VANDERBURGH COUNTY

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS

NOVEMBER 3, 2009

The Vanderburgh County Board of Commissioners met in session this 3^rd day of November, 2009 at 5:01 p.m. in room 301 of the Civic Center Complex with President Troy Tornatta presiding.

President Tornatta: Good evening. We’re going to start the Board of Commissioners meeting, November 3, 2009, just a hair after 5:00 in room 301. Attendance roll call, please.

Madelyn Grayson: Commissioner Winnecke?

Commissioner Winnecke: Here.

Madelyn Grayson: Commissioner Melcher?

Commissioner Melcher: Here.

Madelyn Grayson: President Tornatta?

President Tornatta: Here.

President Tornatta: Normally we have a name, but we don’t today, anybody from Patchwork Central? Come on up. Who do we have today?

Amy Rich: Hi, I’m Amy Rich, and I’m one of the co-executive directors at Patchwork, and this is Alyssa Powers who is a teen who participates in our program and in our leadership training.

President Tornatta: I’ll tell you what, first of all, if you guys would lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance, we would appreciate it.

(The Pledge of Allegiance was given.)

President Tornatta: Okay, Amy, tell us about your holiday sale.

Amy Rich: Sure, Patchwork Central is having our annual holiday sale on November 14^th from 9:00 in the morning until 3:00 in the afternoon. We feature a lot of art by local artists, so it’s a great chance for people to come down, support local artists, and also support Patchwork Central, because part of the proceeds from the sale go to support Patchwork. Patchwork is a small, non-profit that serves the neighborhood near downtown. We’re located at 100 Washington Avenue, and we have a variety of programs that include an after school and summer children’s program that Alyssa is part of, that’s offered to kids free of charge. We also have a food pantry that’s open in the mornings, it’s an emergency food pantry, and bicycle programs for giving bikes to homeless people, and a lot of just neighborhood hospitality and being open for people who are in need and helping to connect them to services that they need.

President Tornatta: Super. Any questions of Amy? Alyssa, why don’t you step up to the mic and just tell us a little bit of how you been affected by Patchwork.

Alyssa Powers: Well, I started going there when I was three years old, but there’s an anti-drug and alcohol program that I’m a part of, and I help teach the younger kids not to get into drugs and stuff. We look up our lessons, and, you know, different teen volunteers and we teach it to the middle school age and elementary school kids.

President Tornatta: Super, so, you’re a successful teacher of the anti-drug campaign. Alright, well, thank you for coming out and leading us in the Pledge.

Amy Rich: Thanks.

President Tornatta: Good luck with your sale.

Amy Rich: Thanks.

President Tornatta: Alright.

President Tornatta: We have two guests with us from Youth Resources. My special guest is Harper Speciale. What school do you go to, Harper?

Harper Speciale: I go to Harrison.

President Tornatta: Alright, Harrison High School. And, Steve?

Commissioner Melcher: Well, I always let them introduce themselves.

President Tornatta: Okay.

Haley Speciale: I’m Haley Speciale, and I go to Harrison High School.

Commissioner Melcher: What grade?

Haley Speciale: I’m a Freshman.

President Tornatta: Alright. Lloyd, you were left out today. That’s okay. That’s alright.

President Tornatta: We’re going to quickly run through a couple of things, just orders of business here, and then we would like to have a special presentation from the Sheriff. So, permission to open bids, Old Courthouse plaster repair.

Commissioner Melcher: So moved.

Commissioner Winnecke: Second.

President Tornatta: A motion and a second to open the bids. All in favor say aye.

All Commissioners: Aye.

President Tornatta: Alright.

President Tornatta: Action items, first reading of CO.11-09-017, an ordinance amending chapter 2.40 of code of ordinances for dental procedures and fees.

Commissioner Melcher: Move for approval.

Commissioner Winnecke: Second.

President Tornatta: A motion and a second. Any questions or discussion? Roll call vote.

Commissioner Winnecke: I would just–

President Tornatta: Oh, go ahead.

Commissioner Winnecke: –add that this is request made by the Board of Health, adding services to the very important dental clinic in our inner city.

President Tornatta: I know that Gary’s been working on that list to try and make sure those fees are compensable for what they get. So, appreciate that, Gary. That being said, roll call vote.

Commissioner Melcher: Is there any public comment?

President Tornatta: I saw none.

Commissioner Melcher: Okay.

Madelyn Grayson: Commissioner Winnecke?

Commissioner Winnecke: Yes.

Madelyn Grayson: Commissioner Melcher?

Commissioner Melcher: Yes.

Madelyn Grayson: President Tornatta?

President Tornatta: Yes.

(Motion approved 3-0)

President Tornatta: Health Department phase three grant agreement by Indiana State Department of Health to Vanderburgh County for the Vanderburgh County Board of Health for H1N1 preparedness and response.

Gary Heck: It’s been reviewed by the.....Gary Heck with the Vanderburgh County Health Department. It’s been reviewed by the County Attorney, this is the third and final phase which will give us the funds that we will be using to actually implement the H1N1 response plan. This would be the funds that would allow us to pay for vaccinators and other use of buildings or anything else as we find that we need them, on the agreements that you have approved for us in the last several months.

President Tornatta: And that’s for $375,221?

Gary Heck: That’s correct.

Commissioner Winnecke: Mr. President, before I move approval, maybe it would be helpful if Gary reiterated the upcoming clinic sites.

Gary Heck: I would be happy to. We’re having an H1N1 clinic tomorrow. It will be at the CK Newsome Center from 2:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. So, primarily, if people get in line by 6:00 p.m. we should be able to get them through and done within a reasonable amount of time. That hopefully will allow some folks, when they get off work at 5:00, to still be there and be ready for that particular clinic. This one is for the tier one target populations. Those include pregnant women, people who live with and care for children under the age of six months, health care or emergency medical services personnel, persons between the age of six months and 24 years of age, and then people from 25 to 64 who are a higher risk for the H1N1 because of some chronic health disorders or compromised immune systems. That’s the first of three clinics. Next Tuesday, this would be on November the 10^th, there will be a special clinic for pregnant women only at the Vanderburgh County Health Department at 420 Mulberry Street. That clinic will be from 1:00 to 6:00, Tuesday, November the 10^th. Then, on Thursday, November the 12^th, there will another H1N1 vaccination clinic at the CK Newsome Center, and that will be from 2:00 to 6:00 for the same tier one populations that we just mentioned.

President Tornatta: On the 10^th that’s for women who are pregnant only?

Gary Heck: That’s correct.

President Tornatta: Okay. Alright, so, 11/4 from 2:00 to 6:00 at CK Newsome; 11/10 from 1:00 to 6:00 at the Health Department; and 11/12 from 2:00 to 6:00 at CK Newsome?

Gary Heck: That is correct.

President Tornatta: And, any website, what website would they go to?

Gary Heck: The website would be www.vanderburghgov.org/h1n1 that would take you directly to the Health Department’s H1N1 webpage, and there’s a blue vaccination clinic button that you will find on that page, and that will take you directly to when all of our next clinics are for this.

President Tornatta: Okay.

Gary Heck: It’s also, the H1N1 is linked directly from the Commissioners home page as well.

President Tornatta: Super. Okay.

Commissioner Winnecke: Mr. President, I will move approval of phase three of the grant agreement between the State Board of Health and the Vanderburgh County Board of Health.

Commissioner Melcher: Second.

President Tornatta: A motion and a second. Questions or discussion? If not, roll call vote.

Madelyn Grayson: Commissioner Winnecke?

Commissioner Winnecke: Yes.

Madelyn Grayson: Commissioner Melcher?

Commissioner Melcher: Yes.

Madelyn Grayson: President Tornatta?

President Tornatta: Yes.

(Motion approved 3-0)

President Tornatta: As Gary said, that makes up 53 percent of the population in that tier one which is approximately 90,000 individuals.

Gary Heck: That’s so.

President Tornatta: We’ve got a lot of stuff working.

Gary Heck: We sure do.

President Tornatta: Alright, thank you.

Gary Heck: Thank you so much.

President Tornatta: Prosecutor’s office, drug and crime control division program certified assurance and special provisions. This is an ICJI grant.

Commissioner Melcher: Move for approval.

Commissioner Winnecke: Second.

President Tornatta: A motion and a second. Questions or discussion? Roll call vote, please.

Madelyn Grayson: Commissioner Winnecke?

Commissioner Winnecke: Yes.

Madelyn Grayson: Commissioner Melcher?

Commissioner Melcher: Yes.

Madelyn Grayson: President Tornatta?

President Tornatta: Yes.

(Motion approved 3-0)

President Tornatta: Next, Weights and Measures lease at Executive Inn tenant estoppel certificate. The certificate which Browning Investments wishes the Commissioners to execute relative to Weights and Measures lease at the Executive Inn.

Commissioner Melcher: Move for approval.

Commissioner Winnecke: Second.

President Tornatta: A motion and a second. Questions or discussion? If not, roll call vote.

Madelyn Grayson: Commissioner Winnecke?

Commissioner Winnecke: Yes.

Madelyn Grayson: Commissioner Melcher?

Commissioner Melcher: Yes.

Madelyn Grayson: President Tornatta?

President Tornatta: Yes.

(Motion approved 3-0)

President Tornatta: Alright, and condemnation of Reising real estate for University Parkway construction. In March 2009 in conjunction with settling the Reising eminent domain matter the county agreed to take title to the Reising property and lease it back to them for a certain period of time. As part of the settlement the county agreed to pay the installment of taxes due in November 2009 and all subsequent taxes. Therefore it’s recommended that we amend the lease agreement to make that provision.

Commissioner Winnecke: So moved.

Commissioner Melcher: Second.

President Tornatta: A motion and a second. Questions or discussion? If not, roll call vote please.

Madelyn Grayson: Commissioner Winnecke?

Commissioner Winnecke: Yes.

Madelyn Grayson: Commissioner Melcher?

Commissioner Melcher: Yes.

Madelyn Grayson: President Tornatta?

President Tornatta: Yes.

(Motion approved 3-0)

President Tornatta: John, if you’ll come up, and before you do we’re going to go to new business. Come on up and we’ll go to new business and then get right to you. Under new business, the January 2010 meeting date. The schedule for the rest of the 2010 to be set in the ordinance of the meeting for, is that for zoning? Okay, it’s not in here. That’s for zoning. The first Tuesday in January is the 5^th. I think that would be the first meeting that we would set. Is that clear as mud?

Commissioner Winnecke: Our first meeting in January.

President Tornatta: Notes not so good.

Commissioner Winnecke: Our first meeting is January 5^th, and at that time we’ll–

President Tornatta: For the rezonings, yes.

Commissioner Winnecke: – set the meetings for the balance of the year by ordinance.

President Tornatta: Correct.

Commissioner Winnecke: Okay. I’ll move approval.

Commissioner Melcher: I’ll second it.

President Tornatta: A motion and a second. Questions or discussion? If not, roll call vote please.

Madelyn Grayson: Commissioner Winnecke?

Commissioner Winnecke: Yes.

Madelyn Grayson: Commissioner Melcher?

Commissioner Melcher: Yes.

Madelyn Grayson: President Tornatta?

President Tornatta: Yes.

(Motion approved 3-0)

President Tornatta: John?

John Stoll: First I have the right-of-way certification letter for phase three of the USI-Burdette Park bike path. This is the segment of the path between Nurrenbern and Broadway Avenue. This is the part that we’re attempting to get stimulus funds on. We just need to certify to INDOT that the right-of-way is secured. That’s why I brought that letter for you to sign this evening.

Commissioner Winnecke: So moved.

Commissioner Melcher: Second.

President Tornatta: A motion and a second. Questions or discussion? Roll call vote, please.

Madelyn Grayson: Commissioner Winnecke?

Commissioner Winnecke: Yes.

Madelyn Grayson: Commissioner Melcher?

Commissioner Melcher: Yes.

Madelyn Grayson: President Tornatta?

President Tornatta: Yes.

(Motion approved 3-0)

John Stoll: Then, next, I need to go before County Council to transfer $2,000 from our County Line Road Account to the Local Road and Street Legal Account. The Legal Account is running out of funds, and the County Line project was stopped, so we’ve got surplus funds in that account. So, I would request approval to go to Council to make that transfer.

Commissioner Winnecke: So moved.

Commissioner Melcher: Second.

President Tornatta: A motion and a second.

Commissioner Melcher: That’s the one you sent us an e-mail on? You sent us an e-mail on that one?

President Tornatta: Yes.

John Stoll: And on the next one that I’ll bring up as well, yeah.

President Tornatta: Any questions, discussion? Roll call vote, please.

Madelyn Grayson: Commissioner Winnecke?

Commissioner Winnecke: Yes.

Madelyn Grayson: Commissioner Melcher?

Commissioner Melcher: Yes.

Madelyn Grayson: President Tornatta?

President Tornatta: Yes.

(Motion approved 3-0)

John Stoll: Then, next is also a request to go to County Council, this would be to transfer $450,000 from the Baseline Bridge project, $60,000 from the Baehl Road Culvert project, $40,000 from the Mohr Road Bridge project, and $25,000 from the Sensmeier Bridge project to the First Avenue Bridge Rehab over Pigeon Creek. This would give us an approximate total of about $1.5 million, and that should cover the construction and the construction inspection on that project. In talking to Bernardin Lochmueller, the plans should be ready to go probably sometime in January, so we would be able to bid that project out sometime in early 2010, with this transfer.

Commissioner Melcher: Move for approval.

Commissioner Winnecke: Second.

President Tornatta: A motion and a second. Questions or discussion?

Commissioner Winnecke: Just, John, for clarification purposes in terms of the timing, all of the Lloyd Expressway work, or the majority of it should be done, so that bottleneck should be relieved?

John Stoll: I spoke to INDOT’s project engineer last week, they will have traffic running over the top of the new bridge on Fulton Avenue within the next couple of weeks. I don’t remember the exact schedule, but that should help alleviate some of the congestion, and, hopefully, we won’t have a big problem with overlapping detour routes.

Commissioner Winnecke: Refresh our memory on the time line for the First Avenue Bridge Rehab.

John Stoll: I don’t have the specific completion date, but in talking to the consultant they thought that it shouldn’t be a problem to get it completed within 2010, by the end of 2010.

Commissioner Winnecke: Okay, thank you.

President Tornatta: Roll call vote.

Madelyn Grayson: Commissioner Winnecke?

Commissioner Winnecke: Yes.

Madelyn Grayson: Commissioner Melcher?

Commissioner Melcher: Yes.

Madelyn Grayson: President Tornatta?

President Tornatta: Yes.

(Motion approved 3-0)

John Stoll: One other thing on the First Avenue too that we will have two lanes open throughout the course of the project. So, we won’t be closing the road down for that. It will be done half at a time.

President Tornatta: Okay.

John Stoll: The next item I have is the notice to bidders for section four of the Burdette Park bike path. This is the section that takes off from the east end of the path that was constructed a couple of years ago, and ties into the parking lot beside the Discovery Lodge. This would open bids on November 24^th, so, I just need approval for the notice to bidders and for the advertising.

Commissioner Melcher: Move for approval.

Commissioner Winnecke: Second.

President Tornatta: A motion and a second. Questions or discussion? Roll call vote, please.

Madelyn Grayson: Commissioner Winnecke?

Commissioner Winnecke: Yes.

Madelyn Grayson: Commissioner Melcher?

Commissioner Melcher: Yes.

Madelyn Grayson: President Tornatta?

President Tornatta: Yes.

(Motion approved 3-0)

John Stoll: Then, next, I have a change order on the Bridgeview Drive culvert project. This is an increase of $283.92, and the primary reason for the increase was there was additional grout required when they were pumping grout into the old culvert. We think there was a void, and that’s what caused the overrun in the grout quantity.

Commissioner Winnecke: Move approval.

Commissioner Melcher: Second.

President Tornatta: A motion and a second. Questions or discussion? Roll call vote, please.

Madelyn Grayson: Commissioner Winnecke?

Commissioner Winnecke: Yes.

Madelyn Grayson: Commissioner Melcher?

Commissioner Melcher: Yes.

Madelyn Grayson: President Tornatta?

President Tornatta: Yes.

(Motion approved 3-0)

John Stoll: Then, last, I’ve got the notice of intent letter to submit to IDEM for phase three of University Parkway. This would cover everything, even though it’s just listed as phase three, it would cover everything from Marx to Diamond Avenue. This just says that land disturbing activities will take place. We don’t have a specific time table as of yet, but if we were able to secure additional funds through stimulus funds, or whatever the case may be, this would allow us to be ready to go and use those funds to get the rest of it to construction.

Commissioner Melcher: Move for approval.

Commissioner Winnecke: Second.

President Tornatta: A motion and a second. Questions or discussion? Roll call vote, please.

Madelyn Grayson: Commissioner Winnecke?

Commissioner Winnecke: Yes.

Madelyn Grayson: Commissioner Melcher?

Commissioner Melcher: Yes.

Madelyn Grayson: President Tornatta?

President Tornatta: Yes.

(Motion approved 3-0)

John Stoll: That’s all I have, unless you have questions.

President Tornatta: That’s all?

John Stoll: That’s it.

President Tornatta: Okay. Alright, thanks, John.

Commissioner Winnecke: Thanks, John.

John Stoll: Thanks.

President Tornatta: Okay, alright, moving to old business, and probably put in that category because we’ve discussed this on the Commission floor, however, we did ask that we have a presentation from Sheriff Eric Williams, and this has to do with the Civic Center security, building security. With us today in the audience is Police Chief, Brad Hill; City Councilpersons Dan Adams, Dan McGinn, Don Walker, B.J. Watts, Missy Mosby and John Friend. County Councilmembers Tom Shetler, Ed Bassemeier and Russell Lloyd, Jr.

Commissioner Winnecke: Wendy Bredhold.

President Tornatta: Hiding behind somebody, Wendy Bredhold. Sorry, Wendy. Those of you from the City and County Council, if you would like to come up here for the presentation, I invite you to do so.

Eric Williams: How did I know that you were going to be the taker.

Dan Adams: I didn’t want to disappoint you.

President Tornatta: There are plenty of seats up here if you would like to be in on the discussion. There might not be plenty of seats, but we’ll get seats, how about that?

Eric Williams: Thank you, I appreciate it.

Commissioner Melcher: We’ve got chairs in the back, don’t we?

President Tornatta: Does the County side want chairs? We’ll be happy to get you some.

Tom Shetler, Jr.: No, we’re okay.

President Tornatta: Okay. Sheriff Williams, the stage is yours.

Eric Williams: Thank you, I think. Number one, I appreciate the opportunity to come and speak about the issues that we have. This has been a relatively well debated topic, and it’s been debated for the last 18 months aggressively, two years in this building. I wanted to give you a little bit of information before we really talked about the nuts and bolts of the security screening. How did we get here today, is the first part that I wanted to at least tell you, from my perspective. Early last year, the former Commission, the body that made up the Commission, and several other elected office holders began to openly discuss the need for increased security in this building. There were events in the public, events in other similar cities that caused some concern that maybe we were not being proactive enough. We began having some discussions and meetings. You know, those people included the Commission, the Councils, the Mayor, the Building Authority, and several other persons through time. We developed what I have no other way to describe other than kind of an ad hoc committee of people that were willing to sit down and discuss these issues, and were interested in the process. It consisted of myself, the Police Chief, the Mayor, Circuit Court Judge Heldt, Superior Court Judge Pigman, a member of the County Commission, Troy Tornatta, the Building Authority Superintendent, the Building Authority Security Manager, and from time to time we had participation from other persons. At those committee meetings, and as we met, we discussed a lot of things, and we discussed primarily what were we trying to accomplish by meeting? What was our goal? What did we want to have happen? Basically what we came out of there with was we wanted to provide enhanced security for those working in the Civic Center and those who visit the Civic Center. We wanted to do that in a manner using available technology and within a reasonable budget. As we looked at that, what came about was that what we really wanted to do was duplicate what we were doing in the county courts currently, what we’ve been doing very successfully for the last 20 to 30 years. I think if you asked anybody that works in that building right now, the judges, the Clerk’s office, the Clerk, they would say that they feel much safer with our presence there, and they think that a good job is being done in the courts building. Why not just duplicate that in this building? It works, we know how to do that, and we’ve done it fairly well, and do that with some enhancements. Make it a little bit stiffer. Do a little bit more even than what we’re doing over there. I also want to explain why I’m here today and why I’m even involved in this. Number one, I got asked to give my two cents worth, and I did. I said that I would participate in the meetings. As we developed that plan, it became apparent that one of the most cost effective ways of doing a duplication of what we do over there is for us to do it. We already are doing the juvenile hallway in this building. So, I have a contingent of people that are providing screening and security going down the juvenile hallway, which includes the juvenile courts and the Prosecutor’s office. It seemed to make sense that we just take that screening station, do what we’re doing there, which is duplicated over in the courts, move that to one of the two primary entrances of the security, or of the Civic Center, and then duplicate that again on the other side. So, we would basically have three primary entrances to this facility. We talked about other avenues, but in Indiana the Constitution is fairly clear, my responsibility is to the courts, and I was not going to give up that responsibility and let somebody else do the screening into this building and be accountable for what happened in juvenile court. So, it just made sense that if I was going to take that hard line of a stand, that we would take on the responsibility of the screening. We worked out some plans with the Building Authority that it didn’t seem appropriate for the county to bear that entire burden of this new process, that it seemed to make sense that the Building Authority would reimburse the county for the increased costs with adding this security, which then their costs would be easily distributed amongst the city and county government equally. I think everybody agreed on that, it made sense. So, we began to develop a plan to duplicate that security by doing what I just said. We were also going to add things like adding the stations at the front, adding i.d. cards for all employees, some vendors and guests in the building, adding turnstiles at all three screening points, and I’ll explain the importance of those in a minute, increase the video surveillance on all the entrances and exits, and limiting access to the building for the majority to the three main screening points. The vast majority of people that come and go from this building would enter and exit from the through the three main security points. I think it’s important to note that this building was designed way before we had Homeland Security, pre 9/11, it was designed in the mid 60's with an idea of an open atmosphere. I remember the debates a few years ago when they were talking about putting Main Street right back through the middle of this building and the design elements of welcomeness in public. If we were to design this building again today, it would look dramatically different with what we know about securing a government facility, but we can’t re-design this building. We have to work within what we’ve got. So, where are we today? We’ve employed three new screeners to compliment the current Sheriff’s office staff. Some people have been critical of the number. I know three sounds like too few to take on what we’ve done, but you remember I was already screening the vast majority of the people in that main hallway, so I’m going to move those people up front. I thought long and hard about the number that I asked for when we did this, and it seemed to make sense to me that I ask for a limited number with the caveat that if it doesn’t work I’ll be back asking for more, as opposed to asking for several and having the idea that I’ve got more than I need and now I’ve got to figure out how to get rid of them or make them appear to be busy when they aren’t. I would rather start small and let it grow, as opposed to start big and try to reduce it. I still think that three, with overtime, will work. We have or are nearing completion of the issuance of all the i.d. cards for the employees. That’s going to be an on-going process, but we are, we’re getting done with that. Bruce Hargrave and the Building Authority is taking care of that. We have added the new screening equipment in all three locations, other than the x-ray machine at the back entrance, and we’ll just relocate the x-ray machine and the magnatometer from the juvenile hallway to that back entrance. We’ve added the new surveillance, and the committee’s been meeting to formulate policy on how we’re going to implement this. Some general things, to let you know what we’ve worked out so far, the general hours for screening in the building is going to be from 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. That’s generally the hours we plan to keep on the screening stations. I have to recognize that there’s going to be exceptions for governmental meetings that occur late in this building that have public access, and some other scheduling things, but, in general, that’s going to be the hours. We’ve established three levels of screening getting into the building. The three levels are the general, or the public, non-employees, just the everyday person, the non-frequent person coming in and out of this building. Those people will enter through one of the three primary screening facilities, the front or back door of this building, or the courts, they would go through the magnatometer or the metal detector, they would place property and baggage on the x-ray machine and we would review that, they would be required to take off any large objects, jewelry, empty their pockets, take their belt off, those kinds of things, place that on the scanner and go through. They may also be subject to a possible hand scanner if we’re having trouble determining if they’ve still got something on their person. That’s exactly what we’re doing at both locations today. The second level is the card and visual screen. That is the element of the employees. The employees will be issued an i.d. card like I see Commissioner Melcher, Commissioner Tornatta, and Commissioner Winnecke all wearing right now. That will be their access to the building. They’ll come in the three main points, in general, but instead of going through the magnatometer, they will go to the turnstile where they’ll present that credential, it will be scanned, if it’s still valid we recognize it as valid, it will release the turnstile for one rotation. They’ll be able to pass through at the same time that the current file picture that you see there is displayed to my screening personnel that are standing there. So, they can make a visual inspection to make sure it looks as though that the employee is the right employee and it’s not somebody has gotten somebody else’s i.d. card, that the right people are going through. They’re going to be screened. I also reserve the right at all times for my staff to screen anybody to the nth degree to get into this building if we have reasonable suspicion or cause to do so, not just on a whim, but have reason to do that. Then, the final level of screening is what we’ve termed alternate access. There are going to be people that work in this building everyday that need access to the building through other than those three points, based on where they park, handicap issues, how they get in and out of this building, and they are going to have access, via that card, to specific doors in this building. Now, I can give you several examples of who those exceptions are going to be, number one, the Evansville Police Department are inside the confines of this building, they have several entrances that are all going to be electronically controlled in their section. We don’t believe that it’s reasonable to make them all come down and go through screening, they’re going to have card access to their offices. The security personnel, office holders, key department officials, and those people that we’ve designated for other reasons that need that kind of access to the building. They’re all going to still be monitored electronically when they come in and out. A log is going to be produced that they came in and out. Those doors are under video surveillance, so we can look at that. They’re all going through some level of screening, it’s just a different level based on their clearance into this building. One of the other things that we were able to do is that with us screening in both buildings, when both buildings are being screened actively, we consider that to be that the environment is the same on both sides, we’re going to open the bridge back up to the public and to the employees to use. A couple of things, convenience for the employees and the public to move back and forth between the two buildings, but the other thing, the reason that’s more important to me is to help load balance. We have a considerable number of people that come to this building that come from the front of the Civic Center to make an appearance in court, so, as opposed to having them come in through screening to get in to find out that they needed to be in the next building to make their court appearance, with the bridge open we’ve already accomplished the screening that would have occurred on the courts side of it, we can send them across the bridge and they can make their court appearance, do their business with the Clerk’s office without having to screen again and go through that. If both of them aren’t open, the bridge is closed, but when both of them are open and we’re actively screening the bridge would be open. Security proposal in a nutshell, while I’m happy to answer questions, please understand that there are going to be questions that I’ll answer to you in private, that we can discuss, but there are some things that I would prefer not to talk about in public, because I don’t think it makes a lot of sense for me to expose the weaknesses that we do have. There are some. Like I said, this is an older building designed with openness, and there are some weaknesses in our security proposal. I’m the first to tell you that it’s not a perfect proposal, but I think it’s the most reasonable proposal that we could come up with based on all of the things that we’ve discussed. I’m comfortable with this plan. I believe every member of that committee is comfortable with the plan. In fact, have endorsed it and said that’s the way we think we ought to do business for today. I’ve got, you know, I don’t know how to say this other than I’ve got great faith and confidence in my staff, the people that are doing this everyday, and I think that if you talk to the judges and the Clerk and the people that have been dealing with us for a long time over there, they would agree. I also have to assume that as an office holder to other office holders and elected officials that we have faith in our employees, and that we trust them to do something. I use the analogy that, you know, somebody’s trusting us to do the screening. Nobody’s screening my people coming in every day to do this for them, to do this. You trust us, and until we do something to violate that trust, that exists today. I would assume that most office holders, department heads and people feel that way about their employees. You know, I have talked to a lot of people, and I can tell you that I’ve not had anyone tell me that they are afraid of the public. In general I’ve not had anybody say, you know, Sheriff we’re scared to death of the public coming in and out of this building. You know, in fact, I’ve heard quite the opposite that we serve the public and we want to serve them as efficiently and as effectively as we can. I’ve also not heard any employee tell me that they’re afraid of their fellow employee. I’ve asked and we’ve talked and that’s not come up, you know, gosh, I’m scared to death of standing next to me. Now, they may make you nervous from time to time, but not fearful. But, what I do hear is that people are fearful of the unknown. The greatest unknown that we deal with in this building is the occasional person that doesn’t come here frequently, they may be disgruntled or have an issue that wants to come down here and cause a problem. That’s the public that comes in and out of here. We’ve tried to make this as reasonable as we can, as efficient as we can, as effective as we can, without causing great problems, and without creating undue turmoil, without causing a lot of delay in being able to get in here and do their business, but provide everybody with a basic sense of security. I think that’s the mission that we were given, I think the plan that we’ve proposed provides that. I think everybody that sits on that committee and have been through the discussions for the last 18 months agrees that this is the right proposal and this is the right plan for this building today. I would open myself up to questions.

President Tornatta: Questions?

Eric Williams: I knew you couldn’t resist.

Dan Adams: I mean, you know I’m going to ask a question. First, I would really, honestly like to laud you for your efforts. I think you’ve explained the system as you feel, imperfect as it is, in a very cogent manner. I would ask you really just one question–

Eric Williams: Sure.

Dan Adams: –because you and I have debated this–

Eric Williams: Yes.

Dan Adams: – for the last–

Eric Williams: I use the word banter.

Dan Adams: Yeah, right, okay. Fair enough, banter. In your experience, and also if you go on line and look at workplace files, what is the most common group of people that actually causes workplace violence?

Eric Williams: I’m not in a position to quote statistics to you. I have done several bits of research and I’ve found that there is cases of employee violence. There is cases of public violence. There is lots of those kinds of cases out there. So, to answer that, we figure we’re not reinventing the wheel, that there are a lot of other government agencies out there that do similar things. What are they doing? What have they found? And, I surveyed all of the Sheriffs in the state, and those that would answer to me, which was a lot of them, the majority of them have more lax situations for their people than we do, or at least what we’re getting ready to implement. I look at other governmental buildings and find out that the vast majority of them allow their employees to electronically access their building through the back or some other alternate access, as opposed to the main screening station. So, they don’t screen their employees. You can travel around our community and look at other businesses, big operations that have lots of reasons to maybe be security conscious, and they don’t screen their employees coming in and out. I would tell you that if we could redo this building, and we did it, I would screen everybody. I don’t see any reason, but we would be able to do it then because we designed it that way from the ground up in an efficient and an effective manner that we would be able to cost....and, I don’t think we can do that here, with the exceptions that I think this group is going to want to make. The idea of saying that we want to screen every employee I don’t think is a realistic or a reasonable position to take because I know we’re going to make exceptions to that. When you begin making exceptions, I think you have to make reasonable exceptions, and categorize them appropriately. I think that’s what this plan has done for us. I don’t know if I answered your question, so, I can’t give you a stat that it’s more often than not employee, or more often than not public. I can’t answer that for you today.

Dan Adams: Well, let me answer it for you.

Eric Williams: Okay.

Dan Adams: The most common cause of, group of people that cause workplace violence are people that obviously work in the place. In D.C. the only person who doesn’t go through screening, secret service people go through screening, is the President of the United States.

Eric Williams: But, I will correct you, that’s not true. I talked to our Congressman.

Dan Adams: Oh, really, and what did he say?

Eric Williams: I went with him to Washington to the Capitol Building–

Dan Adams: Uh-huh.

Eric Williams: –and he zipped right on by and I got stopped.

Dan Adams: Okay, well, then–

Eric Williams: So.

Dan Adams: –I stand corrected, but the people that I talked to told me in D.C. that that’s not true. So–

Eric Williams: I think there are a lot of exceptions, and I would agree.

Dan Adams: What I would suggest to you though, if indeed the highest statistical, by far, are the workplace people, why don’t you just scan the employees and let the public come in free and not be scanned?

Eric Williams: Because, again, and when we bantered back and forth, I would like to see those statistics–

Dan Adams: Sure.

Eric Williams: –and see who’s accumulated them, who’s compiled them, because I don’t necessarily accept them as factual just based on just somebody accumulated them. I look at everything and I look at the history of this building. We’ve not had that here. Now, it’s not saying that it can’t happen, but we’ve had significant issues with a member of the public trying to come in here with something. I ask you to sometime stop over at court security and take a look at what we’ve taken off of people trying to get into this building. That’s members of the general public coming in for one reason or another. A lot of times it’s because they forgot or they’re not familiar with the process, but other times it’s not necessarily. We’ve not had that issue of employee violence inside this building that I’m aware of. Now, we do have issues periodically with disgruntled ex-employees, but I think we’ve got a system in place to deal with that, if all of the office holders and department heads cooperate with us.

Dan Adams: You and I have played this debate for, and I really appreciate the demeanor that we’ve done it in. We just agree to disagree.

Eric Williams: To me, just so you know, I’m going to go on record, this is not personal to me, not at all. You know, I campaigned on I am serious about your safety. I want to make this as safe an environment as I possibly can for everybody involved; the public, the employees and everybody, but I’ve only got a certain amount of resources and tools to make it happen, and I think that we have to look at being reasonable.

Dan Adams: And I want to go on record that I hope I’m wrong. I really do, but if you notice tonight I’m not wearing an i.d. badge and I’m not going to get one because I think it’s very important for all of us, all of us to do exactly what our constituency does. I think it’s an inappropriate privilege to tell you the truth. You don’t have to agree with me.

Eric Williams: No, and we can professionally agree to disagree–

Dan Adams: Right.

Eric Williams: –and that’s fine, and I understand that. I don’t look at it as employees of this building being any better than anybody else. It’s not about that. It’s about working efficiently, smartly and reasonably. You know, I’ll use this analogy, and Lloyd and I have talked about it, some other people have talked about it, the people in this room make very difficult decisions sometimes. The tax collector does a very difficult job collecting taxes, and there’s a lot of times that there is a segment of the general public that aren’t excited about it. In fact, they’re very excited about it, but not happy about it. Every once in a while you get the people that might decide that they want to cause harm to somebody that’s making that decision. If they know that you’re coming through security everyday because that’s what you do, that’s where I’m going to wait for you. That’s where I’m going to wait. I’m not saying that you shouldn’t come through security, and I welcome that, but there are those times when I think it’s more appropriate that we bring people in safely and securely. Not only for your safety, but when an attack like that occurs I also have to be conscientious about all the other people that happen to be standing around at the same time that may unduly be injured or affected by this incident. There are a lot of reasons why I think that the employees of this building should be able to come in the back door and other doors at certain times for certain employees. That by far is not the majority. The vast majority of them are going to go through one of the three main check points, they are going to be screened, via their credentials, they’re going to go through the turnstile, they’re just going to bypass going through the magnatometer and the x-ray machine, unless we have reason to stop them. I don’t disagree with you, that in a better world, or in a perfect world we wouldn’t need security, but if we had a different situation we would screen everybody. But, I just, I think the committee beat this to no end in looking at it and found that it not to be a reasonable solution for what we have today.

President Tornatta: I have a question for Council–

Dan Adams: I hope you’re right.

Eric Williams: I do too.

Dan Adams: If you’re wrong it’s big time–

Eric Williams: Well, if I’m wrong, I’m still providing a better service than what we’re providing today. Anything I do tomorrow that’s different than today that enhances security puts us in a better position than we were today. You know, we do this exact same thing over in the courts with all the judges consent, with everybody over there, this is how they want business done and they are very comfortable with that. It’s not perfect, and I would tell you that no matter what security system I put in place, it’s not going to be perfect and if somebody wants to violate it and get through it, it’s going to happen. We just have to trust our people that are here on the ground floor, working in these buildings to be mindful and conscientious to their environment, watching what’s going on, watching who’s doing things so that we can catch those.

Dan Adams: But, even in light of the rare background checks that have not been done, or quite a number of background checks that have not been done with the people who work in this building?

Eric Williams: I do background checks on my people. Significant–

Dan Adams: And I laud that.

Eric Williams: –ones. I know the Police Department does, and I think there are other office holders that do background checks that they feel is appropriate, but those office holders trust their employees and until somebody gives me a reason not to trust them, I’m going to trust them too.

Dan Adams: Well, if I believe the newspaper, they have not done the background checks. I mean, I know you would, that’s a given. I know the Chief would, but it doesn’t seem like there are any.

President Tornatta: I want to get some other questions on the floor.

Dan Adams: Sure, yeah.

President Tornatta: Councilperson Mosby?

Missy Mosby: Hi, Sheriff Williams, thank you for coming this evening. One question I have–

Eric Williams: Okay.

Missy Mosby: –so, the security is going to stop at 5:00?

Eric Williams: No.

Missy Mosby: Okay.

Eric Williams: Public screening–

Missy Mosby: Because I’m concerned with our Council meetings.

Eric Williams: That’s what I said, there are exceptions to that.

Missy Mosby: Okay.

Eric Williams: When there are governmental functions going on, City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals, Area Plan Commission, those meetings that run into odd hours, we will keep public screening live until that meeting is closed and adjourned.

Missy Mosby: Okay.

Eric Williams: We intend to do that. That’s one of the issues with the personnel, just so you understand, I can’t predict those and it’s very hard to schedule people, so those are going to be comp time and overtime slots because they are not predictable, and it doesn’t make a lot of sense to have a full time person to cover those odds and ends. Now, we may end up utilizing some part time help down the road to cover those slots, but we’re going to try to get a feel for how it works first. This is new to me. I have never been responsible for security in this building before. My office has never been responsible for overall security in this building before. I can do my best based on my experiences with the juvenile hallway and the courts building to try to provide the same level in this building. But, I’m telling you right now, we are going to make changes as this grows and progresses.

Missy Mosby: Thank you.

President Tornatta: Councilman?

John Friend: If we screened every employee, we have, what about 700 here? Something like that? So, we would, how, that would take probably 15 minutes in the morning at least to get all of them through.

Eric Williams: Well, I don’t think there’s a real good answer to that, because every employee is going to come in dressed differently.

John Friend: Sure.

Eric Williams: If you come in with nothing in your pockets and no belt on and no jewelry, you’re going to skate right on through full screening no problem. But, a lot of people in here are going to wear belts, they’re going to wear jewelry, they’re going to have their pockets full of things, and we’re going to go through that process. Usually we can estimate that it’s about 45 seconds to do that, if you’ve got to take your belt off, get on through before we can cue the next person through that. 45 seconds is not a ton of time. I recognize that. However, 45 seconds, and if we just use the number of 700, say there is 700 employees, and let’s just say they get screened twice because they leave for lunch, which I think a lot of the employees in this building leave for lunch or they go outside to go on smoke break or go get a soft drink or whatever it is they do the reason they leave the building, let’s just say twice, so you take 700 employees, twice a day being screened at 45 seconds, you’ve now added about 20 hours of queue time to the lines at one of those three spots. So, that 20 hours of queue time you would like to think that you’re going to be able to distribute that evenly amongst the three locations and all eight hours of the day, but if you spend any time in this building you would know that the traffic into this building is not equally distributed amongst all eight hours of the day. It’s very heavy in the morning, it picks up around lunch time when people are leaving their workplace to come here to pay a water bill or do some business with city or county government, and it picks up in the afternoon when people are rushing in when they got off work at 3:00 to make the 4:00 or 5:00 deadline here. Those are when our peak periods are. So, if you concentrate that, you’re looking at about adding, overall, 20 hours of queue time to, and that’s just an estimate, that’s just real rough math. We could accommodate that, but my fear is that that’s going to stack people up way more than they want to and they would be much, much, it would be very inefficient.

John Friend: So, Sheriff, you were saying with this then what would happen is that somebody would get to their desk at 8:00 in the morning they would have to get here at quarter till eight or ten minutes till eight, that could bring some–

Eric Williams: Yeah, if you’re the employee that cuts it to the last minute and you show up here at 7:59 hoping to hit the door at 8:00, then, yeah you may get slowed down. The turnstiles are going to slow you down some. That’s a remarkable increase from what we do today with our employees going to the courts, because they are physically going to be stopped, they are going to present credentials, those credentials will be cleared on the computer as still valid, we will see their picture and it will queue them through one at a time. So, they are going to get slowed down some already, but we’re taking out the magnatometer and the x-ray machine.

President Tornatta: Councilman? President Watts?

B.J. Watts: Sheriff, what’s your proposed time line as far as–

Eric Williams: I would like to start November 16^th.

B.J. Watts: –things, and.....start November 16^th? How long does it take to have everything in place? You’re saying we could be up and running November 16^th?

Eric Williams: I think we’re ready to go basically now. We still have some i.d.’s to issue, dependent on the outcome of this meeting and other debates and things we do may change some things, you know, as far as delivering a final policy statement to everybody that works in and out of this building. But, I think, you know, we were ready to start on the 2^nd. I’ve had some questions about well can you do some test runs, and we’ve done some practice scenarios and some tests, you’re either on or you’re not.

B.J. Watts: But, you have all of the equipment?

Eric Williams: I can’t say, well, you’re going to get screened and you guys aren’t, and then you’re going to get screened and you guys aren’t because we’re testing it. We’re just going to turn it on.

B.J. Watts: You have all of the pieces of equipment that you need currently?

Eric Williams: Yes. All the hardware is in place and operational.

President Tornatta: Anything?

Wendy Bredhold: Well, I was just going to comment that when Sheriff Williams and I discussed this before, we were discussing this idea that we’re creating perhaps an elite of people who can enter, you know, and the fact is that it may be that the public will appreciate the fact that you don’t have all of these employees filling up the cue and causing them greater inconvenience because they have to wait longer to get inside to register to vote, or to pay a bill or whatever business they would have to do here. I think that’s a compelling argument. Then, also the fact that you said that that line of people may extend out the door if it were to back up sufficiently?

Eric Williams: Well, if by default, and the thing that you have to look at in this building, the back door is a little better for entry. I’m going to tell employees if they can come in the back side of the Civic Center to please do that, and guests. That’s where we think the majority come in because they park in the back lot more often than not. It’s backed away from those doors enough where there’s a little bit of lead room in there where you’re under cover. That’s what, I don’t want people to stand outside getting wet when it’s raining, or standing in the snow when it’s snowing, I want them to be able to get inside and get cover and then go through the process. The unfortunate thing about the design of this building the way the front stairs are in the Civic Center, we basically had to back that equipment right up to the very front door. So, more than a few people standing at that front door is going to create a line outside. It’s going to happen, I mean, it happens now over in the courts. If you’ve ever seen Monday night Night Court when all of the traffic ticket people are coming in to deal with the traffic tickets, that line can be yards, you know, 100 yards outside the door. It happens from time to time. It’s not very frequent, but it does happen.

Wendy Bredhold: (Inaudible. Mic not on.)

Eric Williams: No, they stand in the rain.

Wendy Bredhold: (Inaudible. Mic not on.)

Eric Williams: I guess we could.

Commissioner Melcher: Troy?

President Tornatta: Go ahead.

Commissioner Melcher: I guess you know where I stand too.

Eric Williams: You’ve made that apparent.

Commissioner Melcher: Yes, I have. Only because I try to treat everybody equal. I’ve tried to do that my whole life. I believe in public safety. I’m big on public safety. My understanding was, when we were putting this together was that we were going to secure the building, but this looks, to me, just like a piecemeal. It’s better than what we have, I’m going to agree with all that. I think everybody has done a great job so far, but I really believe that everybody wants to be treated equal. Even when I go into the court building, I have over the last 20 years or whatever over here, I have to take my belt off, well, that just started a few years ago, but we used to, I had to go through it and I didn’t like it that people were passing me. Everybody would just wave and say, good morning, good morning, and I had to go through it. I thought, well, you know, this is wrong, everybody ought to be doing it. So, when I thought we were going to do it for the whole building, I was really amazed that we’re cutting people out that don’t have to go through it. Then you read about there’s not any background checks, that kind of amazed me too, I think that’s something, I think we might have to look at, as County Commissioners, about having some background checks for the future. Then, I didn’t really know about this third tier, I mean, I think we’ve hinted about it, but I didn’t even think about it. Now we’ve got three tiers of people coming in. That’s not, and maybe this counting the people that are going to bring in their toolboxes and work here and everything else–

Eric Williams: It is.

Commissioner Melcher: –somebody’s got to secure, check them.

Eric Williams: We do.

Commissioner Melcher: I just wanted everybody to be checked equally. I don’t think the badge thing, if you’ve got one or you don’t have one matters, I think it’s probably good that we’ve got badges, because I think when people are in and they’re in an office and they have a problem with somebody if you’ve got a badge on then you know who you can report to, or who the person is. But, I’ve always tried to treat people equally, and it looks like we’re not going to do that. Then the way the thing kept going I kept saying well we’re going to have a say on this, we actually don’t have a say on this. That’s kind of where I’m sitting over here on the side that I don’t have a say on what’s going to happen, because it’s going to happen. So, I don’t know.

Eric Williams: Well, if I could respond, and I’ll try to respond in order. I don’t think this is about treating people equally or unequally. I too have spent my life believing in the justice system and treating people equally and fairly and uniformly and all those things. I don’t disagree with you a bit. But, it’s not about treating people equally or unequally, it’s about providing security to this facility in a reasonable manner. There are things that happen all the way, all the time around this building, everywhere we go that by your definition of equal we’re not treating people equally. The assignment of parking spaces around this building is the most simplest example. The assignment of office space in the building based on window view or not. We’re not treated equally, there are things that happen because of your tenure in the building, the job you perform and the number of hours you spend there in a day. I just, I don’t think it has anything to do with me thinking I’m better than any one of these people that are sitting in this audience, because that is farthest from the truth. I think you do have a say in this, because that’s why I’m standing here today. Because if I really didn’t think you had a say in this, I would have just done it my way and I wouldn’t have bothered with this, but I do care about what the people that are in this room think about this, and I want them to buy into it. Again, we’ve gone through this so many times, and the committee would like to do some things differently, but I don’t think we have the ability to do it. I don’t have ultimate control over all of the other offices and the department heads and what they do. I think you, by what you said, do have some say in the level of background checks we do on employees in the future, and I applaud that, and the Sheriff’s office is standing willing and ready to help you accomplish that. You know, but I still stand by this, and, I guess, as Doc Adams said, and we’ve talked about this several times, I’m going to eat this if it fails. But, I was going to eat it over there in the courts if it failed, and ultimately public safety falls under the Sheriff and the Police Chief. The Police Chief, I guess I should have let him come up and put his two cents in if he felt it was appropriate, but I think he’s probably happy to be sitting back there right now.

Commissioner Melcher: I believe he is too.

Eric Williams: You know, I think, you know, he thinks security-minded all the time. That’s what he does. That’s what I do. We are comfortable with this solution for today in this building. You know, I look at the jail for example, probably the most secure building in county government. I don’t screen my employees coming in and out of there. They’ve got key cards, they come in the back door, and they go to work. I trust them. When they violate that trust, I deal with them. I don’t disagree with anything you said, but I think we have a definition issue about the terminology. It’s not about being unequal or equal. It’s about doing what we need to do to secure this building.

Commissioner Melcher: I really don’t think you’re going to eat it. You know, I don’t see how anybody’s going to blame you, because this was a committee–

Eric Williams: Well, I don’t know, they’ll, somebody will find a way.

Commissioner Melcher: No, it was a committee function, you know, and I can’t see that, because like you said before, and I agreed with that, we’re going to have better security than what we had. But, I just wanted everybody to be treated fairly. I wanted everybody, I’ll probably end up going through the scanner, I mean, I will, because I said that from the beginning.

Eric Williams: That’s great.

Commissioner Melcher: I don’t want to have the people out there go through it and look at me up here, that’s not going to happen.

Eric Williams: I would ask you, for me, and I’m just going to run this scenario by you, I would ask you, for me, and for the people that are down there, the night when you’re getting ready to vote and the world knows how you’re going to vote and it’s not a vote that makes some people very happy, and they’re waiting for you down there at the screening station, that you please on that night not go through screening and come through the back door and let us bring you up that way, so that I don’t have to deal with it on that night.

Commissioner Melcher: You know, I’ve really never had a problem in the 18 years with that.

Eric Williams: Well, we’ve not had a problem with employee violence in this in 20 years either.

Commissioner Melcher: No, I’m agreeing with that, I’m just saying, you know, I ran for this office, we’ve got people waiting in line to work in this building, and you’re right, nobody’s scared to work here. When you’re elected to something you just take that option. I’ve been threatened, you know.

Eric Williams: It’s part of the territory. It goes with the job.

Commissioner Melcher: But, I just wanted to get everything out tonight.

Eric Williams: I’m glad you did. Please don’t take me wrong, I absolutely, I’ve made lots of notes through the course of this, I haven’t had time to write tonight, but I think a lot of the things that people have said, you know, I took a lot of what Doc Adams said, because he bantered aggressively with me–

Dan Adams: Not really.

Eric Williams: Well, compared to everybody else. I know you’re capable of much more, but we talked, and I took some of the things that he said and took them to heart and relayed those when we talked in those committees and talked about those issues, but this is where we wound up. Again, this committee was not established by a statute or an ordinance or anything, this was a group of people that were concerned enough to just begin meeting and talk about the issues. You know, my statutory constitutional responsibility is to protect the courts. Beyond that, I’m just in this trying to do the right thing.

President Tornatta: Commissioner Winnecke?

Commissioner Winnecke: First, thanks for your patience, and information, and I’ve got three quick questions. First, have you estimated sort of the queing time going through the turnstile?

Eric Williams: We’ve looked at it, but we don’t have a good estimate on it, because it’s going to be such a new thing for us. We’ve not had any ability to see how fast that machine is going to read. We were down practicing with it today, it’s pretty quick. You know, about every five seconds you can screen that, the picture comes up, it releases one. But, no, we’ve not done a study on the actual cue time of employees using the turnstiles.

Commissioner Winnecke: Secondly, help us understand, because there are people who, for one reason or another, arrive at work before 7:00 a.m., even when there’s not a public meeting, how will they access the building, how will that work?

Eric Williams: Well, very similar to how they are doing it today, depending on the tier that they are in. For example, I would assume that you, the Mayor, the office holders are going to have card access from the parking lot to come in the back door. You’ll be able to come in, it will be electronically logged, it will be on video, we’ll know you came in, we’ll know that information. The average employee that’s allowed to come in, basically, will do what they do today, there will always be somebody from the Building Authority in here. They staff this building all the time, there’s a buzzer at the front door, they buzz that, they come down, greet them, they log them in, sign them in. We’re probably going to have them go ahead and keyfob through the turnstile because that will be active all the time to have a record that they made entrance. Then they’ll go to their office. A lot of that just continues to be just pure coordination and communication between all the offices and departments about who has that kind of access to the building. That is a very difficult part of this, because we’re dealing with so many different entities out there to make sure that we always know who’s allowed to have access to that office at any given time. The Election Office is a great example, because certain times of the year there are all kinds of wild hours. You know, there’s other offices, depending on what’s happening, what’s going on that they keep some strange hours and have to prep up. The Prosecutor’s Office is a good example. They come in very early in the morning, certain members of their staff, to prep up for morning court. So, there’s a lot of variable in that that we’re trying to work through, but that won’t be all that different than what we do today.

Commissioner Winnecke: My third question has to do with communication, what is the, sort of the plan in your mind or the committee’s mind to communicate the policy for security in the building to the employees and to the general public?

Eric Williams: Once we get a definitive start date, and we know where we’re at and we know what the starting policy is going to be, it’s our plan to distribute that to all of the office holders, department heads in writing so that they can disseminate it how they see fit, how they see best. We’ll probably make it available on our, the Sheriff’s office internet page or something, if somebody wants to read it. Then we’re going to use e-mail. We’re going to use reporting from office holders and department heads to my staff that works in this building as their first line of something’s happened, the office holder needs to get hold of somebody, we’ve lost an i.d. card, we’ve terminated an employee, we’ve got a disgruntled employee situation, much as they do today with their access to this building, but, we plan to distill it in writing. Now, as that moves down through the road, through one of the other meetings we had on this very topic, I think it may eventually warrant some action by the legislative bodies of our county, and the city, to introduce some ordinance in the form of in their personnel handbooks, so that this is what the personnel policy requires of these people. But, I’m very thankful that the bodies have given us the latitude to start this without generating ordinance yet to find out how it goes and make sure we fine tune it before we distill that into including it in the personnel handbooks for both the city and the county. I see that as an eventual happening, and then it will just, I truly believe that within a very short period of time this will be second nature and nobody will remember the difference.

Commissioner Winnecke: Thank you.

Commissioner Melcher: I’ve got one more.

Eric Williams: Sure.

Commissioner Melcher: You mentioned the Building Authority, so when we get done I would like Dave Rector to come up here.

Eric Williams: Sure.

Commissioner Melcher: Because I had talked--

Eric Williams: Well, I can’t say sure for him, I guess.

Commissioner Melcher: I talked to him for about two minutes--

Eric Williams: I can escort him up here, if you would like.

Commissioner Melcher: We could do that. Did he get screened? No, I just need him to get up here and kind of explain, because I think there’s a misunderstanding of who’s building it belongs to and all that, so I would like to get him up to explain all of that.

President Tornatta: First of all, I would like to find out if any of the other Councilmen have anything to say. First we’re going to deal with the elected officials, then I will be happy to take public comment. Nothing? Anybody else.

Dan McGinn: I just have a comment.

President Tornatta: Sure. Absolutely.

Dan McGinn: Sheriff, thank you for coming. When this first came about, having no background in any type of security, you know, I had some pre-existing opinions, but in my lifetime I’ve done a lot of things, I’ve been a short order cook, I’ve been a lawyer, a zoo director and a Councilman, but I’ve never been a security expert. So, I’m going to do what I have done in the past when there’s an area that I need to know about, I’m going to rely on the expertise of someone with superior knowledge that I trust. You endorse this plan, do you not?

Eric Williams: I do.

Dan McGinn: Thank you.

President Tornatta: Anybody else? I would just like to–

Eric Williams: Did we just get married? Chief?

Brad Hill: I just, I will be very brief. I just want to share the blame with the Sheriff for this plan, because I fully endorse it as well. I thought I ought to at least go on record to say that. It’s not perfect, but it’s reasonable, and it is 100 percent better than what we’ve got right now.

President Tornatta: Just to follow up, I will say that serving on that committee, it brought a lot of people together that were far apart in the beginning. I think we realized that the courts had a different look at how to do security than what the Civic Center had, and we made healthy compromises. I do appreciate the work of that committee, and it was a working committee, and I do appreciate that. I did want to say that, you know, I believe we have a tight network in this building. If you don’t believe me, spread a rumor. You will hear back in a short period of time, and it’s because we do have a knowledge of our employees, and we do have, the office holder has a great knowledge of their employees. The employees have a great knowledge of one another. They might spread that rumor, but they also have concerns when somebody is ill and they know what their capacity is and always keep track. So, when we talk about work forces and other places, I do consider it different in the public realm, because how people are hired, and normally the knowledge of that person that’s hired is, I believe, a lot greater than it is anywhere else. So, I just wanted to make that comment. I believe that this plan will be a more secure plan than even the magnatometers, and I’ll tell you why. After two weeks, I believe your Sheriff deputies, or your staff know who’s coming through that door for those who come in quite often, and especially for those employees, as you’ve seen over in the courts building. A lot of times we’ve seen there’s a waive or a pass through. If that happens today, and we theorize that we’re going to send everybody through a magnatometer, is that truly going to happen? I believe, and converse to what has been said, that we will be more efficient and we will actually do a better job of security because not only will we see a face pop up, which we wouldn’t see in a magnatometer, but we will see that person go through and be scanned and then released from the turnstile. That will happen every time, no exceptions. So, I do believe those are two points that I would like to just hit on. I appreciate all of the Council people coming up here, the Commissioners input, and, Sheriff, Chief, and I know Rose Young is out in the audience for the Mayor. So, I appreciate everyone coming out. If there are no other questions–

Eric Williams: Can I?

President Tornatta: Absolutely.

Eric Williams: I absolutely do appreciate all the comments, especially from my friend Doc Adams, because he forced me to think about some things that I hadn’t thought about before. I appreciate that. That’s how we get things done. We may still continue to professionally agree to disagree on this, but I appreciate that. I appreciate the questions we got, because that’s how, in this building, we can solve problems, by communicating with one another and finding a mutually agreeable solution. It may not be perfect for everybody, and I think that’s been accomplished here. I do endorse this. I think it’s the right thing to do, but I am always open to suggestions. As you come in and out of this building, if you see short comings, or issues that you would like to have addressed, please don’t wait until something bad does happen, please bring them up and let us know so that we can begin the process of addressing those also. Am I relieved? Do you want Dave Rector now?

President Tornatta: I think we’re needing Dave.

Eric Williams: Thank you for your time. I appreciate it.

President Tornatta: Thank you, Sheriff.

Dave Rector: Good evening, gentlemen. Dave Rector, Building Authority. While I am a member of that committee, and we relied heavily on the Chief and the Sheriff, I just want to make it clear I also agree, as a member, that I think it’s a good recommendation and it’s a good plan that they put together for us.

President Tornatta: Questions?

Commissioner Melcher: David, basically what I want you, would like you to do is explain that the building’s paid off and while we’ve got all these Councilmembers and everybody here, how this building works and who appoints people and that.

Dave Rector: The Building Authority–

Commissioner Melcher: Because some people think you should be making this decision by some calls that I got, and I said, I don’t really think he should make the decisions.

Dave Rector: I’m glad I’m not.

Commissioner Melcher: Go ahead.

Dave Rector: The Building Authority was formed in 1966 under an Indiana Code statute 36-19. We have three Building Authorities in this state, ourselves, New Albany and Indianapolis, Marion County. We’re formed for the purpose of financing, acquiring, purchasing, operating and maintaining governmental buildings. We own this building, the Centre and the new jail, and we do just that we operate and maintain that. Our cost back to the city and county are nothing more than the actual costs to operate, pay the bills and maintain these facilities. We’re appointed by a Board of Trustees that the Commissioners have two appointments, the County Council an appointment, the City Council an appointment and the Mayor. Those Trustees then appoint a Board of Directors that then hire me and the Building Authority employees. That’s the same way the other building employees also work.

Commissioner Melcher: So, basically you’re the facilities director over this building?

Dave Rector: For a simpler term, yes.

Commissioner Melcher: Okay. Thank you.

President Tornatta: Any other questions of Dave? Alright, thank you. I will take some public comment, and since everyone’s here, and while you’re coming up, Bill, we’ll lead off with you, our Surveyor. Like I said, I would like to sincerely thank the Council people for coming here and participating today. Thank you.

Bill Jeffers: Bill Jeffers, County Surveyor, an elected office holder by the voters of Vanderburgh County. First off, I would like to say that I support 100 percent the Sheriff’s plan as he presented it, and as the committee endorses it, because it’s a responsible plan. I would like to point out that there was some concern about collateral damage, the Sheriff made two pointed comments towards that that someone might be down here to harm, for whatever reason, whether they’re disgruntled or just plainly insane, to harm a target, like a public official, but yet collateral damage could occur and I would like to point out James Brady comes to mind in that regard. I’ve worked in this building since 1981, and, so, I’ve seen a lot of changes. I saw the original courts building go under security. At that time I was offered a pass to go through the tunnel, etcetera. I’ve never had a pass until it was issued by, under the current system. But, I do know of every entrance, public and private in this building. Secondly, I would like to say that if security checks become an issue, if anyone believes that the employees or office holders in this building should be given background checks, I volunteer to have a background check for myself. I will say that my employees will have background checks done under my orders, if that’s the wishes of the County Commissioners that will happen. What I really came here to say was that this committee that you put together developed and recommended security procedures, that committee consists of the County Sheriff, the Chief of Police, the security chief for this building, who’s a former Sheriff, former County Sheriff, two judges, along with the director who was a former County Commissioner, and all of these people are familiar with the threats, the dangers, what needs to be done. County Commissioners traditionally have, and regularly, have depended upon their legal, technical and professional advisers to give them good advice. How much more professional and responsible could a panel be than the one comprised as this security panel that you have here making this recommendation. Yet, there are elected officials who have reg.....well, I don’t want to get into that. Consider for a moment that this committee’s recommendation is to adopt the exact same security procedures that exist over in the court building, and have worked over there in that court building for many, many years. There’s one entrance to that court building through which the public is fully screened, but through which court employees, judges, bailiffs, defense attorneys, prosecutors, security personnel, County Clerk employees, housekeeping staff, others enter with a keyfob or a card swipe. Then there’s some other entrances, I don’t really want to get into that, because the Sheriff alluded to, you know, weaknesses in the system, I don’t want to get into all that, but there are other means of entry, not just in the morning, but for smoke breaks, lunch breaks, etcetera. Those are keyfob and card swipe entries. Has anyone of the persons that who is now objecting to this system, whether you consider it selective or nonegletarian or whatever you want to call it, has anyone objected publicly to that system over there in the last ten, twenty years? I haven’t heard any objections to it. I hadn’t heard of any problems with it, but all of a sudden it becomes some sort of media opportunity today. Consider that there are County Clerk employees over there, as well as the judges employees and so forth, is there any difference between those County Clerk employees and County Auditor or County Treasurer employees? The system that’s working for them and is going to continue to work for them under the judges authority, I assume, wouldn’t that be unfair and unequal for them to card swipe their way through and then the employees over here be subjected to TSA screening? It happens all the time. Additionally, there are, probably shouldn’t say the number, but there are basically 14 entrances to these buildings, which one of the people who object, which one of the Councilmen who want every person to be screened that comes and goes out of this building, who’s going to go to their Council and make the motion that there will 14 magnatometers put up in this building? Those doorways, all but three of them currently, out of 15, all but three of them currently have secure entrances. Then, with the two that will be put down here, we’ll be down to just the two front entrances to the Police Department that will have to be secured by card swipes and keyfobs. Then the entire building is secure under a system that is currently in place at the court building and has worked for many, many years. If you want to go to a split system, you’re going to have to close, keep that, well–

President Tornatta: The bridge?

Bill Jeffers: The bridge. Everybody knows what’s going on at the bridge. I can get a card and I have been able to have a card since 1990 to swipe my way over through there, and those employees come this way, and these employees go that way. That will all come to an end, and I don’t know, it’s just so confusing. I’m skipping over a lot because most of it was covered. So, basically, I support the recommendation from this committee as an elected office holder. If there is anything I can do to make sure that my employees are properly background checked, or to enforce the personnel policy, if it’s upgraded to include whatever, I will do that. I really don’t feel that everybody entering this building needs to be TSA screened every single time they come and go for a smoke break, a lunch break, or whatever. I just thinks that’s excessive. Then we have to consider board meetings like Area Plan Commission, the Water Board, the Board of Works, the Parks Board, the Alcohol Beverage Commission, the Levee Board, the Redevelopment Commission, all that kind of thing. Those people are volunteers. I mean, they have to leave their place of work to come over here and serve a volunteer civic duty and we’re going to ask them to leave an extra half hour early from their work and come over here so they can be magnatometered? In closing–

President Tornatta: Is that a word?

Bill Jeffers: TSA, whatever.

President Tornatta: Okay.

Bill Jeffers: I can understand, you know, I’ve worked in controversial subjects, you know, drainage and planning and zoning and all that for 30 years and I can understand how come, why there might be some people out there that want to take some action on me. I mean, I have had threats, and I can understand that, but I just don’t understand the threat of, you know, these employees that just come down here to work for–

President Tornatta: Right.

Bill Jeffers: Okay. In closing, I’ve heard the committees full proposal twice now. The President’s, I mean, excuse me, the Sheriff’s presentation twice, and I concur with their recommendation and their proposed security procedures. They will be expensive and burdensome enough. Don’t complicate them just for the sake of appearances. Thank you.

President Tornatta: Thank you, Bill. Come on up?

Mike Wilson: Hi, everybody. My name is Mike Wilson. I live in Evansville. This was informative. One of the questions that I have is what is this going to cost? The Sheriff has evidently done due diligence in that area. Could I ask you what this is going to be, the yearly cost of manning these, this security system?

President Tornatta: And include the County Council and City Council there. I mean, well, I guess this would be County Council on this one.

Eric Williams: Part of the economies of scale of this proposal was being able to use existing employees doing existing positions securing the juvenile courts. That was part of the economies of being able, of my involvement in this. Because trust me, it would have been easier for me to just stick down there in the juvenile courts and leave this to the Building Authority or somebody else, but that didn’t make sense. That wasn’t the right thing to do. We’ve hired three new civilian screeners to help accomplish this. Those three screeners, I believe, their starting salary is about $29,000 plus benefits. They all started on the first of, the middle of October, so we’ll have a partial year, and then you can figure from there next year what those salaries are going to cost, but that’s the additional salary level. You know, their benefits, their longevity and those issues. So, they are between $29,000 and $35,000 employees. I don’t know if that answers your question or not.

Mike Wilson: Well, it’s heading in that direction. First of all, I think we have not only the yearly cost to support this, but we also have the equipment cost, which I never heard mentioned. I’m sure it’s quite expensive. We also have costs that might not have been thought about, and that is in inclement weather people are going to have to stand outside of that machine. It is close to the door. People are not going to be able to get through that quickly. The employees here will be able to just get in and get out quick, that’s what I’ve been hearing, but the average person that comes up here, not because they are on a site seeing trip, most of the time a person that comes up here, unless it would be for a legislative meeting such as this, has to come up here because they have to. So, my question is, how will they be appropriately accommodated in inclement weather conditions? That’s something to at least consider.

President Tornatta: That’s a good point.

Mike Wilson: Also, if you’re carrying a pocket knife, is that going to be a dangerous weapon that we’ll have to do something with? I mean, if you’ve got to take off your belt, jewelry and things like that, some people carry a pocket knife. A pocket knife in the court building probably would not be a good thing, and I kept hearing this slippery slope that is fear based, and the court building was used in example of why we need this here. Well, we’ve got all kind of stuff that we’ve confiscated over there, and, yet, over there you are sentencing people, criminals, some of which are dangerous, you have a lot of people going in and out of there that you may not have in this building.

President Tornatta: Well, you will, the new way of doing this process you will because the door will be open. So, the people that come to this door will go over to the courts building. So, we have to take all of those pieces off of everyone.

Mike Wilson: Well–

President Tornatta: Or, once it gets to a point, I think people will know don’t bring it in. I don’t think they are necessarily over in the courts building they’re not throwing your merchandise away, they’re storing it for you, as I understand it.

Mike Wilson: Well, it’s either that or they tell you to take it outside and hide it, because that’s happened to me before when I’ve accidentally had a pocket knife on me. When I’ve went into, to go to small claims court, or pay a ticket. So, I don’t think it’s a real fair example to use the precedence that was set over there in regards to this building. Secondly, there’s another big hole in this whole security idea. That is if there is a need, and it’s to protect the employees here, what happens when they go to their car? If someone’s got an axe to grind, they’re going to wait for them outside of this building. So, I’m not sure this Draconian measure is really a need that’s justified. I think it’s fear based. Also, to kind of tag on to Dr. Adams comment about employee based violence, I don’t know whether anyone has every heard the term of someone “going Postal”? Now, that was a real issue at one time, and it came from the inside out. It wasn’t the people that visited the Post Offices. So, the third, one of the other questions I have in my mind, what legislative body makes the decision? Or is this decision already been made and we’re working out the details now of how you will enact this? Has the decision been made that we are actually going to have a screening device down there on the front door?

President Tornatta: Yes.

Mike Wilson: Who made that decision?

President Tornatta: Well, that was a committee decision. Not to throw it all on the Sheriff or the Chief, but it was brought to their attention that this building needed to step up its security, and at that point, who do you trust to take care of security? They didn’t look at me. They looked at the people who do security on a day in and day out basis. So, obviously, they were drivers of a process to make sure that this place would be more secure, and it will be.

Mike Wilson: Are you telling me that the legislative bodies, the City Council and the County Council and the County Commissioners, could not make that decision?

President Tornatta: What expertise do we have?

Mike Wilson: Well, whether or not it’s needed. I’m not sure the need has been justified. I would say it’s fear based, and it’s a want not a need.

President Tornatta: Okay.

Mike Wilson: So, the, this committee that was what, had nine, eight or nine people in it made a decision that you will screen all of the people that will come in and out of the Civic Center?

President Tornatta: We made recommendations to enhance the clientele that we have, and the employees that we protect. We made those recommendations, but I wouldn’t say, by any means–

Mike Wilson: So, this is a recommendation?

President Tornatta: This is a plan that’s going to happen. How it’s worked out and how it’s tweaked that’s why we’re here today. We want to make it good for as many people as we can for the vast majority. I think that’s what we’ve been talking about all day today, or all night tonight.

Mike Wilson: Well, I wasn’t under that impression then. I’m sorry that that decision was made that’s going to affect anybody that comes in and out of the building without public comment.

Dan Adams: Commissioner Tornatta, I think this gentleman, and I don’t want to speak for you, sir, but, I think his problem is that a committee of some elected officials, some not elected officials have made a decision without any corroboration or without any passage by the City Council, the County Council and the County Commissioners. Now, I, obviously know that my opinion is going to be voted down. I mean, I’m in a healthy minority, but the bottom line is, I think, that for the sake of the legislative process, it would be worthwhile for the appropriate bodies to pass an ordinance saying that they want this kind of thing, or not. I mean, he’s coming from the point he doesn’t think it’s necessary. I’m coming from the point that I think more is necessary, but I do think you need to have some sort of ordinance–

President Tornatta: Okay, Ted, I guess–

Dan Adams: –referred to the legal (Inaudible) on this. But, I think a recommendation of a committee doesn’t really put it into a legal form.

President Tornatta: I think where we’ve come to the realization is we don’t run security for the courts, the Sheriff does. I mean, and at that point if it’s funded, then you had your say.

Dan Adams: But, if I listen to the wonderful presentation by my colleague, he’s saying he’s taking over something totally new. This is not the courts at all. This is the public building, and I think we ought to–

President Tornatta: When that door–

Dan Adams: I would like to say that I think there should be an ordinance passed by you guys and us, equally, and actually pass it and affirm it. I mean, I don’t think that’s too much to ask. I think that’s what you’re asking.

Mike Wilson: I think it can be stopped and a little more time given to it, to let the people that we elected make a decision, and not some group of people–

President Tornatta: That we elected.

Mike Wilson: –make it for it. That has made a decision for everyone here. We elected people, such as you, to exercise your best judgement. And you didn’t make the decision, a committee did. That’s what I hear you saying is to write an ordinance to say that, well, the bodies that are responsible for the Building Authority, that they have to answer to, has some control over what they do. As far as the Indiana statute is concerned, I see some gray areas in there. There’s 19 pages of it. I sifted through it quickly today. I don’t know whether anybody else has, but there’s not a clear route to who controls and who the Building Authority answers to.

President Tornatta: As long as–

Mike Wilson: Now, maybe Mr. Rector could–

President Tornatta: –Mike, as long as the Sheriff controls the security on the courts, this becomes a pretty moot point. We are clearly trying to be advisors to what we see as pitfalls in the Civic Center, because that is going to be a straight cut through over to the courts building. Now, I mean, Sheriff, I’m not trying to talk for you, if you have any comments to that effect, but the way I see it, when we open up that door, it’s all yours, baby.

Eric Williams: Well, I’m responsible for the courts and the security of those that go into the courts of the county, be it Superior, Circuit, and we have a dedicated courts building. I became involved in this by the design because we needed space for juvenile court, which is a part of Superior Court, and when we moved it into this building, I had to assume some security role for that section of this building. My involvement in this is because that section happens to be in this building, and the economies of scale of using my people to go on and secure the entire building seem to make the most sense to the committee. Now, with all that said, my constitutional responsibility is for the courts, and that’s where it ends as far as that goes. I welcome the idea of the City Council and the County Commission creating this adhoc committee as an official Civic Center campus security committee and empower them to make these decisions. The majority of the people that sit on that committee currently are elected office holders, and we’re elected by the people for their areas of expertise. I have no issue with that. It makes me no difference. I think the plan that we’ve laid forward makes the most sense, I think it’s reasonable, but I’m willing to work with this body and anybody that inhabits this building to try to make it a better place.

Ted C. Ziemer, Jr.: Just from a legal perspective, the city and the county lease this building, lease their space that they have in this building from the Building Authority. Under the terms of the lease they, the lease provides that the Building Authority will manage and operate this building on behalf of the tenants. So, strictly, unless there would be an objection by a tenant, the Building Authority has the authority, and they do in many respects indicate how this building is run, and we don’t have the Commissioners and the City Council enact an ordinance or a resolution about every single act that the Building Authority takes with regard to the operation and management of this building. If the Commissioners and the City Council want to take a position regarding the operation of this building, they can, by adoption of a resolution. It doesn’t need to be an ordinance, they can just simply say that it’s the, the Commissioners for example are resolved that they either agree or disagree with the opinion of the Building Authority and this committee regarding this particular action they are going to take. But, the Commissioners are only one tenant in this building, the City Council is another tenant, or the city is another tenant, and the City Council can, as the legislative body for the city, take a vote that it would like to take regarding the recommendations of this committee. After they have taken their respective recommendations, if they differ, then there will have to be a sitting down together and resolving that difference. I think where we are right now is that tacitly the City Council and the Building Commissioners have indicated they want security for this building, and they know that a committee has been formed to study it, and the committee has made a recommendation. Unless the Commissioners, or the City Council by a vote indicate that they don’t like that recommendation, it would be that recommendation that the Building Authority would follow in operating this building as the landlord.

Mike Wilson: Thank you, gentlemen, lady.

President Tornatta: Thank you. Come on. Good evening.

Bernice Tirmenstein: Good evening. I’m Bernice Tirmenstein. I live at 1636 East Blackford Avenue. I’m kind of approaching this maybe from an unusual position, but set me straight on the chain of command in the operation of this Civic Center. I understand Dave Rector is the Building Authority Director of the Civic Center. There’s the Board of Directors who appoints the Board of Trustees, we have on the members of the Board of Directors five; John Stanley, Joseph Theby, Steven Titzer, Andrew Goebel, Matthew Singer, these members serve for four years, they meet once a year in January, and then they appoint the Board of Trustees. The Board of Directors, one member is appointed by the Mayor, one by the City Council, one by the County Council, and two the County Commissioners. The people are taxpayers, pay no tax on the building since it’s a public building, and the Mayor we remember makes appointments to 47 boards and commissions. How does Dave Rector get his job?

President Tornatta: He’s appointed by the Board.

Ted C. Ziemer, Jr.: The Board of Directors of the Building Authority hire him.

Bernice Tirmenstein: Thank you.

President Tornatta: Thank you, Bernice.

Jeff Day: Good evening. My name is Jeff Day. I live at 6000 Berry Lane. Pretend for the moment it’s election night 2010. All of you folks are either with the Democrat parties having their celebration, or the Republican party where their celebration is. But, between 6:30 and 7:00 I’m in this building. Almost every election I’m an inspector or a judge. I wonder if any of you have any idea how many people have to come into this building within just a matter of a few minutes. I carry a big machine box that has the disk that goes in the voting machine that stores all of the information and I carry a satchel. Everything that’s in those two things would set off your magnetic machines. Am I lead to believe that it’s election night in November, with November weather that we’re going to all stand outside while you go through and open every one of those boxes and go through every one of those bags? Thank you.

President Tornatta: Hold on, I know we’ve got an answer because I’ve heard this. That’s okay, it wasn’t addressed and I think we can address it.

Eric Williams: Again, I go back to the statement of reasonable exceptions to the policy. I’ve talked with Susie Kirk at length about this, we talked the other day, that we are going to make exceptions on election night with the people that will be credentialed coming in and out. We’ll know what that equipment is, but we will be standing security and screening for the other people that come in to help protect the workers that are coming in trying to tally votes and do their business. But, no, we’re not going to anticipate that the county property that you’re going to be bringing in we’re going to run through, quite honestly will damage it.

Jeff Day: Well, that’s what I would think. Well, you’re telling me because I have the credentials of being the poll inspector or judge, according to the particular election year which one I am, okay, that I’m going to be able to go through just as if I was an employee that one night?

Eric Williams: Well, I think that if you look at the scenario you’ve just laid out, that is a completely different evening than normal, and we will probably make a different allocation of resources for that night, and you’ll have your credentials and we’ll probably bring you in the door and try to get you hustled in as fast as we can so that we can get the votes tallied.

Jeff Day: Thank you, because I don’t want to stand outside in November.

President Tornatta: Okay, thank you.

Eric Williams: Nor do we want you to.

President Tornatta: Please.

James Braker: Good evening, Council. I have a question for the Sheriff.

President Tornatta: Your name please.

James Braker: James Braker. I live at 1700 East Blackford here in Evansville. This is a question for the Sheriff, what about the media?

Eric Williams: At the present time we’re going to make media go through full screening.

President Tornatta: Come on up.

Mike Mahan: My name is Mike Mahan. I live at 1140 East Gum. I came to hear about the security system, the benefits of it, which I’ve heard quite a few good ones, and this is nothing more than like going on a flight. Everyone is subjected to screening when you get on a flight. So, what’s, why does everyone have such negative comments about this? I think you’re looking out for our safety instead of looking for negative things. You should be looking for the benefits.

President Tornatta: Right.

Mike Mahan: Thank you.

President Tornatta: Thank you, Mike.

Dan Adams: I would suggest, sir, that it is very helpful when you see the pilots and the stewardi going through the security scanner.

President Tornatta: Come on up.

Toby Spring: My name is Toby Spring. I attend North High School, senior. I live at 220 East Eichel. I have a few questions about, apparently not everybody is going to be screened? I think everybody should be screened. It’s unfair that some are being left out, whether they work here or not, because “going Postal”, which was referred by somebody here, more chances are that somebody here is going to commit an act of violence than somebody just a random person walking in, a visitor. Two coincidences, Virginia Tech, which was done by a student there, not a visitor, not a parent, but somebody actually there. So, was Columbine, which was done by somebody there, once again, not a visitor. So, I think everybody should be screened, whether they work here or not. Honestly, people when they’re leaving they shouldn’t be screened, because, I mean, what are they going to take out? They were screened walking in, what would they possibly take out?

President Tornatta: They won’t be.

Toby Spring: Okay. When, I don’t know why, but me and two other gentlemen when we walked in we were not screened. I don’t know if–

President Tornatta: It’s not started yet.

Toby Spring: Okay. The officer said that cops and employees here are not screened because they are more trusted–

President Tornatta: Right.

Toby Spring:– than other people, but, I mean, you can only trust them for so long, until they commit a crime or whatever, you know. When they do commit a crime, then we’re having to force everyone to be screened. I think everybody should be screened now, that way we won’t have to, that way if a coincidence as of a cop or an employee, or whoever does commit an act of violence, then we suddenly have to enforce the law that everybody must be screened when they walk in. Supposedly not all of the entrances are going to be screened?

President Tornatta: They will.

Toby Spring: Okay, they will?

President Tornatta: Not, your definition of screened might not be mine or the Sheriff’s, or somebody else’s.

Toby Spring: The metal detectors?

President Tornatta: There will not be a magnatrometer over there, there will be a screen with a, there will be a buzz in, which you use your badge.

Toby Spring: Okay.

President Tornatta: And a camera.

Toby Spring: Alright, thank you.

President Tornatta: Thank you. Thanks, Toby.

Dan Adams: Sir, I would ask you, if you’ve seen the movie that talks about Harvey, is it Milk or Silk?

Unidentified: Milk.

Dan Adams: Milk, I suggest you watch it.

President Tornatta: Anybody else with public comment about...Councilman?

Russ Lloyd, Jr.: Just thinking, Mr. Wilson mentioned if we are going to run into a problem with people backed up outside the door, we could look at something like Anchor Industries, a little awning on aluminum poles would be a very cheap way for government to provide for that in inclement weather. So, I mean as the system unfolds it’s something we might want to think about.

President Tornatta: Thank you.

Russ Lloyd, Jr.: Thank you.

President Tornatta: I think, one of the things that has been brought to our attention is that we will be a work in progress, and there will be things that we will change. I think that’s why we have not adopted an ordinance to the personnel handbook initially, because I don’t know that it’s prudent that we change the handbook five times just to make sure that we’re on target with our projections. However, it was brought up by the Surveyor that that would be a good place to start once we get all of our kinks out, and I think that that’s a great idea. Hopefully, it would be in the handbook. Anything else?

Mike Mahan: (Inaudible. Not at mic.)

President Tornatta: I’ve got to have you up, sorry. It’s part of being public.

Mike Mahan: Before you go to the handbook, which I agree with 100 percent, when you distribute the badges, why not have a form for the employee to actually sign so he can have it for their personnel file acknowledging their responsibilities. That way you know that each one of them received it and you have a permanent record of it.

President Tornatta: I know that almost all of the employees have a badge now.

Mike Mahan: Well–

President Tornatta: So–

Mike Mahan: –you could do a follow up by simply a small sheet.

President Tornatta: Yeah.

Mike Mahan: You, I hereby have received this, whatever you call it formally, here are the, you know, just like bullet points.

President Tornatta: Correct.

Mike Mahan: Here is your responsibility towards maintaining the badge, the items that the Sheriff recommends that you not have on your person, and, you know, just a few bullet points, not that it has to be anything technical or a big legal, and then follow up with your handbook with, that way you know who has the badges and who doesn’t have the badges.

President Tornatta: Okay, thank you. With that being said, we’re switching gears. Roberta, come up quick.

Commissioner Winnecke: While she’s doing that–

President Tornatta: Oh, sure, sorry.

Commissioner Winnecke: –maybe just a comment. I do think it’s important, I’m not sure I agree with everything Mr. Wilson offered, but I do agree that I think it’s important for the legislative bodies to approve or not approve what is being presented. I’m not exactly sure if I had to vote tonight what I would do. I would move that this body consider a resolution at its next meeting to consider this proposal as presented by the Sheriff at that time. I think it’s important that we give it a thumbs up or a thumbs down vote. I would think the City Council would have the same obligation, because I do agree with Mr. Wilson, I do believe, in this case the legislative bodies should have a say in the recommendation.

President Tornatta: And that would be what day?

Commissioner Winnecke: November 17^th.

President Tornatta: The 17^th.

Commissioner Winnecke: Sorry, Sheriff.

President Tornatta: That would be the 17^th.

Commissioner Winnecke: That’s our next meeting.

Eric Williams: Things happen.

President Tornatta: Okay.

Commissioner Melcher: The City, Dan, are you meeting the 16^th?

Dan Adams: I think we’re meeting on the 9^th. I don’t think we’re meeting the 16^th. I don’t think it would be appropriate for me to foster a resolution that–

Commissioner Melcher: No, no.

Dan Adams: –(Inaudible). Perhaps (Inaudible).

President Tornatta: One that you don’t believe in, okay.

Commissioner Melcher: I was just checking when your next meeting was so that they would have it.

President Tornatta: We will pass that along.

Dan Adams: I’m not sure of the dates right now, but I think we meet on the 9^th, I’m not sure after that.

President Tornatta: That’s fine. I’ve got no problem with it, the way this has started is through the County Council who approved the money and approved it through and the process was going through, and, then, at some point everyone heard less and less.

B.J. Watts: Hey, Chief?

President Tornatta: So–

B.J. Watts: Chief Hill, may I ask a question? We didn’t have any, do we have any money in this game from the City’s standpoint? We don’t, do we?

Brad Hill: No, we’re not participating as far as, it’s all county employees, and, now, I think we are sharing, the city shares with as far as some of the expenses for the, yeah. Okay.

President Tornatta: So, in some way you have a dog in the fight and some ways you don’t, but, at the end of the day, I mean, I don’t have a problem with going through and getting approvals. The key is that at some point we have better security than we do now, because it has been recommended that we need that level, and it’s all moving that direction. So, I’m fine with doing that, and if two weeks gets everybody.

Unidentified: What about the new arena?

President Tornatta: Moving on. Roberta? I asked you to come today–

Roberta Heiman: You did.

President Tornatta: –because you’re a little shy. Not a shy personality, you would like, I would like you to tell people how to get in touch with you if they would like to sign a consolidation petition, if that were to be done, and those who didn’t have the opportunity or did not know that it was out there and wanted to support something of that nature. I felt that our due diligence to at least let them know about it.

Roberta Heiman: Well, I thank you very much, Troy. First, I am Roberta Heiman, I am president of the League of Women Voters of Evansville and Southwestern Indiana. Before I get into that, I want to applaud the County Commissioners and the City Council for this joint discussion. It was a very civil exercise in civics. In fact, it kind of relates to what we are doing. We are circulating a petition asking that our elected officials begin the process that will allow citizens, the voters, to decide whether to merge city and county government. The state law requires that we get the signatures of 2,632 registered voters in Vanderburgh County. We are now at about the 2,000 count. We’ve gotten more signatures than that, some of them have not been verified, and I wanted to bring that up because many of them that are not being counted are registered voters but they have moved to a different address than that at which they lived when they registered. So, their signatures are not being counted. So, if somebody asked you to sign our petition, please put down the address at which you lived when you registered to vote. Other than that, anybody who wants to sign our petition you may contact the League of Women Voters on the website at www.lwv as in victory s as in Sam win, League of Women Voters of Southwestern Indiana. Or, and you can download from our website a petition and mail it into us, the address is there. Or, you can stop by the Pagoda at the Visitors and Convention Center, and they have the petition there that you could sign.

President Tornatta: Alright.

Roberta Heiman: Thank you very much.

President Tornatta: Alright.

Roberta Heiman: We’ll be back with all those signatures to ask you to start that process.

President Tornatta: Okay, and at this point we’re not promoting or slamming the idea, we’re just giving you the fair shake to try and get your job done.

Roberta Heiman: I understand.

President Tornatta: Okay.

Roberta Heiman: Thank you.

President Tornatta: Thank you, Roberta.

President Tornatta: Looking at the consent agenda–

Ted C. Ziemer, Jr.: Are we going to read the bids?

President Tornatta: Oh, we’d better, we could do that.

Ted C. Ziemer, Jr.: These are bids for the Old Courthouse plaster repair. There were four bidders, each of them had a base bid, an alternate one, alternate two, and alternate three. These are going to be reviewed by the architect for the project, so if the Commissioners agree, I’ll just read the base bids and not the three alternates. Empire Contractors, base bid, $110,000; ARC Construction, the base bid, $60,100; Danco Construction, base bid, $87,870; Deig Brothers Construction, base bid, $89,756.

Commissioner Winnecke: Mr. Chairman, I’ll move that we take these under advisement.

Commissioner Melcher: Second.

President Tornatta: A motion and a second. Discussion? If not, roll call vote, please.

Madelyn Grayson: Commissioner Winnecke?

Commissioner Winnecke: Yes.

Madelyn Grayson: Commissioner Melcher?

Commissioner Melcher: Yes.

Madelyn Grayson: President Tornatta?

President Tornatta: Yes.

(Motion approved 3-0)

President Tornatta: Okay, motion to approve the consent agenda?

Commissioner Melcher: Before we do that, I would like to probably just make a motion to take the one new hire for Legal Aid out of the consent and vote on that separate.

President Tornatta: That’s fine. Make that in the form of a motion.

Commissioner Winnecke: Mr. Chairman, I’ll move that we move the, we approve the consent items with the exception of the employment change.

Commissioner Melcher: I’ll second that.

President Tornatta: A motion and a second. Discussion? If not, if we’ll read those into the minutes, please.

Madelyn Grayson: The consent items for the November 3^rd meeting are as follows; approval of the October 20, 2009 Commission meeting minutes and the October 29, 2009 special Commission meeting minutes; employment changes from the various offices excluding the Legal Aid society; travel requests there are two from the Commissioners and one from the Health Department; the County Engineer has pay request number 91 for the Burkhardt-Green River TIF projects in the amount of $7,488.52; there’s a waiver of Centre fees/not OT for the arena pre-bid meeting; Hillcrest-Washington Youth Home has third quarter service fees reimbursement; Evansville ARC has the September 2009 board meeting minutes; the County Auditor has approval of October 2009 A/P vouchers; the Public Defender Commission reimbursement; a Legal Services transfer request; the Prosecutor’s office has a JAG grant and the Drug and Crime Control grant; and then there’s also department head reports from Burdette Park and the County Engineer.

President Tornatta: Further discussion? Roll call vote, please.

Madelyn Grayson: Commissioner Winnecke?

Commissioner Winnecke: Yes.

Madelyn Grayson: Commissioner Melcher?

Commissioner Melcher: Yes.

Madelyn Grayson: President Tornatta?

President Tornatta: Yes.

(Motion approved 3-0)

Commissioner Melcher: I would like to kind of discuss the part time. According to the resolution of the County Council only emergency and exceptions, how do we know what’s an emergency and what’s an exception?

Commissioner Winnecke: Well, in this case, the Council has made the approval.

Commissioner Melcher: I know, but I just, I guess, it gets back to that fairness again. Like if Bill needed somebody and they turn him down, and then somebody else needed one and they get that down, are we the ones that are supposed to...I’m just trying to go by what they said.

Commissioner Winnecke: No, I think, I mean, it’s, in my opinion it’s their, they made the resolution and they’re the ones that ultimately decide to fund positions. So, they’re making the call, and we’re affirming or not.

Commissioner Melcher: Well, you know, I just didn’t know what was so big about an emergency for Legal Aid. I mean, that’s the one, I mean, you know somebody that’s going to be doing a snow plow truck or somebody, you know, somebody’s got something that’s really important. I mean, it’s all important, but I just, I’m trying to follow what they want to do, because I disagree with what they are trying to do. I think that we ought to be able to refill slots as they come open, not new slots. Because I don’t think they took that money out of the budget, unless they did away with that job or something.

President Tornatta: This is FMLA. FMLA.

Commissioner Melcher: For the one person–

President Tornatta: Correct.

Commissioner Melcher: –that’s going to be off, so they’re going to be paying that person for 12 weeks. They’re not going to pay that person for 12 weeks?

Gary Heck: I think FMLA is the Family Medical Leave–

Commissioner Melcher: Uh-huh.

Gary Heck: –when they are either returning or going on, one way or the other.

Commissioner Melcher: Yeah, they could be on four different FMLA’s at the same time. I’m not against anybody working, I’m just trying to get a handle on what they did.

Bill Fluty: I was at the Council meeting if you would like to know what the discussion was.

Commissioner Melcher: Well, that’s kind of where I was heading next.

Bill Fluty: Okay, I can tell you that, because there was lengthy discussion. Legal Aid has an employee that’s been on Family Medical Leave for an extended period of time. They hoped that she would return, but in her absence they would like to hire an employee to fill that position and do her duties. The Council, they were asking for 40 hours a week, and the Council actually funded, or gave approval, I think the money was there, to do 20 hours a week just to help them out until, hopefully, this employee returns. That was the discussion and that was the reasoning. I don’t know if they, emergency, I don’t know if that was, if it was proposed as an emergency, just a need for that office to function.

Commissioner Melcher: Well, and this is what their resolution says, “in case of emergency or extraordinary circumstances”.

Bill Fluty: But, I think with that, Steve, it was seven Councilmen that all voted to continue with this even though it varies from exactly what the resolution said. So, at that time they did have that office come up and present, and they did agree.

President Tornatta: Did we sign a resolution by this body?

Commissioner Winnecke: No.

Commissioner Melcher: No.

President Tornatta: Did we sign a resolution or affirm the hiring freeze?

Ted C. Ziemer, Jr.: No, it’s a resolution solely of the County Council.

Commissioner Melcher: And I’ve just kept it. Kiefer was absent, I guess, at the meeting. He’s the only one that didn’t sign it. I don’t have a problem with voting for them, but I would kind of like to vote against it so we could stick with what the County Council wants to do. I’m trying to support them, but they change the rules. So, I don’t know.

President Tornatta: I agree. I mean, that’s the one problem that I have is, you know, you have a lengthy discussion over something you wrote that’s supposed to take care of the situation, and, yet there’s always this loophole that allows certain people to get certain things from, on the hiring side. I just, I don’t believe it’s equilateral as well, to be in a situation where you don’t run the office, but you’re telling people in the office when they come and ask for somebody, you’re relying on their salesmanship to sell that position. In this case, I don’t know, I guess, I have a little bit of issue, but, I mean, somebody’s on Family Leave, at that point, you know, I’m sure they need the help in that office.

Commissioner Winnecke: Mr. Chairman, just for the sake of moving the business along and not trying to cut anyone off, I mean, I do think, I mean, the Council passed the resolution, they saw the need because of the case that was brought to them, at this time I would move approval of the employment change as presented.

Commissioner Melcher: I’ll go ahead and second it.

President Tornatta: I would like for the Council to rescind that resolution. A motion and a second. Further discussion?

Commissioner Melcher: I just think that every time we get one of these we’re going to have to have this discussion. Then, I think we’re going to see a pattern, unless they do something. So, that’s basically the way it is.

President Tornatta: Roll call vote, please.

Madelyn Grayson: Commissioner Winnecke?

Commissioner Winnecke: Yes.

Madelyn Grayson: Commissioner Melcher?

Commissioner Melcher: Yes.

Madelyn Grayson: President Tornatta?

President Tornatta: Yes.

(Motion approved 3-0)

President Tornatta: Okay, rezoning?

Madelyn Grayson: I know Janet is not here tonight. I have the information if you would like me to read it into the record.

President Tornatta: If you would please.

Madelyn Grayson: There’s one first reading tonight, it’s VC-10-2009. The petitioner is T&T Development. The address is 15901 Petersburg Road. The request is a change from C-2 with a use and development commitment to C-4 with a UDC, and this is just to forward it on to Area Plan Commission.

Commissioner Winnecke: So moved.

Commissioner Melcher: Yes, I’ll second the motion to move it to Area Plan.

President Tornatta: A motion and a second. Further discussion? If not, roll call vote, please.

Madelyn Grayson: Commissioner Winnecke?

Commissioner Winnecke: Yes.

Madelyn Grayson: Commissioner Melcher?

Commissioner Melcher: Yes.

Madelyn Grayson: President Tornatta?

President Tornatta: Yes.

(Motion approved 3-0)

President Tornatta: I’ll entertain a motion to adjourn.

Commissioner Winnecke: So moved.

Commissioner Melcher: Second.

(The meeting was adjourned at 7:00 p.m.)

CONSENT ITEMS:

Commissioners:

Approval of the October 20, 2009 Commission Meeting Minutes.

Approval of the October 29, 2009 Special Commission Meeting Minutes.

Waiver of Centre Fee/Not OT: Arena Pre-Bid Meeting.

Hillcrest-Washington Youth Home 3^rd Quarter Reimbursement.

Evansville ARC September 2009 Board Meeting Minutes.

Legal Services line item transfer request.

Employment Changes:

Health Dept. (2)                        Burdette Park (2)                      Public Defender (1)

Prosecutor (1)                           Sheriff (7)                                  VCCC (2)

Legal Aid (1)                             County Highway (1)

Travel Requests:                    Commissioners (2)                   Health Dept. (1)

County Engineer: Pay Request No. 91: Green River-Burkhardt TIF Projects.

Auditor: October 2009 A/P Vouchers.

Public Defender: Public Defender Commission Reimbursement: 7/1-9/30/09.

Prosecutor: JAG Grant and Drug and Crime Control Grant Applications.

Department Head Reports:    County Engineer                       Burdette Park

Those in Attendance:

Troy Tornatta                            Stephen Melcher                      Lloyd Winnecke

Bill Fluty                                    Ted C. Ziemer, Jr.          Madelyn Grayson

Amy Rich                                  Alyssa Powers                          Gary Heck

John Stoll                                  Eric Williams                             Dan Adams

Missy Mosby                             John Friend                              B.J. Watts

Wendy Bredhold                       Dan McGinn                             Brad Hill

Dave Rector                             Bill Jeffers                                 Mike Wilson

Bernice Tirmenstein                 Jeff Day                                    Mike Mahan

Toby Spring                              Russ Lloyd, Jr.                          Others Unidentified

Members of Media

VANDERBURGH COUNTY

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS

Troy Tornatta, President

Stephen Melcher, Vice President

Lloyd Winnecke, Member

(Recorded and transcribed by Madelyn Grayson.)