicle ordinances, have they, they've been duly advertised for first reading? Madelyn Grayson: Yes, they have. Phil Hayes: Alright. Madelyn Grayson: On April 27 and May 4. Phil Hayes: Alright then, what's in order, I believe, is a motion to advance this to second reading. Is that correct? Did they also then advertised for second reading as well? Madelyn Grayson: For next Monday, the 14th. Phil Hayes: Next Monday, the 14th. Very good. Madelyn Grayson: Correct.
Commissioner Mourdock: Since this is tonight, the formal first reading for the Central Dispatch Ordinance, is there anyone is the audience wishing to address the issue? Let the record reflect that no one signified. So, on first reading, I will move approval of the Central Dispatch Ordinance. Commissioner Fanello: Second. President Mosby: Motion and second,
so ordered on first reading.
Commissioner Mourdock: Also, on first reading tonight we have an amendment to the City County Human Relations Ordinance. Is there anyone here to discuss that ordinance? Seeing none, I will move approval. Commissioner Fanello: Second. President Mosby: Motion, second, so
ordered.
Commissioner Mourdock: Third, we have on first reading tonight an amendment for the Sheriff's Department Ordinance. Is there anyone here to address that one? Let the record reflect that no one came forward, so I will move approval on first reading. Commissioner Fanello: Second. President Mosby: So ordered.
Commissioner Mourdock: On the last one, I have a question or something here because I am perplexed. We've discussed the Abandoned Vehicle Ordinance on a couple of occasions and the commission previous to the end of the year that this is an ordinance, something that needs to be generated through the County Council, we have discussed it twice this year where we have effectively come to the same conclusion and I am curious why we are handling now again? It seems to me that it still remains something that needs to go through the County Council and not something that we need to do with the County Commission. Phil Hayes: My response on it is that I don't see why. There is no fiscal, there is no appropriation involved. I am informed that there is no establishment that the establishment of the fund is purely administrative. The state statute authorizing the authorizing the activity is an activity of local government, simply requires that we conform to that state statute. We pass it by virtue of authorization to do so and I believe that the reason for that is that we are dealing with vehicle titles and in essence talking about defeasing title of an owner based on sadist or assume sadist of the assumed vehicle. The sales as the ordinance, uh, then goes on, will simply divert proceeds to the county. That is the only fiscal impact, it is a matter of income being deposited then administratively in a fund. Right now, under the terms of the contract that was entered into in November of 2000, the place of auction was changed by virtue of that uh of that ordinance. The state, until such an ordinance is passed, will continue to receive the proceeds of the sale. So in examining it and I apologize, I wasn't uh, I wasn't aware that we had concluded that it was required to go through the Council. I know that is where it was filed initially. I did of course see that because of the fact that it was pending and then it was pulled from advertising there- Commissioner Mourdock: And that was at the end of the year last year. Phil Hayes: And we were told to just go back and start over again. No reason told to go back and start over again and then I examined the respective powers statute and my conclusion was that it would be more appropriate for this body to initiate and to pass the matter. We are not going to be appropriating or that is to say authorizing or appropriating on it. Commissioner Mourdock: Did you carry the ordinance back to the Council at one point? Phil Hayes: At one point, I attempted to have it, I attempted to have it agenda but in the course of the discussion, it never got any where and then we went into our own discussion and it was at that point that I began to reexamine the premise as to which body should more appropriately pass that and I will be glad to address that more thoroughly for you. I can do that by the time the second reading comes up. But, it was review and conclusion on it that it was not a fiscal matter to engage in. I don't think anymore than it would be to develop any kind of inventory and sell it. As we, I mean I think it is as simple as that. As long as the money is a one way street that is coming this direction, it's the only, we are not establishing a tax, we're not establishing a set of fees, we are not establishing those usual earmarks for it. But, if you would let me address that, I would be than happy, if you wish to advance it to second reading on the basis that we will hear more from that. I can talk more thoroughly with Mr. Ahlers, our discussions previous to this time basically been that he doesn't think it going to pass anywhere. He basically talked with me about his feelings on policy. Commissioner Mourdock: Let's chase that one for a minute. Phil Hayes: Yeah. Commissioner Mourdock: If we do anything and they don't pass it, what have we accomplished? I mean. Phil Hayes: I don't know that he has analyzed that. Commissioner Mourdock: Well, do I understand? Phil Hayes: When I say that my initial, I am just being frank. Our initial conversations were that his understanding that it did not have support as such because of the fact that there was no income analysis available that showed the county getting any money. I think in the intervening months once we learned that not only did the previous commission initiate a contract but in fact initiated a legislative process. The fact that they chose the council at the time, I didn't have any particular opinion on it. I just had to kind of dig it out. You are familiar with that process? Commissioner Mourdock: Right and a year ago, Joe, Joe Harrison, Jr., counsel at the time- Phil Hayes: Last November. Commissioner Mourdock: Yes, told us at that was something this Commission should do, it should go to council. Phil Hayes: Yeah, I understand he did yeah. Commissioner Mourdock: If, as a matter of practice or procedure if you will, if we were to enact this ordinance, do I understand you correctly, that County Council would still need to enact something as well? Phil Hayes: I don't think so. Commissioner Fanello: I can't really find anywhere where the county would set up this fund. I mean, I have looked through the code book and I can't find any authority where, I mean that there are some other funds that the Commissioners have set up in the ordinances in the code book? Commissioner Mourdock: I don't know specific to this issue. I know specific to this issue, Joe told us that it wasn't for us to do this one. Phil, earlier this year, told us that it was your opinion that we didn't necessarily need to do something and you were going to carry it to Council and now this thing is back again. I haven't spoken to anybody on Council about this so if it is to be over there... Phil Hayes: I thought maybe an Interlocal, as far as the cash, well, there is a (sepa) left out of that recitation that we still have to pass an Abandoned Vehicle Ordinance because it is state law that confers the authority for us to do so as a county acropo (?) of how to handle the administration of it, that has been a discussion of the County Auditor and that discussion has devolved to this point. We agree that good faith differences can exist here but what it amounts to is can you make a little bit of money? Can you make a lot of money? Can you make some intermediate money? Or, no money and I think that the situation is, meanwhile, you have abandoned vehicles that are being collected and they are taken out and I think that the attitude has been, if the Auditor's office doesn't find a cost benefit in administration then one of my alternatives was an Interlocal agreement suggestion with the controller. Commissioner Mourdock: All of that, rather there is a lot of money or a little money right now a mute point as far, even on the citation as to what you have provided, it say, "whereas the Vanderburgh County Sheriff is requesting that the County fiscal body adopt an ordinance." Phil Hayes: That is a mistake. Commissioner Mourdock: That's them. Phil Hayes: That's an error. It is just from using the, that's why on second reading it is going to have to be amended. It was an error. It was too faithful a transcription of the original document. Commissioner Mourdock: Okay. Phil Hayes: What my attitude is on it legally that I will continue to try to nurse this thing on. This is one of those matters that the more you hang with it the more clumsy it gets. You wrote a contract for example for these people to make the sales and I finally have today a sheet that says we will take the cars out there. This is May and that contract was done back last November. So, you know, this is just one of those lessons that novices like me have to learn and I'll learn it and I'll get there. Well, I will report to you, I will talk, Mr. Harrison and I have never had a conversation as to why he thought the County Council was the appropriate body and I will get to that and in all fairness neither was my conversation with Mr. Ahlers early on. I only had one and I think that was in January kind of asking him what to do. Commissioner Mourdock: I am not picking just to be picky, I just know what happens in the political arena when we cross that magical lines of checks and balances and such and I don't want to step on somebody's toes. Phil Hayes: Well, you shouldn't be so sensitive. Don't be so sensitive. Commissioner Mourdock: I am not being sensitive except then I hear it said that maybe they are not going to vote for it. So, if you guys want to do it, go ahead and move forward. Phil Hayes: Well, that is the conversation among the lawyers and we're not relevant to the process. Commissioner Fanello: Motion to move it to second reading and we will have our answer by next Monday. President Mosby: Second and so ordered.
Phyllis Donohue: Phyllis Donohue with Welfare to Work Council. Commissioner Fanello: Phyllis is back because they have requested a change in the percentage allocation and I met with Gary on Friday to go over with our numbers and just if I understand it correctly, and in speaking with Gary today we have $1,184,255.77 unspent in Welfare to Work money. I am going to go ahead and give you my spiel on this and how I think we ought to move forward. Speaking with Councilman Hoy, we both feel that there is some reform needed because we are not sure why we have so much money unspent. If the program was doing what it needs to be doing we wouldn't be having so much money left unspent. So, it is our desire to look at reforming the program and seeing how we can better utilize the monies in the future. That is my spiel on it and I don't know what anyone else's thoughts is but or our. Commissioner Mourdock: I would just add and I have no problem with taking a look because I think anything can be made better. I don't have any problem with that. I think the part and I am going to go out on a bit of a limb here but regarding the encumbrances that were done under that one of the things as Phyllis mentioned the first time, three weeks ago when you came here, was that we have been using this fund as somewhat as a second bucket, if you will, as the state as continued to change things. So, we have kept our program flexible as the state has taken money away from critical areas, specifically child care, we have been able to make up for that locally with the working poor here. So, if that is the type of reform that you are talking about or that kind of thing then I am in agreement. Commissioner Fanello: I guess my real problem is having almost 1.2 million dollars sitting there unspent and whenever we are talking about Welfare to Work programs, if those monies, if we had a good program in place then that money would be spent every year. I have a problem with the County accumulating that much just sitting there and it is supposed to go to people in need. Commissioner Mourdock: Philosophically, I would say that if we had a great problem or program we wouldn't need any money at all. Commissioner Fanello: This money is sitting there which probably could be better utilized elsewhere in the County, is my fear. This county is not rich and we need to be allocating those resources as efficiently as possible. Commissioner Mourdock: That certainly is a pertinent issue for discussion. Commissioner Fanello: Phil and I talked about it and I told him to get involved in it and I even spoke, with I spoke with Gary last Friday, I told him that we probably ought to look at some, looking at how we can make things better. But, that is my thoughts on it tonight. So, I am really not, as this point in time, in favor of changing the allocation until we look at reform. I would just like to leave it as the prior year. Commissioner Mourdock: Okay, then is there a timetable then to drive the reform. Commissioner Fanello: I am more than willing to set up, I don't know how long it will take us to look at that, I am becoming familiar with the program. Gary explained a lot of it to me on Friday, so, I think that would probably, we would need to get with them and see what is a feasible amount of time for them to look at us reforming that program. Commissioner Mourdock: Given this specific request that was brought forward was for the redistribution or the reallocation of the percentages of 60/40. Is that right, Phyllis? Phyllis Donohue: Yes, for this years money. Commissioner Mourdock: Is even that percentage for this years money something that you are not ready to agree to? Commissioner Fanello: Exactly. Phyllis Donohue: If, well okay. Part of my concern, my only concern is the fact as in this report originally, is that we are getting cut a million dollars in child care. If we would start writing our child care money, can we, is there any type? Commissioner Fanello: Well, can not look and wait and see how it is going? Then, if there comes a point in time where something has changed drastically- Phyllis Donohue: Oh, yeah. Commissioner Fanello: Then they can come back. Phyllis Donohue: Well, I hope that your recommendations, we meet normally the third Wednesday night at 5:15 at our office. I am sure that any of us would be open to discussing with any the three of you or anybody else in the community that would be interested in having input into this. Commissioner Fanello: I just want to see us have a program in place where, like you said, I agree with what you said that if everything was great we would have money accumulated but we don't need to leave this money sitting there unaccumulated and not being spent in other areas that the County needs. Commissioner Mourdock: What you are really saying I think is that the traditional allocation of funds that the County Commission has done since 199- Commissioner Fanello: 1997. Commissioner Mourdock: uh 1995, in 1995 I think that we set up the three accounts and what you are suggesting that some different accounts be established or existing accounts be done away with. So, it is not just for Phyllis's benefit here, Catherine isn't just talking about Welfare to Work, if I understand you correctly, you are talking about each of those three areas potentially that we derive money from the Riverboat. Commissioner Fanello: What I am talking about it Welfare to Work because that is where, we don't have any money accumulated in the other two accounts as of December 31, 2000. Or January 1, 2001. Commissioner Mourdock: But again it is the allocation of the money between those three accounts that you are talking about? Commissioner Fanello: I am looking at the $500,000 given to Welfare to Work. Commissioner Mourdock: Right. Commissioner Fanello: Just Welfare to Work. Commissioner Mourdock: Okay. Phyllis Donohue: How do you want us to go, I mean the Welfare to Work, I mean there is a Council and it is appointed and I think that Gary went through all of that with you. So, how do you want us to go about this? Do you want us to meet, for us to call a meeting this Wednesday? And tell them that you are open to other ideas. Commissioner Fanello: I think we need to look at seriously reforming the program so that we can better utilize the funds that are there because the funds are getting utilized. So, there is a problem somewhere. President Mosby: I understand that you are being cut a million dollars. Phyllis Donohue: In child care. President Mosby: From? Commissioner Mourdock: State sources. President Mosby: From State sources okay, I guess, I am- Phyllis Donohue: (inaudible) President Mosby: Pardon? Phyllis Donohue: CCDF. It is one of the funding sources and we have acronyms of them. President Mosby: And you are wanting us to change the formula? I have not had any discussion with Gary or anybody on this. What is that going to do for you, if we change the formula? Phyllis Donohue: It will give me more money for child care. President Mosby: Okay. Phyllis Donohue: In that line item. President Mosby: Is this out of the $1.2 million? Phyllis Donohue: No, that is why this only about this years money. This is only about beginning January 1, of this year, 2001. That is where we want to see the change. Commissioner Fanello: (inaudible) Commissioner Mourdock: Right. Phyllis Donohue: The money that she is talking about left over, we want to leave that in the four criteria that we had set up originally. President Mosby: What is that money doing though? That's my question, what is the $1.2 million doing? Commissioner Mourdock: Are you talking about the encumbered funds? Commissioner Fanello: It is just sitting there. Suzanne Crouch: Well, $500,000 of it is this years budget. President Mosby: So, there is $700,000 that I guess you had left over from last year or the year before. Phyllis Donohue: Yeah. Commissioner Mourdock: Again, what I said at the beginning. The idea of encumbering some of that money so that if the State did the types of things that it is getting ready to do we had something there. The request for allocation change was not about that money that was carried over it is just about this year. Commissioner Fanello: It is about this years budget. President Mosby: So, we have carried over $700,000 that you have no intention of spending at this point. Phyllis Donohue: Yes, we have intention of spending it. President Mosby: On what? Phyllis Donohue: On these line items. I mean I certainly discuss this about what it does and what it is used for and how it is used and how we have six months for each person and each one can draw out of the four categories. President Mosby: I guess my question is, why hasn't it be spent yet? Why are you carrying it over, carrying it over? What's? Phyllis Donohue: Based on the fact of what is happening now. We are going to lose a million dollars in child and we are going to need, the possibility is there, that we are going to need that. I mean I don't want to go into that. President Mosby: Okay, so we have $700,000 and one time you are going to lose a million, what are you going to do the following year? Phyllis Donohue: Well, we hope that the State or Federal government changes their minds about the cuts and if not, there will be that many women or men losing their jobs because they have no place to take their children and no way to pay for it. President Mosby: So, you are? Phyllis Donohue: It is a subsidy. Commissioner Fanello: But, you have carried money over since 1997 unspent and you have accumulated over $700,000 of unspent money in anticipation of something that will happen. Phyllis Donohue: Well, I could Commissioner Mourdock: Yes.
Phyllis Donohue: I can honestly say that, I have been working for the state for 30 years so I can say that. Commissioner Fanello: I don't agree with that theory with the County that might work with some other programs. President Mosby: Okay, I guess that brings me back to the fact that we returned $831,000 and $679,000 in Infrastructure and Economic Development money that there evidently was no P.O.'s or encumbrances on but over here we have $700,000 laying there that nobody is spending. Suzanne Crouch: But, they had P.O.'s- President Mosby: For what? Suzanne Crouch: To encumber it. President Mosby: For what? Commissioner Mourdock: For the contract from which it is administered. The contract that we have with the so called Gatekeeper - Lieberman and Associates. It is impar- President Mosby: Okay, that is what I was wondering. So, you can just have a contract. They have a contract but they show no expenditure and it just keeps rolling over. Commissioner Fanello: I think that is kind of a lose interpretation of the rules, but, I just agree with us accumulating this much money when we are supposed to have a program in place and it is not being spent. I just can't agree with that. Commissioner Mourdock: Okay, let me again break this down, because I know we all want to go to a different issue. The, what we do in the future discussion and how we reallocate money from the Riverboat is certainly a fair discussion that we can have. The original request that Phyllis came forward on is - Commissioner Fanello: Is the allocation. Commissioner Mourdock: Is the allocation against the money that is already budgeted for this year. Commissioner Fanello: For this year. I understand that. I am just not ready to change allocation. Tell me, let me get this straight. What was your allocation for child care last year? Phyllis Donohue: I couldn't tell you that. Commissioner Fanello: I have 45% written down but you are wanting to change that to 40 so that can't, Gary told me 45%. Phyllis Donohue: I don't have my. Commissioner Mourdock: Yes, that is right, I think it was 45, 45 and 10. That is from memory. Phyllis Donohue: It is 12 ½ and 12 ½ and two of those were 12 ½. Commissioner Fanello: The job training was 12 ½ , transportation was 12 ½ and 30% Safety Net and 45% child care. Phyllis Donohue: Right. Commissioner Fanello: So, we were spending 45%. Phyllis Donohue: Why he is only asking for this beginning Commissioner Fanello: So, you are actually asking for less for child care. Phyllis Donohue: Is the fact that we have the other money still in, the money that you are talking about the $700,000 the money is still there to spend for child care but we think that there will be a shortfall coming into this year, somewhere this year. Commissioner Fanello: If there is going to be a shortfall in child care then why would be going from 45% to 40%? Phyllis Donohue: Because we still have the other 45%, 45% for the other three years. Commissioner Fanello: Now, you have really lost me. President Mosby: Now, you are going back to the $700,000 and you are wanting to spend 45% of that? Commissioner Fanello: No, yeah, we have already allocated 45% of that. Commissioner Mourdock: Yes. President Mosby: So you are going to spend 45% of $700,000 and what is going to happen to the other 55% of the $700,000? Commissioner Fanello: The prior allocations were 45% child care, 30% for the Safety Net program, 12 ½ % job training and 12 ½ % for transportation and then there is administrative fee in there somewhere isn't there? No? Okay. Commissioner Mourdock: I believe that I am going backwards here but the request for the 60/40 was for this year's funds, of what was left for this years funds, so that the child care could be bumped up because the need for the safety net. Commissioner Fanello: But, how is the child care going to be bumped up when you were taking 45% for child care and now you are taking 40%? Commissioner Mourdock: Because I believe that it is for the remaining funds this year. President Mosby: Well, I know but if you got 45 why wouldn't you take 45 instead of 40? Commissioner Fanello: If you have 45 of $500,000 for child care, why wouldn't want that instead of 40% for child care? Phyllis Donohue: Up until now, until we found out that we were going to be cut $1,000,000 we were fine as far as the child care. I mean nobody in this community that I know that fit the criteria here or with that other funding source that I was speaking of went without child care. We are never turned anybody away. Our money went out of safety net and that is why we have left the 60% there and that is in emergency cases where people could be losing their job and a lot of it is on car repairs and we could, it is a pretty broad spectrum of things that we could do to help people if they are in jeopardy of losing their job because of something that we could fix or take care of in a very short period of time. It enables them to stay in a job and that is why the 60% is there. President Mosby: So, but you are saying that child care is the critical issue and we are going from 45% to 40%. Phyllis Donohue: I have my money from the other three years to draw down from. Commissioner Mourdock: So, even though the percentage is less the number would be greater. Phyllis Donohue: Because I 've still got the money from the larger percentages in the prior years is there. A lot of that is still there because we have had no problem. Commissioner Fanello: I am still going, I am in favor of leaving alone and as far as time frame on this, we should probably have some reform by budget time so that we know how much we need to budget for next year. Maybe you know if we have accumulated this money that has not been spent then I don't know if we need $500,000 at budget time. I mean I don't want to see a program in place that isn't going to spend the money. Commissioner Mourdock: So what you are formally saying is that Phyllis doesn't need to come back until? Commissioner Fanello: Let's leave things the same, I am in favor of leaving things the same and looking at reform before budget time. Commissioner Mourdock: Take your time in- President Mosby: Is that a motion? Commissioner Fanello: Budget time packets, Suzanne, you will have to educate me on the critical dates for the County for budget so. You send out packets at the end of May and - Suzanne Crouch: Yes and usually by the end of June is when we request that they come back and I will be happy to work with you on that. Commissioner Fanello: Okay, so we are looking at about a two month period here, sixty days. Phyllis Donohue: Okay, like I said, you know we usually meet the third Wednesday and I would certainly be open to call a meeting or talking to you. Commissioner Fanello: Like I said, I talked to Phil Hoy about it and I know Royce has some concerns about it, so I think it would probably just be good if we could all get it together in a meeting. Phyllis Donohue: Royce is- President Mosby: Are you making a motion? Commissioner Fanello: Motion to? I
don't know if I need to make a motion to defer or if we are not voting
on it.
President Mosby: Okay. Any other group or individual wishing to address the board? Come forward. Steve Perry: Good evening, my name is Steve Perry and I am with the Evansville Rescue Mission Youth Care Center and on behalf of our president, Norm Snyder and fellow board members and staff, I would like to just make a brief presentation to you and kind of let you know where we are since the time we last met in February, okay? Alright when I came to you in February this year I expressed our organization through the Youth Care Center wanted to offer an expansion of juvenile detention services to Vanderburgh County. Our plan was to renovate the existing youth care center to a capacity of 24 private bedrooms that would be wet. In turn, we would move our nonsecure program to a different location. The plan seemed like a no brainer to me. A fundraising task that could be knocked off with a mere squirt gun. But, before coming to you, I was advised by an architect that the plan was doable. Since that time, I have been advised that it would be better to build a new secure detention center and retain the current Youth Care Center as a non-secure program. Even though it is people who change people and not buildings, a code I'll express by Roger Mason and several other quality youth workers. Building a new secured detention center is probably a wiser choice over the long term but that plan requires substantial investment up front. Now, this means that the fundraising or financing challenge where it is one or the other or a combination of both will take more than just a squirt gun to pull it off. It might take my seven year old son's supersoaker. It also requires the purchase of more land. To make construction possible we are purchasing property adjacent to our campus with the closing date planned for the end of this month. It is on that site that we intend to build a state of the art juvenile detention center. Though, the financial challenge of building new structures multiplies our requirement exponentially we the board and staff of the Youth Care Center stand united in our desire to design and construct a detention facility that will provide services for males and females. We wish to pursue this project with the least cost to the county as possible without jeopardizing the quality of care believed necessary to guide juveniles toward successful living in this community. The Youth Care Center has been managing our youth detention services in Vanderburgh County for the past 19 years. The staff has a combined total of close to 100 years experience of working with juvenile offenders. For most of us, employment at the YCC is not a job as much as it a lifestyle and we know that children in custody need to be managed differently than adults. With youth opportunities for rehabilitation and character development are within reasonable reach. Fewer things in life bring us more happiness and peace of mind than knowing one of our precious children receives exactly what he and hopefully she needs while under our care. As I have said on other occasions, we have no desire to profit monetarily from the services that we provide juvenile defenders. Nor do we wish to supplement any of our worthy programs at the expense of the Youth Care Center. But, we do not wish to return to years where we had to absorb deficits. Our profit from all of this remains from seeing young people reform from their indiscretions, finish their education, pay taxes and support us baby boomers in retirement. Seriously, not since the Youth Care Center began 19 years ago do we have a more unique opportunity to change lives of young offenders in Vanderburgh County. Let's capture a vision together that raises the bar for other communities. One of the most exciting days in the history of Evansville's Rescue Missions 84 year existence will be when we finalize with you and the County Council a long term contract to provide needed guidance and placement for the most troubled teenagers in this region. I envision a facility that can handle as many youths as necessary in a secure yet safe environment, a facility that can provide help regardless of the crime. A facility that does not have to turn away anyone except for emergency medial treatment. A facility that can accommodate teenagers picked up the police department or the sheriff's departments and are waiting for family to come after them. A facility that can provide day treatment for juveniles who have no further school alternatives and there are a bunch of those out there. I look forward to a facility to where youth can be inspired to achieve higher goals and to dream big and it is going to be great when we together reduce crime, child neglect and abuse and poverty to minuscule proportions. We look forward to hearing from you on this matter and we will just wanted to take a few minutes to let you know that we very much are committed more than ever to help at risk children here in this county. If we can help you all in anyway we want to do that as well. We thank you for the time. Commissioner Mourdock: Steve, you might introduce your board members who are here. Steve Perry: I will be glad to do that. This is Norm Snyder, our board president; Ken Haynie, Jr., Dave Kishline, Jim Price, Ray Wright is behind us here. Marcus Head is our, one of our staff members, Michael Bland, Mr. Bob Withers is our Supervisor of our Start Unit, the non secure program; John Cassaphant is one of our staff members as well and Mr. Joe Hudson is our Supervisor of the Safety Unit. They do an outstanding job and render a great service to the children who need to come to our facility to get the discipline that is required of them. Commissioner Mourdock: I am not in any way asking you to negotiate at the microphone so please do not misinterpret the question. But, in saying what you said towards the end of your remarks about wanting to look forward to finalizing a long term contract for guidance and placement of trouble youths. Do you have any idea at this point at what you see is necessary in terms for that type of contract and when you'd be looking forward, when you see something like that necessary and how that drives your schedule forward? Obviously, there are a lot of questions that come into that, but. Steve Perry: Like we were saying before, we really want to build a facility, a juvenile detention facility that can work in harmony with the jail services that are provided adults but at the same time be at a different campus and we can treat juveniles differently and it takes a special person to work with these young people and there is a lot more interaction that is required and I think that it itself has led to very little physical violence or physical fist of cuffs if you will among those who have had to stay and use our services. These men behind me do a brilliant job in facilitating arguments and resolving differences and interacting at appropriate times and even beyond that passing on good and moral character and skills that will given to them for the rest of their lives. Commissioner Mourdock: All of that certainly being true, though, with the purpose of this board being to handle the contractual matters for the County, again I heard you say that it is something that you are looking forwarding to do and you are ready to move forward to do those things. What do you need from this board? When are you going to need it? When can you present such a formal proposal to us or least to the County Attorney so that he can start looking through it. I mean, we need something to react to, I guess it what I am saying. Steve Perry: Well, in our last meeting we had talked about a contractual agreement I think and I believe that everybody agrees to consensus that this is a good idea. Numbers have been better since the new judge has taken office and he has used us quite regularly and it has been a great relationship, it has been wonderful, actually. So, that has kind of minimized the pressure on finalizing anything and putting it in writing. It has also given us more time to think through what we needed to do in terms of offering a facility to the county. To serve the purpose and one that will be state of the art. So, that has to be taken into consideration as well when we get into this construction and design phase and you all are on board with us on this and you really see the value of young people being placed separately and in a different context. It would be more logical then to talk about what the annual budget is going to be required. Commissioner Mourdock: Okay. But, just understand our view. We just sat through a two hour discussion and both Catherine and David asked the numerous participants, is the money that the County Council allocating going to be sufficient to do all of the things that we basically laid out to them. Which is, under the concept, to do Community Corrections, a juvenile facility and the jail. If you are doing something now or are in a position to do something differently that would pull out one of those components then that effects what we have to do in dealing with that architect. So, all of these things can't be going on independent of each other. We need input from you on a fairly timely basis. You heard us say at the start of this meeting that on the 21st we are going to try and come to a final determination with the architect which means that we need to know what we are doing with you by that day. But, that process has to start to unfold so that we know where we are going on each of those three fronts. Commissioner Fanello: Basically, we would have to have some kind of contract or what you are thinking of in terms of a contract. Steve Perry: You would want that two weeks from today? Commissioner Mourdock: No. Commissioner Fanello: No, not necessarily two weeks from today. Commissioner Mourdock: But, it is going to help by having the Rescue Mission define for us what you are looking at as potential options. It may give us greater flexibility in doing what we need to do with now just a jail and community corrections concept, realizing that there is still cost for us with what you are doing. But, all of these things have to mesh together and it's three gears and they are all running simultaneously and we have to make sure that we have all of those covered. So- Steve Perry: Absolutely and we want to work together with you on that. We certainly don't want to work independently. Commissioner Mourdock: If your board can digest all of that and get back to us as speedily as possible, I think that would be helpful. Steve Perry: If we can help to take the juvenile component out of the equation for a bond issue or whatever, it would suit us just fine. Commissioner Mourdock: That is the kind of issue that we need to deal with. Commissioner Fanello: Are you interested in working with surrounding counties or just stay in Vanderburgh Counties? Steve Perry: I am sure that we would be, I think it could help ease some of the financial demands of the County but our primary interest is Vanderburgh County. Our secondary interest would be other counties. We would like to help as many young people as we can but we also realize that if we enter an agreement with you we would to do the bulk of our business with the County. So, if they are in favor of wanting to bring their children to the county we would love to accommodate them too. Any other question that we can address with you? Phil Hayes: Just briefly, Steve I am sure you are aware that Judge Niemeier has furnished some language to me to go over and he and I have had a chance in the last 60 days to speak about three or four occasions and look at that draft. Now, that particular contract language is what you are referring to tonight? It is just the money increment, the length of time and the of course, there are many, many other technical issues to be covered. Steve Perry: The contract that Judge Niemeier showed me the other day and gave me a copy of was a contract that we drafted back in 1995 when we began our Safety Unit and I believe that it was required at the Department of Corrections at that time in order to get the start up grant that we needed, that some kind of formal budget was in place. Phil Hayes: Right. Steve Perry: It wasn't anything other than a per diem agreement that had been reached and that is still what we have been going by. Phil Hayes: Pretty much what we have been going along with now as well. It is the carryover of that as we speak. Steve Perry: The contract that you are referring to referred to a per diem cost per day per child- Phil Hayes: That's the reference- Steve Perry: We are looking more at a contractual agreement on an annual basis that doesn't hinge on numbers of children being involved at any given day or whatever but providing a service that makes sure it takes care of the needs. Phil Hayes: I understand. Steve Perry: The needs of everybody throughout the year. Phil Hayes: Understood. Steve Perry: So, I have that document in place and I have been reviewing that and I will go to work on it additionally as well. Phil Hayes: Okay, then we will continue to consult with the Judge and anyway we can be of assistance on the legal side of it, why have him rattle me. Steve Perry: Alright, I will and thanks
a lot.
President Mosby: Thank you. (Tape Change) President Mosby: Is there any other individual wishing to address the board? City Councilman? The Sheriff. Brad Ellsworth: Good evening, I am Sheriff Brad Ellsworth. A little bit of information, looking for a little guidance, also sharing some present information, this past weekend we were reporting on Saturday on Sunday, we didn't go above the ICLU agreement with the population on Sunday went to 350, we had to report 354 and that is obviously above the 329 cap. Our numbers, Tim said that our numbers have been better to or worse however you want to look at it. But, I am in to look for guidance and informing you what is going on. Under last years Commission, we sought and gained permission to transfer inmates if we got to the 329 number and I am going to look for guidance from this Commission to see what they want done. We have talked to the area, the three surrounding counties, they do have some bed space available if we find it necessary to move inmates. We have also spoke to Judge Pigman and he seemed willing to convene meetings which is obviously cheaper if we can convene meetings with the local judiciary and the local prosecutor to reduce bonds and or to stay sentences to get inmates out of the jail. They have done that before and I think Commissioner Mourdock will remember this that they have had long meetings and I think that the grand total of people that they let out after a four hour meeting was four people. Three or four people. So they weren't sure how beneficial that would be. As I state in my letter, it is our position that the judges are very well aware that the numbers and the population in the jail and that they are probably doing what they feel is necessary with their bonds. But, at least Judge Pigman said that he is willing to convene meetings if we get to that point and we have not talked to Judge Heldt or the Prosecutor yet but I don't assume that they would not want to meet. Some of the things that we are going to look at and start exploring who we would move first if we get to that point where we have to start moving people to other counties, as I mentioned there. The surrounding counties will do that at the rate of $35.00 a day plus any medical expenses plus any other costs incurred, prescriptions, any transportation. Obviously at this point our plan is that if we have to move inmates that we would take sentenced misdemeanants first. We looked at that is probably somewhere in the area of 10 - 12 that have sentenced misdemeanors in the jail and we would move them first. People that are sentenced first, second, people with the longest the least serious felons and people that are awaiting court dates but the furthest out. So, that would cut down on our amount of moving. Any direction, like I said, Phil I don't know if at some point we need to talk with Mr. Faulk and see how they handle this in other jurisdictions when we only go for a couple of days. Phil Hayes: Yeah, we had talked briefly I think at the end of last week you had informed me about the potentials and I think that we just touched base. Brad Ellsworth: Right. Phil Hayes: I think that we both came to the same conclusion that on Mondays we are going to be having some active bonding out and you may not even know what that result is until Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday. But, what we are talking about is that there is a good deal of activity over the warm weekends because as we know there is a direct correlation to warm weather verses the cold weather. So, in terms of our population, so specifically you will be seeing the result of bond determinations that were made this morning, tonight, tomorrow all the way through the week, I am sure. One suggestion that I have for you is that you are the possessor of some trenchant statistics and I feel certain that the judges and the prosecutor will not object whatsoever to you following up simply on showing statistically what you have, same classification of crime, amount of bond because it may take a while to discern that from your current statistics but if they were admitting somebody to bail in similar situations, similar records for one price last winter, then maybe we would see the same thing happen if it were simply called to their attention given that everybody is busy and I don't think that is an intrusion on authority because you're obviously actively engaged in this effort to try and follow up, they are stake holders as well. So, I am giving you a legal opinion that I don't think that you are going to get kicked out of the office if you submit that down to Division II and if you would like I would be more than happy to advance the suggestion. Chief Judge owes me one anyway. Brad Ellsworth: Great. ( inaudible) Phil Hayes: I don't know that is going to occur but on the statistics that I received by e-mail and zipped up and taken a look at them each time that they come in there is some suggestion as least in my experience that there may be comparisons that can be made and they may wish to go ahead and address it anyway because of the heightened sensitivity that we have in our position of trying to settle a lawsuit and by the way I will take it up with Mr. Faulk because we are going to meet on Thursday with the three interested attorneys here in the county and with Mr. Faulk and we are going to spend some time going over how to begin to shut down the litigation. So, I can certainly report this and in fact I will show him the memo so that he is well aware of where we are and we will try to get some assistance in terms of his representation with his clients. Brad Ellsworth: And that again is what I am asking. By today at 1:00 it was back down under the 329 so we dropped 25 inmates. Phil Hayes: Right, just right away. Brad Ellsworth: We need a mechanism is place that if it is on Wednesday and it is over is that when we start? Phil Hayes: Yeah, I think- Commissioner Mourdock: I guess that you are basically trying to establishment something based on the number of concurrent days. When they were under the order before they finally gave the Sheriff the authority to release people from jail, which he might request some day Commissioner Fanello: (inaudible - microphone not on) Commissioner Mourdock: Well, neither is the Marion County Sheriff, but he does, the Federal Judge did give him that authority so he has the ability to release people from jail, which I find amazing. But, at least prior to that, they put something in place where they had 2 or 3 days concurrently so that if it is above and below, I think something like that would be a prudent thing for us to day. Maybe three days I would suggest. The second part though is your question at the end of the second paragraph which is that if we start sending people off to those other jails, what is our funding mechanism to take care of that cost? Brad Ellsworth: Right. I don't have anything in a line item or any kind of budget for that. I have medical for the jail but I don't have a mechanism to pay the Warrick County Sheriff. So, obviously that is going to take the fiscal body. Commissioner Mourdock: How did we do that before? Did we do an emergency appropriation or something when we sent some folks over there? Brad Ellsworth: We never did. Commissioner Mourdock: We ended up not having to send them? Brad Ellsworth: We got the permission but I don't think that we ever had any money in place. Eric Williams: No, no funding was ever specifically put in place for that. The few that we have moved back and forth have just been basically gentlemen's agreements between the Sheriff's. We have six outside of this county right now just for other reasons to keep them out of our jurisdiction. But, those we trade back and forth. Brad Ellsworth: It has never been because of the overcrowding. We just put them in there. It has been court cases and safety issues. It is one of those gentlemen agreements that we will do it for them if they call and - Commissioner Mourdock: There is no expectation that we can remain gentlemanly? Brad Ellsworth: I don't think for that many people. I don't see it happening. They don't like us that much. Commissioner Fanello: I would suggest that until we get some other answers (inaudible - microphone not turned on) Brad Ellsworth: Yeah, until that point, we are going to try and get with the judges and that and if we can get an opinion from Mr. Faulk and some kind of, like I said, what they have experienced, or he has experienced and if he is going to jam us up over this 354 on a Sunday when it is gone by Monday. Phil Hayes: Yeah, I don't think it is a reasonable interpretation of any stipulations that was made that a one day or a two day dislocation for basically for processing is a problem. I think that you have your safety concerns first for employees and I think on a secondary basis that it is getting that capacity pushed through and you have to use what facilities are available to you which is the operations of Division II and Misdemeanor Court and Circuit Court and where those cases fall as being assigned. But, I reiterate that you already have a history in the course of development of this jail project and in dealing with the litigation of communicating to the parties at the same time. Which would of course be, it would be the Prosecutor, the Judge and I might add the Defense Counsel and you may want to send to Steve Owens, the administrator of PD operations who has the bulk of that population who are assigned to PD. I have a feeling that among those parties, the four parties, that you might come to some review. Each one has the power other than yourself to bring the subject of review of bail before the court . It very well just may be accidental at the time that it occurs, the arresting police officer may have made a suggestion in the report and the Prosecutor followed it. So, it may be that the additional information may be welcome from you. I will be more than glad to make a call tomorrow in regard to our view as to your authority to do that. Commissioner Mourdock: Is one of the options that would be looked at, possibly electronic house arrest? Brad Ellsworth: I am trying to think over the last three years how they viewed that as a Community Corrections precedent as being the last carrot in corrections. I am not real big on that as a pre-bond, I am not saying that it wouldn't happen or that it can't happen. I think that's the judges, if I remember you know the countless meetings that we have had, that was not something the judges were really in favor of was putting electronic monitoring on. Commissioner Mourdock: Well, I am not in favor of it either except in an emergency step here. Brad Ellsworth: Sure and I think that is an option that we certainly need to make available to the judges. But, it certainly hasn't been used very much and we have called for that before. Commissioner Mourdock: Well, for what's it worth, I remember with some humor, that when this issue came up last year, the suggestion was made that we send people to Warrick County, I voted against it because I didn't like starting a precedent of shipping our people elsewhere and it would remove the constraints to keep the caps low. Bettye Lou Jerrel and Pat Tuley voted to send them out and the newspaper did an editorial and said that all three of us cast the right vote. That was the most peculiar editorial I can recall. Brad Ellsworth: I think it can go, like I said at some point, you know and being from law enforcement it pains me to have the inmate realize that they are getting their jail sentence shortened or getting a reduced bond not because of what the judge feels is right but because it is driven by the numbers in the jail. Phil Hayes: Right and you are not applying that to pre-trial detainees because they has been no determination. Brad Ellsworth: Right. Phil Hayes: But there are others standards, like previous history and even the possible testimony from people considering the current threat. So that is what you are getting at but the pre-trial detainees who have not been determined who otherwise would qualify, I think that is what we are all talking about up here, if they would otherwise qualify for checking or monitoring. We have all seen telephone check in, in lieu of cash bails. Brad Ellsworth: It is certainly a tax on the law enforcement officer. Especially when you bring failure to appears which is a majority of or warrants. The person has five failure to appears and you reduce his bond to $50.00. He is not coming back to court, I don't care what you say. He can tell you anything he wants and then my officers need PD to go back and their life is in danger trying to police them up again for the next court date which perpetuates that court docket and it's the same old story. Commissioner Fanello: So, I guess that Phil will talk with (inaudible - microphone not on) Brad Ellsworth: We will get with the judges and keep them appraised and see if they want to convene bond - President Mosby: I think it would be smart if you went to County Council and set up a line item. Brad Ellsworth: Might be a good idea. President Mosby: That would be my suggestion just in case, I mean with the way they meet, I mean you can go one week and have a hearing and go the next week and then voted on and then you are out for three or four weeks and if we run into a major problem. Eric Williams: You suggest that we do that? President Mosby: We can do it. I like going over there. I am starting to enjoy it. Commissioner Mourdock: I move that the Commission President make a council call to request funding for possible expenditures to hold our inmates in jails of other counties. Commissioner Fanello: I will second that motion. President Mosby: I vote no. I am just
kidding. So ordered. I will make a request tomorrow. I will have Tammy
write up a request for me and get it on the agenda? Any other individual
wishing to address the board? Seeing none. County Engineer. Department
Head reports.
John Stoll: First item that I have is a request for proposals for engineering services for the Green River Road/Millersburg Road intersection. This is a project that was initiated by EUTS and the project basically is the installation of traffic signal and an addition of turn lanes on each leg of the intersection and in addition to that we have also added to have some of the hill of the west lane of the intersection cut down to improve site distance as you approach the intersection. The reason we are bringing a request for proposals is because since it is a federal aid job we don't have sufficient staff to undertake such a project in our with our existing staff. So, it is recommended that the request for proposals be approved for advertising. Commissioner Mourdock: So moved. Commissioner Fanello: Second. President Mosby: Motion and second,
so ordered.
John Stoll: In that I put the due date for the proposals as June 18, so we will see you in about six weeks. The second item that I have is a request for acceptance of a streets of Section IV of the Seasons. This is 536 feet of Seasons Ridge Boulevard, 330 feet of Star Dance Point and 330 feet of Snow Flake Cove. All streets were constructed in general accordance with the approved plans so it is recommended that they be accepted for maintenance. Commissioner Fanello: So moved. Commissioner Mourdock: Second. President Mosby: I have a motion and a second, so ordered. John Stoll: Next I have a change order on contract VC01-04-03 the St. Joseph Avenue Culvert Replacement project. The over run was for $73.70 and the reason for the over run was due to some additional stone that was placed on the shoulders. It is recommended that this be approved as well. Commissioner Mourdock: So moved. Commissioner Fanello: Second. President Mosby: I was getting ready to second your motion, I thought that the 73 scared her. I don't know. So ordered. Commissioner Fanello: (inaudible - microphone turned off) John Stoll: Next, I would like to make a request to go to County Council to transfer $40,000 from the Broadway Avenue Bridge account that is for bridge 273, the account number was 2030-4401 transferred to the Boyle Lane Bridge account number 2030-4391. This is a request to transfer $40,000 and the request is due to the fact that when we originally budgeted for this bridge last summer, we didn't realize that the bridge needed raised as much as it does in order to reduce the upstream flood elevations. Basically, the low structure on the new bridge will be about the deck elevation of the current bridge. So, it will be raised in the neighborhood of three feet. President Mosby: Which bridge is it? John Stoll: This is Boyle Lane and it's on, immediately east of Highway 41 north of Baseline Road. It is next to the RV place. Commissioner Fanello: Motion. Commissioner Mourdock: Second. President Mosby: So ordered. John Stoll: Last item that I have is approval for a culvert replacement on Wolf Creek Drive located off of Eickhoff Road. This is to replace an existing corrugated metal pipe with a 6 by 5 foot concrete box culvert. This is part of the overall development plan for the Haas development that the rezoning was approved for a couple of weeks ago, a couple of months ago. I can't remember exactly when. Basically, in order to develop the upstream area they had to put in this larger culvert so there again they would lower the upstream elevations and make the ground develop able, So, they have prepared this plan so basically they are going to come out here, remove the existing culvert, they will remove the concrete payment out to the nearest joint so that we don't get any diagonal cuts across the road and then they are going to install the culvert in the same manner that we do whenever we put projects out to bid. It is recommended that this be approved as well. Commissioner Mourdock: Second. President Mosby: They are paying for all of this too correct? Commissioner Fanello: Second. John Stoll: Yes. President Mosby: So ordered. Commissioner Mourdock: Is the culvert that the guy was standing in when he sent the pictures around that night? John Stoll: I'm sorry? Commissioner Mourdock: When we had that zoning and drainage board too, I think. The fellow handed around the pictures and he was standing in the one culvert. Is this the one we are replacing? John Stoll: I didn't those pictures. I don't think he could have stood in that one. President Mosby: You are thinking of the one that comes under Eickhoff Road, I think. The picture I saw. Commissioner Mourdock: Yeah. President Mosby: It is a pretty good size culvert. Is that it, John? John Stoll: Yes. The last thing I got is what Phil just handed me. It is the deed to transfer the property , to transfer to county's rights to the property out at Old State and Campbell and 41 where the cross sits. This is the request from the Kiwanis Club that was made a couple of weeks ago. The original deed didn't sufficiently define the right of way for Old State Road and the Kiwanis Club turnaround had their consultants modify the deed. I have reviewed it and Phil has reviewed it. Commissioner Mourdock: Is this just a quit-claim deed then? John Stoll: Yes. Commissioner Mourdock: I will move approval. Commissioner Fanello: Second. President Mosby: Motion and a second, so ordered. Commissioner Mourdock: Is that it, John? John Stoll: Yes. Commissioner Mourdock: Then I have one for you then. I have a call regarding the speed limit on Heckel Road that is currently 45 with the new development out there off of Keystone and such, would you check into that and see what we might do. I am not either for or against it at this point but I know that when we get these requests we typically look at them and we do a study through your office or through EUTS and see what's appropriate. John Stoll: Right, EUTS puts traffic counters out and they find out what the current speeds are. Commissioner Mourdock: Here is the name of the lady that called me if you would like to give her a call just to let her know that you are looking into it, I would appreciate it. President Mosby: Anything else? Thank
you, John.
President Mosby: County Highway. Ralph
called and said that something has come up and he didn't have anything
more than his report, so I told him that was fine.
President Mosby: Uh, County Attorney
has nothing.
President Mosby: Superintendent of County Buildings. Tammy McKinney: I have a couple of things: I have one late (inaudible). I want to get permission from the Commissioners to use the credit card tomorrow. You are probably not aware of it but when(inaudible) we were left with nothing. There is not hammer, a screwdriver or anything. Today, I went to Kuesters to get some sandpaper to do some of the walls over there, the Kuesters on the west side and North Park, who is going out of business so everything is 50% off. So, now is the time to get some hammers, and get some things. Commissioner Mourdock: To get hammered. President Mosby: Anybody that needs tools, go to Kuesters tomorrow. Commissioner Mourdock: That ought to be worth another 10% just for the advertisement. President Mosby: Yeah. Commissioner Mourdock: I will move approval of the use of the credit card for the purpose of getting the few basic of the Old Courthouse. Catherine Fanello: Second. President Mosby: I have a motion and a second, so ordered. Tammy McKinney: I won't go crazy, I promise. President Mosby: Any other? Is our part-time employee working out okay? Tammy McKinney: He is working out very good. I don't know if Community Corrections likes it as well because he white gloves everything. President Mosby: Gary was kind of hoping that you would say no so that we can send him back. Brad Ellsworth: Brad Ellsworth, Sheriff. This amazes me that will cover Christmas next year. I was just thinking about when you were talking about Kuesters and that. Since we don't do at Community Corrections some of the community service that we did before, especially with the highway and the lawn cutting, we may have stuff. There is tons of tools and tool rooms that at some point I was going to approach the Commission about holding an auction of those items. President Mosby: Tammy wants to bid. Brad Ellsworth: I was just thinking that is something that we might be something that we could put together. If you, if you can make a list of what you need, we probably have it over there. Tammy McKinney: We need everything. There is nothing. We are bringing stuff from home, just to get some jobs done. Brad Ellsworth: If that's okay, why don't you, we have stuff just laying in garages over there. Tons of stuff. Tammy McKinney: That's at Community Corrections? Brad Ellsworth: Correct. If, in fact, is Mark Sturgeon. Tammy McKinney: Well, Mark and I were going to go. Brad Ellsworth: Put together a wish list and we will get with Sturgeon. Tammy McKinney: Here, Santa. Mark and I were going to go tomorrow and get some things. So, is that okay to go over there tomorrow. Brad Ellsworth: That's and see Mike Sturgeon and I will call Steve Woodall and we will, we will probably have what you need. It may not be sandpaper, but we might- President Mosby: Tools and stuff. Brad Ellsworth: Tons of stuff. President Mosby: I appreciate it. Brad Ellsworth: At some time, I may approach the Commission about putting together an auction to get rid of all of that stuff. President Mosby: Okay. Unidentified: (inaudible comments) Brad Ellsworth: It should all come back to Community Corrections, I hope. Tammy McKinney: We usually do the auctions unless you want to. Brad Ellsworth: That is up to you. This could be literally hundreds or thousands of small items. I don't know if that is things that you would want to handle or if we would actually contract with an auction service to put this on out on site. I might put together some proposals on that. Commissioner Mourdock: Just officially, I move that the late travel request be added to the consent items. President Mosby: Tammy, is that it? Tammy McKinney: Yes. President Mosby: Phil, did you have
anything.
Gary Hohman: Gary Hohman, Burdette Park. I have informed Brad that we would welcome any free gifts as well. You have our work reports there tonight. The only other items that I would like to bring to your attention is the updates of where we are at this particular point. As a matter of fact, the reason I am here tonight rather than Steve is that he is giving orientation for some 80 future pool employees tonight. Our schedule for opening of our miniature golf is on schedule for the 17th of this month. I think for those of you that haven't been by there will be pleasantly surprised when you see the new oasis miniature golf concept. It is going to be totally revamped and renovated. It will be very pleasing to the eye. Our pool, we are scheduled to open the 26th to the general public. We have a number of school groups that will be in there prior to the 26th, the earliest being the patrol boys that are coming in on May the 17th followed by four or five different school groups prior to us opening for the general public. That is all that I have Mr. Chairman. President Mosby: Any questions? Thank
you, Gary, I appreciate it.
Commissioner Mourdock: I have one thing per the ozone officers report here. Dr. Alexandrovich has asked that she be appointed to the I-69 advisory panel. As you may know, they had a thing in the paper the other day where they are looking for some additional input on other factors. She is very much a supporter of the road and her interest has been peeked every time she hears that the possibility that the road could help reduce a little bit of air admissions. So, I would move that we appoint her to the advisory panel. Commissioner Fanello: Second. Commissioner Mourdock: Tammy, if you would, I will give this to you and it has some names and such and if you would maybe compose a letter on behalf of us appointing Joanne to that. President Mosby: Motion and second, so ordered. Any other comments? Commissioner Mourdock: I will move approval of the consent items for the Ozone Officer and SWCD as filed. Commissioner Fanello: Second. President Mosby: So ordered.
Commissioner Fanello: That wasn't
all the consent items was it?
Commissioner Mourdock: That was just the Department Head Reports. I move approval of all of the consent items including the addition. Commissioner Fanello: Second. President Mosby: Motion and a second,
so ordered.
Commissioner Mourdock: Phil, I saw something go through the routing basket where you had suggested that we needed an Executive Session for tonight, which obviously we weren't able to do for the full schedule. Should we try that for next week. Commissioner Fanello: We have Solid Waste. Commissioner Mourdock: Oh, that's right. President Mosby: The 21st if that will work. Commissioner Mourdock: Okay, then I move that we advertise for an Executive Session for 5:00 p.m. on the 21st. Commissioner Fanello: Second. President Mosby: I have a motion and a second, May 21st, 5:00 p.m. Executive Session, so ordered. Any other scheduled meetings? Tammy McKinney: The Courthouse Task Force will have a meeting this Thursday. President Mosby: Okay. I know something
that I was going to discuss while you was giving your report and I forgot,
so I will go to Old Business.
President Mosby: Old Business. Commissioner Fanello: I have one thing. Has everyone seen the letter than Phil gave about the RAP contract that we talked about last week? Commissioner Mourdock: For the C-42? Suzanne Crouch: You don't have your mike on. Commissioner Fanello: Oh, I am sorry. The public safety client server project. Commissioner Mourdock: I received a draft from Chief Deputy Ellsworth and sent him an e-mail defining it. Commissioner Fanello: I was going to say that if everyone is okay with that letter, we could just move approval on that. Have you seen it? President Mosby: Which one are you talking about? No, I have not looked at this one. Commissioner Mourdock: It basically says that they have to acknowledge that we have not authorized money for expenditures President Mosby: Right, correct, okay. Commissioner Fanello: I will move approval on the. Commissioner Mourdock: Second. President Mosby: Motion and a second,
so ordered. Any other old business? New business?
Commissioner Mourdock: Motion to adjourn. Commissioner Fanello: Second.
President Mourdock: I was going to. Commissioner Mourdock: Oh. Commissioner Fanello: Rescind. President Mosby: You mentioned to me the other day the Old Courthouse roof. Tammy McKinney: Yes. President Mosby: That you were up there and we have some problems there that is going to cause future damage. Tammy McKinney: Yes. President Mosby: I had mentioned that to a couple of County Councilmembers, my opinion is- Tammy McKinney: I can take them on a tour if they want. President Mosby: No, they didn't really want to go on a tour. Tammy McKinney: I can't understand why. President Mosby: I guess that we need to get a couple of people over there and look at it and possibly look at getting some quotes to what it would take or what we are looking at - Tammy McKinney: The thing is that we can find someone who can work with copper and slate and I don't know if anyone around here does that. President Mosby: (inaudible) he is on your board and if he doesn't, then contact ICI or one of them and find out what kind of options we have there and get a couple of people to look at it so we know about what we are facing. It is something that we need to discuss before we do future damage to the structure. Commissioner Mourdock: Be ready to hold your breath when you see those prices. President Mosby: Well, I am not really excited about it but I know that it's got to be done. So, that being. Phil Hayes: Mr. President, may I have just a few moments to clarify the record to night in regards to the ordinances? Particularly the Abandoned Vehicle thing. Just for clarification, the Commissioner was concerned about the item, especially when he said that somebody said it wouldn't pass the County Council, that you have a concern about doing that. Let me clarify, that was a discussion prior to the time that there was an analysis done on the administration of it and how to make that function. I have been assured since going through several courses of discussion, not only with this body but the County Auditor, that the way was cleared to go ahead and advertise that ordinance whether it went through the County Council or whether it went through this body. So, I wanted to assure you that there wasn't, I didn't make some choice based on calculation of passage or non-passage in one place or the other and I just want to make sure that our records reflect that, it is not my call. I certainly didn't do it but we've, I was assured that there weren't any procedural problems in advertising that and going ahead and clearing it through. So, thank you for that. President Mosby: With all being said. Commissioner Fanello: Motion to adjourn. Commissioner Mourdock: So, I second. President Mosby: Motion, second, so ordered. Meeting adjourned at 7:34 p.m.
|
