The Vanderburgh County Council met in session this 3rd day of February, 2010 in room 301 of the Civic Center Complex. The meeting was called to order at 8:32 a.m. by County Council President Russell Lloyd,Jr.

President Lloyd: I’d like to open the meeting for the Vanderburgh County Council February 3^rd, 2010. Attendance roll call please.

COUNCILMEMBER	PRESENT	ABSENT
Councilmember Sutton	X
Councilmember Bassemier	X
Councilmember Shetler	X
Councilmember Goebel	X
Councilmember Raben	X
Councilmember Kiefer	X
President Lloyd	X

President Lloyd: For the Pledge of Allegiance, I’d like to ask Councilman Shetler to lead us.

President Lloyd: Okay, we have minutes from January 6, 2010. Has everyone had a chance to review those? I’ll accept a motion to approve.

President Lloyd: Okay, we’re going to have a deviation from the agenda. We’re going to defer to Judge Heldt here, so let’s go to Item 9, New Business, Item D, Circuit Court Supplemental Adult Probation, request to fill a vacancy, and we’ve got Judge Heldt here.

Carl Heldt: Carl Heldt, Circuit Court Judge. Mr. President, members of the Council, first of all, thank you for the courtesy of letting me go first; the reason is we’re accommodating a jury. I’m in the middle of a jury trial and I can get back there earlier and get them started, and they appreciate it as well. This is a request to fill the secretarial position. We lost our secretary at the drug and alcohol probation services program, it’s the office on 501 John Street. I have with me today Karen Angermeier, who is our administrative assistant; Cherie Wood, who is chief probation officer; Mignon Ware, who is the head of the drug and alcohol probation service over on John Street. This is, I want to say two things from the outset: first of all, this is a position that is funded, salary and fringe benefits, entirely by the adult probation user fee fund, the user fees, so it will have no impact on the taxpayers, or county budget. This is also one of those positions that’s indispensable and can’t be done by other people in the office. And I’m going to ask Mignon Ware, who is the head of the program over there, to come explain more of the details and answer whatever questions you have then. Mignon?

Mignon Ware: Good morning, everyone. As Judge explained, this position is very vital to our office. Currently, we have several people pitching in just trying to assist which is actually taking away from their daily responsibilities. We have a large volume of clients coming through on a daily basis, phone calls, doing urinalysis, just maintenance of daily operations, paperwork that is needing to be prepared, agencies that we coordinate with. This position definitely assists with that. Instead of me probably trying to explain, I don’t know if there is specific questions that might need to be asked of that actual position.

Councilmember Shetler: The person that’s leaving that position, is there a buyout on that person? Have they been there for an extended period of time?

Karen Angermeier: Yes, there was a buy-out of 81 hours, and that is completed as of today.

Councilmember Shetler: Okay, and so there is, you’ve not hired or not looking to hire anybody in the middle of that, it’s going to be completed and starting over from that point?

Carl Heldt: I might say, we did send a letter, there was a lot of details in there that we’re not going to take up your time with. I hope you all have a copy of that, it says exactly what that person does.

President Lloyd: Right, 74 people a day coming through there. Other questions? Mr. Kiefer?

Councilmember Kiefer: I just want to reiterate, you said that that is paid from what source?

Carl Heldt: Probation User Fee funds. It’s money that is generated from the people that, the probationers that actually use the program and also it’s also subsidized by the Community Transition Program where we take, it’s sort of like a re-entry program and Department of Corrections pays us an amount of money to take people back. And that fund is used to operate this program, including this position and so nothing comes from the county fund.

President Lloyd: Motion Mr. Bassemier, second Mr. Kiefer. Any other discussion? Roll call vote please.

President Lloyd: It sounds like this position, it really doesn’t have any effect on the general fund and it’s a busy position, so I’ll vote yes. Thank you, Judge.

President Lloyd: We’ll go back to the regular agenda, so that would be Appropriation Ordinance, number five, and I’ll turn that over to Mr. Shetler, the Finance Chair.

Councilmember Shetler: Yes, this request is from Coroner Groves, with regards to part-time help that she has in there, to increase that. And I do have a couple of questions and I apologize, I wasn’t here last week to ask those questions. If I recall, we had this discussion I think at budget time –

Councilmember Shetler: Seemed like it may have even been the year before that. But anyway, at that time, it’s my understanding that these part-time folks were kind of put on a retainer where they got paid a minimum, so much a week like 12 hours or 20 hours, and –

Councilmember Shetler: They get paid per hour, there’s no retainer, they don’t get paid regardless if they fulfill that time or not?

Annie Groves: Oh, so they’re paid per hour to take call, so they take call for 12 hours at a time, and they’re paid for 12 hours of call.

Councilmember Kiefer: Can you clarify that? I’m a little confused. If they only work one hour, do they get paid for 12?

Councilmember Kiefer: Oh, they’re paid to be on call, so they’re on call for a minimum of 12 hours?

Annie Groves: Correct. Well, we hope. Sometimes we have to throw a couple more on.

Councilmember Kiefer: And that’s whether you get called or not, correct? So if you don’t get called and you’re on call, you still get paid for 12 hours?

Annie Groves: That is technically correct. However, they never make it through a night without being called.

Councilmember Shetler: So there’s not any four-hour minimum? If they do get a call, is there like a four-hour minimum –

Councilmember Shetler: Now, if they would exceed that 12 hours, they would be paid –

Councilmember Shetler: – accordingly. And right now, they’re at a rate of eight dollars an hour?

Councilmember Shetler: Because we did, if memory serves me, and it’s getting old and more fragile than it used to be, but if memory serves me correctly, it seems that we approved around $8.75 an hour back, again, about a year and a half ago, I think, prior to your occupying the office. I thought, under Mr. Erk, that we had approved $8.75, but that isn’t being –

Annie Groves: Well, what happened is, is that I was sworn in January 1^st of 2009, January 28^th of 2010 is the first I ever heard of that. No one had ever told me, my pay schedule never showed anything differently, so I just found out on January 28^th about that, so, you know. And the counties around us pay more, so even with the 75 cents, what they have to do and what they have to go through, that’s really not a fair wage for what they do.

President Lloyd: Other questions by Councilmembers? Do you know roughly what the other counties are paying?

Annie Groves: Yes, I do. Warrick County pays $9.25 an hour, and then Posey County pays per case, and they pay 125 a case. And we have over 400 cases a year, so that wouldn’t be fair to ask for that.

President Lloyd: Okay, any other questions, Councilmembers? Is there a motion to approve a dollar amount? Mr. Kiefer?

Councilmember Kiefer: Yeah, I just wanted to get a little clarification. So right now, you can pay 8.75 per hour, is that what you were saying?

Councilmember Kiefer: Because I was looking back at these old minutes here, and I thought it said a higher amount, so really, what she’s asking for is from 8.75 to 10?

Annie Groves: I’m actually asking for $8 to 10, because no one ever told me about the 75 cent raise.

Councilmember Bassemier: I’ll make a motion to approve if you’re looking for a motion.

President Lloyd: Discussion. Well, we’ll ask for a second. Is there going to be a second to that motion? Any second for $10 an hour? Okay, seeing there are no seconders, that motion dies for lack of a second. Discussion, Mr. Kiefer?

Councilmember Kiefer: I’m in favor of doing something. I, personally, probably would have preferred to do this at budget time, you know, when, because this is coming up, although it’s the beginning of the year, you know, it would have been nicer to have this discussion back when we were doing the budget hearings.

Annie Groves: I asked, I had put the money into the budget for the increase and it was never approved.

Councilmember Kiefer: Okay. Well, thank you for doing that then. You know, is there a reason that the county may, the position may have changed from budget hearing to today, then?

Councilmember Bassemier: I’m just saying, you all have got to realize, being in emergency service what these workers go through. I mean, it’s, they deserve the $10 an hour. What they do, with being in emergency service for going on 40 years, they deserve $10 an hour, what they have to go through. I mean, I know I didn’t get a second on it, but they deserve, they deserve more pay, I’m telling you.

Councilmember Raben: It probably wouldn’t be out of line to at least get them parallel with Warrick, at the $9.25.

Annie Groves: I can’t fill my schedule now. I have several people that work for Warrick also, and when you work for Vanderburgh County, you’re going to be out working. When you work for Warrick County, what we do in one week, they do in a year. So I don’t blame my staff for wanting to work somewhere else to make more money to do nothing.

Councilmember Raben: And then getting them at the $9.25 an hour with Warrick, that should alleviate your problems.

Councilmember Kiefer: I’m comfortable with the $9.25 to balance it out with Warrick County.

Councilmember Shetler: Yeah, I’d like to make a motion that we approve $9.25 an hour to establish a rate.

President Lloyd: Okay, motion Mr. Shetler, second Mr. Kiefer. We have to establish an hourly rate, we also have to act on the general fund appropriation of the $5,000, so I needed a motion for that as well.

Councilmember Shetler: I’ll move that, do it all in one motion, that we approve of the $5,000 at a rate of 9.25 per hour.

President Lloyd: Okay, so motion Mr. Shetler, under Coroner, Assistant Coroners, $5,000, and second Mr. Kiefer. Any other discussion? Roll call vote please.

President Lloyd: Next item on the agenda, go to transfers, continue with transfers, Mr. Shetler.

Councilmember Shetler: We have transfers from the Clerk, the Treasurer’s office and a late request from the Treasurer’s office, I think you all have it there in your packets. So, any questions? I’d move that the transfers be approved as submitted.

President Lloyd: Okay, also we have the late transfers on the second page. Does everybody see those? Okay, there is a motion to approve all the transfers as submitted, Mr. Shetler, and a second, was it Mr. Raben? Any discussion or questions from Council? Roll call vote please.

President Lloyd: Next, no repeals, Old Business, appointments were made last week. Number 9, New Business, Item A, Assessor request to fill vacancy. Any questions from Councilmembers? Mr. Shetler?

Councilmember Shetler: We set up – I know the year before we eliminated pretty much the part-time account, and then last year, we re-established it. How much did we set that in for?

Jonathan Weaver: July 1^st. What we’re doing right now is, we have an intern from USI who is unpaid and we have three Community Work Experience Program candidates, the Welfare to Work people, working with those right now on a part-time basis.

Jonathan Weaver: They’re not being paid, none of those four are being paid, so we’re saving a lot of money by having those four unpaid part-timers.

Councilmember Shetler: Can you tell me how you get that done? I would appreciate knowing that story at a different time.

Councilmember Shetler: Okay, I think that’s all the questions I have right now. Thank you.

President Lloyd: Questions from Council? Anything else, Mr. Weaver? I mean, we’ve received your correspondence on this. It’s a COMOT IV Real Estate Deputy.

President Lloyd: Is there a specific area, specialization for this position? Area that they handle?

President Lloyd: I was asking Mr. Weaver if this was a position that handled a certain area.

Jonathan Weaver: There’s going to be a lot of data inputting. When we take new curbside photos, they will be sticking that into our ProVal assessing software. We have a lot of permits we need to process, just a lot of information to get into the system before March 1^st.

Councilmember Kiefer: Oh, thank you, Mr. President. Jonathan, how long has this position been vacant?

Councilmember Kiefer: Yeah, and I guess the same question that Mr. Shetler had asked earlier, is there some payout owed on this or how long will we be paying out on this?

Jonathan Weaver: I believe the payout has already happened. This particular person was here a year, so the payout wasn’t substantial, is what I recall.

Councilmember Shetler: How many full-time people do you have in your office currently?

Councilmember Shetler: 39? Okay, and this position is a general clerk type position, you said?

Glen Koob: Glen Koob, Real Estate Deputy, County Assessor’s office. This position will work with Pictometry, the ChangeFindr. We have four categories we have to go through: zero to 25% change, 50% change, 75% change, and all demolished property. They will also do data entry for anything that is picked up for the March 2010 deadline. They will also put in photos. What we do down there, we do have cross training in our own office as they will do apartments, call for apartments, the income on those. So whatever needs to be done down there, that’s what they will do at any given time. But those are four of the things that they’re going to be doing to be trained on. We already have, presently, one other person doing that. And four of the people that are working for free, they don’t come in all day. They come in from like 7:30 until 11, one of them does. Whenever they are available to work, we get them, and they’re not going to be there forever. One girl is a college student and so she’ll be gone, you know, soon. But it’s nice that they come in. But that’s what the new person will be doing that I can think of right now.

Councilmember Shetler: Your part-time help, how do you envision, – I guess in my mind I’m thinking of part-time can be, you know, a lot of different things. You can define that like a seasonal part-time, somebody just works in the summer months, or somebody works in the school year. Somebody that works six hours a day instead of eight hours a day, somebody that works less than 25 hours a week, whatever. I mean, there’s different categories of part-time. How do you envision that part-time person?

Glen Koob: We start reassessment, as far as we know, July 1^st of 2010. We still have ongoing pickups, new houses, that will go in different areas of the city. And it’s a rolling reassessment, so the people that we have now will do ongoing work. The new people that we would have part-time, that we would pay part-time salaries to, would be the ones that are going out in the field in the new areas and data collecting for the reassessment that starts in 2010. There are two different, we have a general assessment and a reassessment, as you know, because of the budgets.

Councilmember Shetler: And how many people will that 40,000 be able to have employed working part-time?

Councilmember Shetler: The $40,000 part-time monies that , how many part-timers will that give you?

Glen Koob: Well, I know this is a silly answer, but as many as we need to get the job done on time because Commissioner Rushenberg, he’s very adamant on us getting on-time assessments, I’m sure you’ve heard, and on getting May the 31^st, getting all of our trending finished for this year because he wants the tax rates and everything for the whole state to be on time. He’s very adamant about that. So we have to hit our deadlines pretty well. So, if the people that are having to hit the deadlines that are there working presently, like trending, we have to have finished by May 1^st, okay, and we have, I think last night the Commissioners were just working on that vendor. But anyway, they start reassessment July of 2010. So when we get, we’ll still be correcting things for 2010 assessment up until, all year, up until it rolls over, the Auditor rolls it over.

Councilmember Shetler: And those part-time people are going to be basically in the field, doing the measurements and doing – Pictometry has relieved a little bit of the duties we’ve had in the past or ...

Glen Koob: Well, not really, because right now, what Pictometry is doing, is we’ve had that ChangeFindr, I think we paid extra money for it. What we’re doing now is we’re going out and looking in the field as to what has been missed out in the field. Like, somebody will build a house or build an addition on to a house, actually, or a garage or something, they never take a permit out for it, you know. So that’s what ChangeFindr is actually doing and we’re going out. I picked up a 60 x 32 barn yesterday in ChangeFindr, it’s 75% complete or a 75% change is what it actually is, to the parcel, to the building, and I picked up a 32 x 60, and that’s expensive.

Councilmember Shetler: If I remember, that Pictometry was supposed to be able to get down to within a few inches of the dimensions of the – do we actually need to go out and visually look at each one of those things and measure it off and the whole business then, to have –

Glen Koob: You know, the only reason, like the barn, we don’t know if it has a concrete floor by Pictometry because it just shows the outer shell of the building. We need to see what the amenities are to the building and that doesn’t need to be done every year. Once it’s done, it’s done, just like everything else. But they’re building new houses each year, they’re, you know, building new commercial buildings, they’re adding room additions and those are really what’s expensive and what we need to pick up. They add to the assessment base.

Councilmember Shetler: Now, when they go out and do the field work, are we sending one person out or two people, because that’s my question, too.

Glen Koob: Well, for safety reasons, I think it’s good, especially if the women go out, I think it’s good to send two people. The other thing is, somebody has to hold the dumb end of the ruler, is what we call it. You know, the end that you hold to the side of the building, and the other one reads the other end.

Glen Koob: Yeah, so that’s the reason, and for safety reasons, too, because they are going all over the city. So that’s the reason why we send two and the other thing, too, is that whenever the person is reading the measurement, she’s calling it out to the other person that may have the clipboard writing down or doing the drawings. And then they have to do photos, they have to look at the land, they have to look for any pavement, you know, in commercial. They have to do a lot more in commercial than they do residential. But there’s, I’d say, yes, on the two people.

Councilmember Goebel: I was going to backtrack. Jonathan, about a month ago we approved a replacement. Has that position been filled?

Councilmember Kiefer: Glen, I was just going to ask, you said they use rulers, --

Glen Koob: Well, a tape measure. Fiberglass, hopefully, in case they go across an electrical line, they don’t get electrocuted.

Councilmember Kiefer: Have you guys thought about getting those digital measuring tapes and reading those? I mean, they –

Councilmember Kiefer: You wouldn’t have to have somebody holding the dumb end of it.

Glen Koob: Well, I tell you the reason why. We get tape measures because they’re a lot less expensive than those things. You drop them in the mud, I’m not sure if they would work. We would have to do more investigation on those electronic ones.

Councilmember Kiefer: Yeah, the only reason I’m thinking is because it doesn’t take two people to utilize that.

Councilmember Kiefer: You know, you could use that and you might save some money by not having to have two people.

Glen Koob: I guess we could give them stun guns, too, in case they got attacked by dogs or something like that. But, I mean, you know, that’s the reason two people go out for the safety of it, too.

Councilmember Kiefer: Okay, I was just trying to think if the digital ones might save some money.

Glen Koob: The laser ones are good for angles. You know, the newer houses, how they have the house may be rectangular, two or three stories, but you know how they have the angle, the garage may be angled? That’s good for the vector in that when you measure that. But, for now, unless we can come up with a different thing for their safety, that’s what I worry about more than the – the other thing is, we could check into that laser and see how much those are. But I think they’re quite a bit more than a tape.

Councilmember Bassemier: Joe, would that be another job for Loretta to check that, make sure that’s working right?

Councilmember Kiefer: Yeah, we want to add to her work. But, you know, Loretta can get it done.

Jonathan Weaver: I just want to add, too, Pictometry, Mr. Shetler, that we’ve picked up over $6,000,000 in assessed value that has been missed, with the addition of Pictometry. And essentially, you know, the first year has already paid for itself with the extra revenue it’s bringing in.

Councilmember Raben: I guess what I’m kind of picking up from everybody is the Council may want to lean more towards using some part-time help and seeing how that goes. Let me ask you this, would that not also give us an opportunity, you said there were two or three people that were coming from the Initiative Based program, if there were an individual or two that are really working out, that might be an opportunity for them to earn their wings within your office and eventually go to a full-time position?

Jonathan Weaver: So far we’ve been really impressed with two of the four part-timers. We really would love to have that full-time person replaced, though, at this point. Last night at the Commissioner meeting we threw out the bids for commercial/industrial trending, they ranged anywhere from, I think, 78,000 to 98,000. We’re going to do that in-house and save money there. We are going to, we did get permission to seek bids to get assistance with the appeals, commercial/industrial appeals, which I’m guessing might cost 30 to 40,000. But, so last night, I feel like we saved an additional 40 to 50,000 by rejecting those commercial/industrial bids.

Councilmember Raben: Okay, I’m just trying to balance this out because I’m kind of doing a forecast of how the vote turnout might be. But I think we might have to reconsider if you can possibly do the part-time and see how that goes and training, understanding training probably takes 30 days. If it doesn’t work out, you would want to be in here in time to have someone trained and ready for the reassessment period.

Glen Koob: Glen Koob, again. I just need to say this, Jim, the part-time person, if we have four people now that, and one person that only goes out in the field for commercial and he is somewhat behind because he’s the only one that goes out, and there is one person that data enters. The other person is calling for income and expense information for – we’ve got over 10,000, approximately 10,000 commercial/industrial that have to be done. Where it would take maybe two hours to do a house, to measure a house, it takes almost a day to do a commercial building if they put an addition on it or whatever, and that’s what this person, the replacement, would do because that’s where we need the help the most is over in the commercial department right now.

Councilmember Raben: Okay, I guess that could be part of the confusion here within the Council then because the summary, it has this individual doing more clerical. And really, I was kind of confused, when we were getting off on measuring and stuff, how we go from data entry and clerical to doing field work.

Glen Koob: Well, that’s just a question that Tom had. But this person, this new person would be clerical also because whenever they bring in the information right now, we have one lady that’s going out, two people that go out. When she gets back in, she has to do all the data entry, so therefore, she gets behind, too. To do data entry for commercial, it’s going to take probably at a minimum three weeks to even teach them how to do this. And then they have to get their level I and II before they can do commercial. So it’s really not a job that you can just give to anybody to do. They do have to have those classes to do that, the level I and level II to do that because of the fact that, is it this year, 2010, they have to be a level II before they can assess? So that’s the reason why we were going to put them in clerical and commercial because that’s where we needed it worse, because we have four people there and they’re all covered up. Thank you.

Jonathan Weaver: I’d also like to add that, you know, we’ve gone from 52 to 40 employees also just with the consolidation, so I feel we really need this person. We also gave back two positions last year to the county.

President Lloyd: Which kind of segues into a question I have: Commissioner Tornatta had brought a proposal from Waggoner, Irwin & Scheele about an operations review for the county, I don’t know if you saw that. I think the Council, rather than spend $65,000 doing the whole county, Council would look at the possibility of maybe doing one or two departments as a kind of a pilot. Would you be interested in having them do an operations review on your department where you’ve had all these townships combined into one County Assessor?

President Lloyd: Alright. I mean, I think that, as opposed to some of the others where they’ve had reviews in the past and it may be more difficult to organize the workload, but maybe with yours, they might be able to come up with something there. Okay, any other questions from Council? Is there a motion to approve filling the vacancy?

Councilmember Goebel: Once again, this is kind of a gray area for us as far as the job descriptions, actually, because it seems like one is mostly clerical and office and now it’s become commercial, actually going out into the field. So it’s kind of difficult for us to understand if the people you have right now that are working, I guess, basically, as volunteers? Is that correct?

Councilmember Goebel: Four part-timers. Or is there consideration about hiring them or is this just short-term and they’re going to leave right away?

Jonathan Weaver: The three Community, from CWEP, they’re there on a short-term, I think six to eight weeks. And they have the opportunity to apply. I think they seek other experience, though, after their tenure is done with me.

Councilmember Shetler: I’d like to see us utilize the part-time help now for trying to take up some of that space. I’m having a little bit of difficulty expanding or keeping our budget at a point that we need to shrink the size of county government the best we can. This is a pretty good size office, 40 employees, I feel like this is an opportunity for us to really look hard at this, and if we have to do something more than part-time later on in the year, we have to do something there. But I’m going to have to vote no, to keeping this at the same level. So I vote no.

Councilmember Goebel: I’m between a rock and a hard spot as well. I don’t know how essential this position is and if it doesn’t go through today, would you be likely to come back? I hate to ask this question during the vote, actually, but, or if we go with the study –

Jonathan Weaver: Yeah, I’d be willing to come back. It’s already budgeted for 2010, so I’m not asking for an additional appropriation.

Councilmember Goebel: I understand that, but it’s not very difficult to see what kind of crises I think is ahead with our revenues being cut. I mean, schools are closing buildings and we’re wondering how we’re going to make bills. And I think that tidal wave is going to hit us very quickly, so we have to be as prudent as possible at this point. I just don’t feel real comfortable with the job description as to actually what this person is going to be required to do right now, because it seems to be a little bit up in the air, so I think I would go with part-time for right now. But very willing to reconsider once I have a better grasp as to what your, what the job really entails.

Councilmember Raben: Okay, you echoed a lot of what I was going to say. It would be my desire to first make an attempt to go part-time, but at the same token, I also understand that this office is what generates our income to operate county government. So understanding that, as we get closer to real crunch time with reassessment, if it doesn’t work, I’ll sit here with a very open mind and look at turning this position into full-time.

Councilmember Kiefer: I won’t make a long speech. I think the field component of this is what’s compelling to me, so I’m going to vote yes.

President Lloyd: At this point I’m going to vote no, and look at the part-time budget as well as some of the other Councilmembers had mentioned, so the motion fails 3-4. Thank you.

Loretta Townsend: Loretta Townsend, Weights & Measures department. And don’t go with the digital ones, either. Stick with the metal tape.

President Lloyd: Okay, we had a pretty good discussion in the Personnel & Finance meeting about this position. Any questions from Council? Mr. Shetler?

Councilmember Shetler: And that buy-out takes it up to about what time will the position actually be vacant?

Loretta Townsend: I think, if I’m right, Sandie, that on part of your agenda, today, isn’t it, that we’re asking for an appropriation or a transfer in order to be able to fill it as quickly as we can. I don’t have a whole roomful of people. I mean, there’s myself and two guys, and the secretary. I can’t turn around to one of them and say, you’re going to have to pick up the slack. They’re already there, you know. So, I mean, and there’s no slow time at all. We go from one thing on to another thing. As far as complaints, I’ve got them laying on the desk right now that –

Councilmember Shetler: The buy-out is what, around $7,000 or something like that?

Councilmember Raben: You know, this, if you’ve ever, I’ve had the luxury of seeing them when they’re checking tanks, and what have you, and gas stations, and there’s a lot of lifting. When they’re onsite, it is a two or three man job and at the same token, the residents of Vanderburgh County expect someone to answer the phone when they’re out .

Councilmember Raben: So, you can kind of look at this department, I very often look at it as kind of like the big brother department, that’s somebody that’s not a revenue generating department, but’s it’s somebody that’s –

Councilmember Raben: – that’s ensuring that you’re getting what you paid for and this is one that I think is very necessary, and I’m supportive of replacing.

Loretta Townsend: There’s only five people total in the whole department, period, including the secretary. And sometimes we go by ourselves, it depends on the situation. We don’t want to look like we’re ganging up on somebody if we don’t necessarily have to. But most of the time, it takes every one of us.

Councilmember Shetler: I’ll be glad to make that motion and I will because when we first established the hiring freeze, one of the things that we talked about, I think Councilman Sutton may have even brought that point and that question up, about if we’re dealing with a small office, and it would have an effect on 20 or 25 percent of the operation, that’s something that has to have due consideration as opposed to something that might be one of 30 or 40 or 50 employees, where it wouldn’t have quite the effect. So I’ll make a motion because I feel like it’s –

Loretta Townsend: Well, if you can turn to another person and say, you know, can you pick up his slack, that other person ain’t there. I mean, they’ve already got all they can handle, you know.

Bill Fluty: Just, the action taken today was a transfer out of that particular line item, salary line item into Accrued Payments. So it’s really, it’s not an appropriation to immediately hire. I just want to make that clear to everyone, that what you’ve done is reduced the amount of that salary to do the buy-out and then that person would be hired in when the money hits for the remainder of the year, so it’s at a later date. So is everybody clear on that?

Loretta Townsend: I’m not. I mean, I’m not clear on it. Bottom line is, we had to pay out what, $7,000? We will be paying out, it’s already in to be paid out like, what, next week or whenever? Okay. We had to pay that out to him, he was there for 20 years, okay. We need somebody as quickly as we can. I can’t just put them in the front seat of the truck and say go for it. You know, we’re going to have to train them. We’ve got to train them ourselves, because we have no money in our budget to send them off somewhere to train. We got a whole hundred bucks, I think, in travel.

Bill Fluty: But the action taken today wasn’t an appropriation to leave this money in. This money has been moved to be his buy-out, so there’s not enough money in that line item to pay a full-time person until the end of the year.

Councilmember Raben: Right, there’s funds that could pay the person, but some time later in the year, the fund will run out.

Loretta Townsend: They’re going to make less, too. Whoever comes in will make less.

Sandie Deig: I believe you filed an appropriation, didn’t you, for additional funds?

President Lloyd: Okay, that clarifies that. Any other questions from Council? Was there, did you make a motion, Mr. Raben?

President Lloyd: Oh, you made a motion to approve filling the vacancy and Ed seconded? Any further discussion? Roll call vote please.

Councilmember Sutton: I think Councilman Shetler stated my position very well in relation to the size of the office and the impact that you guys have, and I do vote yes.

President Lloyd: And I appreciate the conversations we’ve had, and I would like to vote yes as well to fill the vacancy. Thank you.

Loretta Townsend: I’ve got one question, what’s my next step? When can I get him?

President Lloyd: The, I mean, there’s money in that line item now, so I believe she can hire somebody at any time. Isn’t that correct?

Bill Fluty: I guess if you do go forward next month and appropriate that money. Now if you don’t, then, so that’s where you stand –

Loretta Townsend: Well, there’s money in there now to cover his salary, you know, for quite a few months.

President Lloyd: Right, there’s plenty of money in there and then we’ll take up the additional appropriation next month. But there’s money in there to hire the employee as soon as you can make that available.

Councilmember Shetler: From a, I may be overstepping my bounds here, I guess, my position, but I guess from a legal standpoint, though, wouldn’t you have an issue, that if, in fact, it did not get passed, you could end up running out of money for that employee come December?

Jeff Ahlers: Right. Once the money runs out of that line item, if it’s not replenished, that would be the end of that position. It would be contingent upon, in terms of whether that employee makes it to the end of the year, whether you put additional funds in that line item.

Councilmember Shetler: So I’m kind of echoing what our Auditor is saying and with a word of caution here that, you know, we may want to not rapidly look at replacing. You know, every day or two or week that we have to be able to stretch that out a little bit gets you closer to the point that you won’t need as much of an appropriation and/or you can make, with a lesser pay that that new person is coming in, you know, it may work itself out.

Loretta Townsend: What I’m saying, we do need him as soon as we can because we’ve just now started going through everything. The first of every year, we’ve got to start all over again. And train them, too. I just can’t send them out there. I mean, there’s going to be quite a bit of training that we’re going to have to do for him.

Bill Fluty: When these buyouts are figured, there is a future date that is calculated to say you can hire in as of this date.

Bill Fluty: Well, I don’t have it with me, but I mean, it has been done. Sandie, do you know what that date is?

Bill Fluty: Yes, but if there were no funds then from March 3, do you know the first date that she could hire? I just don’t have it, but I know its been done.

Councilmember Shetler: Well, you could if the appropriation would go through March the 3^rd, then you could hire prior to that, but I guess the caution is, you would not be able to really hire, again. Maybe I’m overstepping my bounds. I apologize, but that’s the way I’m understanding.

Bill Fluty: Let me just back up a minute. March 3^rd, but then you send the appropriation to the state and you wait for their approval which takes a couple of weeks. We do have a budget order, so that’s not a problem now, but the state will tell you that money is okay somewhere in the second or third week of March. But even doing it at that time, I mean, you can take other risks, but I’m just telling you what you did today.

Loretta Townsend: They are Teamsters so it’s going to have to be advertised five days there and then other than that, I mean, we’ve not gone out and looked, you know.

Jeff Ahlers: Obviously, if you want – the safest route, it’s obviously best to wait until, you know, you make the appropriation on March 3^rd. If, however, Council approves you moving forward to do that prior to that appropriation, I would suggest that, well, I would ask that, I think you ought to tell any employee that’s hired, and it probably ought to be put in writing that they understand unless that appropriation is in effect, it could be that their position runs out of funds before the end of the year. And if that occurred, their position would terminate, so that there’s no confusion and no one, you know, has any argument to be made that somehow they were mislead, that they left another job to come to this job. They need to understand, until the official action is taken by Council, the funds run out in that line item, their job terminates. Is that fair? Does everybody understand that?

Councilmember Raben: You know, if we look at March 3^rd, by the time you advertise it and do what you have to do, February is a short month, I mean, it probably isn’t the end of the world waiting until March 3^rd to officially hire anyone.

Councilmember Bassemier: The vote was taken today, Loretta, that’s not going to happen.

President Lloyd: Okay, we have some correspondence about the position of Bailiff Transportation Officer.

Brett Niemeier: Yes, I think it’s set in at approximately $6,700. This position hasn’t been used on a regular basis over the last few years. What I’m asking for is to go ahead and fill it now. Unfortunately, because of the tough economic times, it really affects the court tremendously. And it came to my attention, especially in the paternity area where we collect child support for parents, that if a parent came and applied for child support, the earliest they were going to get a court hearing to get a court order was four months out. To me, that’s not efficient government and we had to do something. So I’ve reconstructed with the help of the other superior court judges, some new court sessions, but because of that, I truly need this part-time bailiff to be able to call cases in and out, because all of our proceedings are confidential in nature. We just can’t bring them all into the court at one time. And this position would allow us to probably cut that downtime in half. We probably can get people in and out of court now within two months instead of four months, so they could get their court orders for back child support.

President Lloyd: Okay, and you indicated it’s a part-time position. Any questions from Councilmembers?

Councilmember Raben: This line item, is this, I’m trying to recognize that. Is that a general fund line item?

Councilmember Raben: Do you have any other funds available to reimburse for that position?

Councilmember Raben: Well, do you have any other line items or any other non-general fund accounts that we could use to offset this position?

Brett Niemeier: No. I don’t anticipate using all that was granted to us in the Patient Inmate Care line item, but that, again, is a general fund line item. But I expect to have substantial savings there by the end of the year, but I don’t have any other means to come up with $6,700.

President Lloyd: Now, if I look in the salary ordinance, we’ve got Bailiff, but it shows full-time.

President Lloyd: Oh okay, I’m sorry. Okay, but this one, what are you anticipating the hours per week? Like 20 hours?

Brett Niemeier: Probably 15. Yeah, they’re going to end up covering three sessions. Not only will they cover one new paternity session, they’ll also cover two new Children In Need of Service sessions that the courts had to add. We increased 20% last year on both of those variety of cases, those type of cases.

President Lloyd: So this would be kind of the lower level type work, where right now, you’re having to pull staff out to do this kind of stuff?

Brett Niemeier: Right now, I have somebody volunteering, they’re not being paid.

Councilmember Goebel: You mentioned that you thought the waiting time would be cut in half?

Brett Niemeier: Yeah. We’re going to be able to run an extra 20 to 25 cases per week through that one session and as importantly, probably even more importantly, quite frankly, is the two sessions that we’re adding to the Children In Need of Service cases, so that we, again, have faster results and get our parents in that have abused and neglected kids. Hopefully get those cases moving quicker than they are now.

Councilmember Raben: Put that in perspective, how many cases do you normally, because that seems like a pretty substantial amount of additional cases?

Brett Niemeier: Well, last year, we had approximately just below a thousand cases filed on the children born out of wedlock. And in the CHINS area, we’re talking 500 new cases. We currently have 800 children that are not currently living in their homes because of abuse and neglect and we have to have court hearings. We have to make those determinations, determine what’s best for those kids, whether or not they’re going to continue to be outside of their home or to get them back home.

President Lloyd: Other questions from Council? Does somebody want to make a motion?

President Lloyd: Okay, motion to approve a part-time vacancy, filling it. Is there a second?

President Lloyd: Okay, motion Mr. Shetler, second Mr. Raben. Any discussion? Roll call vote please.

President Lloyd: Okay, we already had Circuit Court, Item 9D. We’ll move to Item 9E, Legal Aid request to fill vacancy.

Sue Hartig: Good morning, I’m Sue Hartig, the Director of Legal Aid. Mr. Gibson is passing out to you a letter of support we have from the Evansville Bar Association and several of our board members are here. Would the board members please stand? And Carol Braden-Clarke, the Executive Director of United Way is here. I explained this in pretty explicit detail last week. Last year, we lost one of our three full-time secretaries and had tried to replace her with a part-time person. We’ve gone through two part-time persons and that position is vacant right now, but we will fill that with a part-time person we have approval for. Now our most senior secretary of 29 years has submitted her retirement at the end of the month. And we’re one of those small offices with three attorneys and three secretaries and our attorneys are as efficient as we are because we have the secretaries to rely on. They do intake and spend a lot of time dealing with the general public and serve on committees and file paperwork in the courthouse as well as doing our legal work for us. Last year, we handled 877 cases and leveraged every dollar of our budget over four times. We had a 430,000 something dollar budget and did 1.9 million dollars of legal work. With the economy, our requests are even higher. You just heard Judge Neimeier say that he’s adding additional sessions of court that we’ll have to appear at and we need this full-time person. There is a fairly substantial buy-out since she has been with us for 29 years. We did the transfer for that this morning and I have not worked out all of the details, but I think between the extra funds because of the position where we’re only filling part-time was budgeted for the whole year, and each of the new positions, if you approve it today and if the junior secretary is promoted to senior secretary, I think there will be enough savings in those three accounts, that we can do a transfer for the large majority of the money we would need, so that we could hire someone fairly quickly. Otherwise, it’s going to be July and I think our next appointment right now is near the end of March, about ready to go into April because we’ve just had to cut back on appointments because we didn’t have the staff. Are there any questions?

Councilmember Bassemier: You’re showing a savings of $11,419 if this is approved?

Sue Hartig: Yes. Because the senior secretary will make less than the current person does, the new hire will make less than the current person does, and our third position remains part-time instead of full-time.

Sue Hartig: When fully staffed, six. Three attorneys and three secretaries. Under this new plan, it will be 5.5, three attorneys and two and a half secretaries.

President Lloyd: And when Mrs. Paulin leaves, as of right now, you’d have one and a half secretaries, right?

Councilmember Kiefer: I’m in favor of this. I mean, they’re saving money, they’ve developed a plan that’s reducing the cost by over $11,000. I think it’s a good way to manipulate the staff so that way you can reduce the total costs, especially by hiring in lower salaried people. So I’m in favor of it.

Councilmember Goebel: I was just wondering, do you have a plan as far as the part-time replacement? Do you have someone in mind at this point?

Sue Hartig: Um, we’ve got several people in mind, so we’ll probably do some interviews.

Councilmember Goebel: At the end of this month, though, actually, you’ll be down to one secretary, is that correct?

Councilmember Goebel: And you definitely intend to promote your junior to the senior level?

Councilmember Goebel: And that, I don’t know if that’s an issue with us or not. I think the payout might be if these numbers are correct that you provided today compared to what might be in the line items. I don’t know.

Sue Hartig: There’s still a savings in that line item even with the promotion because the person we’re promoting still has much less seniority than the person retiring did.

Councilmember Shetler: Well, I have one question and that is, so you’re thinking that you might be able to massage this timing-wise to get it pretty well revenue neutral here, so that it isn’t going to have an effect?

Sue Hartig: If we have to do an additional appropriation, I don’t think it will be anywhere close to that 14,000 that we transferred because we’re going to have money left in the full-time position that you’ve made part-time, we’ll have money left because the new hire will make substantially less than the current junior secretary, and the person that we promote will make less than the person that’s retiring.

Councilmember Shetler: And I’m not trying to reflect anything on this particular individual. A lot of circumstances arise that, we, as individuals, cannot predict. From a management perspective, it appears to me, particularly when you have an employee that’s been there for a considerable amount of time and you have a small office, that a two week notice, and they may have given you more than that, you know, a month’s notice, sometimes may not be sufficient, though, to help us out in our way of trying to keep it revenue neutral as much as we possibly can. And I’m just wondering, maybe we ought to look at that handbook, the employee handbook there and see exactly what it does say, how much notice an employee should give us when they’re getting ready to leave. I’m thinking, the more seniority they have, particularly if you’re looking at a retirement deal, that it might be helpful to have a little bit more notice on that because that’s what puts us in a real predicament, particularly if you can’t fill this until July, you know, keeping it revenue neutral, and some of that is constrained by laws. I mean, we’re not able to have two people occupying the same line item for any period of time, so that creates a real problem for us and that’s why I’ve kind of established that questioning throughout, you know, starting with Judge Heldt’s office and everybody has been aware of that and trying to keep it so that there aren’t two people occupying the same line. Our job is to make sure that we keep things at or below where they were last year, particularly with the budget that we had this year. So it’s creating a real management nightmare for you to do it.

Sue Hartig: I think she gave three weeks’ notice, if not four, but I found out the Friday afternoon, and then the information was due to you the next Monday, the following workday.

Councilmember Goebel: I was curious, to make sure we stay revenue or expense neutral, would it be possible to hire in another junior secretary and keep your current recommendation for a senior secretary at that level until the books balance, with her knowing that she will then get the promotion? Is that a consideration?

Sue Hartig: That would hardly be fair for her to take on all those additional duties in addition to training the new person.

Councilmember Goebel: I don’t know, you obviously need the position and I’m just thinking as far as increasing the budget...

Councilmember Shetler: What’s the difference in those two positions, junior/senior because I think Councilman Goebel may have struck on a good compromise here, as far as what I’m hearing.

Sue Hartig: Well, the senior person does all the bookkeeping, all the accounting, all the bill paying, the time keeping, many things that the junior secretaries don’t do.

Councilmember Shetler: What’s the difference in the pay levels? How will that affect...

Sue Hartig: If the person is promoted, the salary will go from 30,338 to 34,716.

Sue Hartig: And then the new person will come in at 21,120 instead of the 34,716, so there is –

Sue Hartig: I think it will be – if not revenue neutral, it will be very close to it.

Councilmember Goebel: We’re just talking $1,400 difference, is that correct? And you need to fill then a junior vacancy? Is that, my understanding, is that right?

President Lloyd: Okay, motion Mr. Kiefer, second Mr. Bassemier. Any discussion? Roll call vote please.

Councilmember Sutton: (Inaudible) committee for being creative and trying to find some alternate ways to address what is an issue in your office but, more so, looking from a more global perspective of what the county is facing and the challenges that we have in trying to not just freeze, but we’re trying to find ways to reduce. And I appreciate your efforts in doing that. So I vote yes.

Councilmember Shetler: While it’s only $4,000 I think I like Councilman Goebel’s suggestion on trying to compromise on this a little bit. I, like him, I think misunderstood at first, I thought it was 33,000 and a $1,400 difference, which wasn’t enough to worry about, but 4,000 –

Councilmember Shetler: – a little bit more revenue neutral or expense neutral or whatever. I would be in favor of this if we could somehow stipulate that this is going to be revenue neutral and not affect the budget, whatsoever. Since it’s not presented that way, I’d have to vote no.

President Lloyd: I can appreciate what Mr. Shetler has indicated here. They have a dire situation, though, so I’m going to vote yes. The motion passes six to one. Thank you.

Sandie Deig: But you do realize that that position cannot be filled until Mrs. Paulin is out of that position? You have to have your buyout and everything out of there. You can’t put two people in the same line item.

Sue Hartig: Okay, so that will be one lump sum that comes out some time after she leaves.

President Lloyd: Okay, we’ll move on to 9F, Item F is travel requests. Item number 1, Auditor, Spring and Fall County Auditor Conference. Any questions, Council? These are state called meetings. Yes, Mr. Goebel?

Councilmember Goebel: Well, it’s not a big issue, I guess, but I spoke to Mr. Fluty about it. It seems like the Auditors Association would put that second meeting later in the year after the general election when perhaps a new person would be able to benefit. I have a little question on the second one, but all in all, I think it’s okay.

President Lloyd: Maybe they purposely do it in late October so all the candidates will show up and they would get more revenue at the conference. Mr. Sutton?

Councilmember Sutton: On that request, is all of that lumped in to one request? Is there a way to divide that off into the expenses for spring and the expenses, what they would end up being for the fall?

President Lloyd: Sure. There is a February 3^rd estimated cost $810, or no, that’s October, and then May, the estimated cost is $960.

Councilmember Sutton: And kind of along the lines of what Councilman Goebel was saying, just in relation to kind of where we are now financially and where we may be come summer or fall, I’d rather kind of wait before we make a decision on expenses that far down the road. I feel comfortable acting, obviously, on the one in the spring, but the other one is a little far off.

President Lloyd: Let me ask a question for Mr. Fluty. Could you send the Chief Deputy to one of these conferences instead of the Auditor?

Bill Fluty: I surely could. The habit is just myself going and bringing back material, and that’s what I’ve done for the last eight years or past seven years. These are state called meetings that I’m required to go to, so I don’t have a choice, that’s why I just went ahead and sent them both in as early as possible to have them approved. So that was the reasoning behind that.

President Lloyd: Okay, any other questions, Council? The request was for these to be taken separately. I’ll entertain a motion either that way or if a Councilmember feels they should just be taken together.

Councilmember Kiefer: So state required, it’s mandatory you have to be in attendance?

Bill Fluty: Yes, unless I would have some excuse, some reason, I guess, that they would accept. But yes, I am required to go.

Bill Fluty: But if you wanted to wait on the other one, I just wanted to get them both out there, but it makes no difference to me.

Councilmember Sutton: Well, I’d like to make a motion that we approve the spring conference and, well, I’ll just leave it at that.

President Lloyd: Okay, so $810 spring conference for the Auditor, is there a second?

President Lloyd: Okay, motion Mr. Sutton, second Mr. Goebel. All in favor, signify by saying aye.

President Lloyd: Is there anybody that wants to make the motion on the October conference?

President Lloyd: Well, we can still vote on it, Royce. I mean, it could be voted down.

Councilmember Raben: You know, the motion that was made, I think it came from you, you cited an amount for the spring conference of $810. That’s the fall, so –

President Lloyd: My apologies. So I announced it wrong, but the motion was voted on for the spring, so that amount was $960, that was my error. But that was still approved.

President Lloyd: Well, we have a motion from Mr. Shetler for the Fall Conference, we can take this all then. Is there a second for that?

Councilmember Sutton: I was going to ask for you to resubmit it, the Fall Conference is later on.

Bill Fluty: I’d be happy to resubmit it. I just wanted you to know that it was something I’m required to do and get it out there, but I’d be happy to bring it back at a later date.

President Lloyd: Let’s move on to Item 2, the Treasurer. Any questions on the request from the Treasurer? It looks like Treasurer’s Association county meeting.

President Lloyd: Okay, motion Mr. Bassemier. Second, was it Mr. Goebel? Okay. All in favor signify by saying aye.

President Lloyd: Weights & Measures, Item number 3, Indianapolis trip, certification of equipment, $100. Is there a motion to approve?

Councilmember Kiefer: Yeah, that’s what I was going to say, there goes their hundred.

Loretta Townsend: That’s two trips, actually. Take them on a Monday and then come back home, and then we’ve got to go up on a Friday and pick them up and come back, so it’s a hundred bucks for two round trips.

Councilmember Shetler: Somebody want to check her mileage on her odometer there just to make sure that she’s getting the right fuel mileage?

President Lloyd: Okay, Vanderburgh County Health Department, I’ve nine requests, is there any questions from Councilmembers?

Councilmember Kiefer: Are they all state called meetings, because some of them are not checked?

Gary Heck: Gary Heck, Vanderburgh County Health Department. None of these trips come out of the general fund. They either come out of the Health fund or grant funds. The vast majority of them are from grant funds that are part of the grant requirements. I’d be happy to answer any questions.

Gary Heck: There’s probably going to be that many every month. I sort of alluded to that last month when you took on this task. This is not an unusual number for the Health department. We have almost 70 employees. There’s different training requirements, attending the meetings, learning additional or attendance at various locations all around the state. It’s just part of doing business today. I don’t think it’s necessarily unusual, but I can, I mean, if you have a specific question, I’ll be more than happy to try to address it, but I would expect that you’ll get about this same number every month from us.

Councilmember Goebel: Has this been standard procedure through the Commissioners?

Gary Heck: It has been. Once again, it doesn’t affect the general fund, it comes out of the money that’s been budgeted in the travel line item in the Health Department’s fund, which has been reduced. It used to be 17,000, we’re down to $12,000 now.

President Lloyd: Well, and this includes trips to Deaconess Hospital Gateway in Warrick County, so –

Councilmember Kiefer: Question. That Deaconess one, just out of curiosity, I guess if you don’t check anything, then it means no? Like, it says, is this a state called meeting, there’s no checkmark on either yes or no, so does that mean no?

Gary Heck: I don’t think it’s a state called meeting in the sense that we have Vanderburgh County residents that give birth at Deaconess Hospital or they’re entered into the hospital there and our Health Department staff has to travel there to serve their needs.

Gary Heck: Yeah, it wouldn’t be a state called meeting. It doesn’t mean it’s not a required –

Councilmember Kiefer: I was just curious because it has a place to checkmark no, and there was nothing checked. No big deal.

Councilmember Kiefer: Yeah, and the source of funding, it says $213, but that annual cost is $300.

Councilmember Kiefer: I’m looking at the one that says Deaconess Gateway Hospital, Women’s Hospital.

Councilmember Kiefer: Oh okay. I thought that was a dollar amount there or something.

Gary Heck: I was just trying to make sure he had the source of the funding from the fund.

President Lloyd: Other discussion, questions? We’ll just take them as a lump unless somebody else wants to take anything out here. Is there a motion to approve the Health Department?

President Lloyd: Okay, motion Mr. Shetler, second Mr. Kiefer. All in favor signify by saying aye.

Councilmember Shetler: I have a question before we go on. With regards to, and I could ask this to Mr. Davis, or to Mr. Fluty, or both, or one, or the other. But the question is that, in your associations, like with the Auditor and the Treasurer’s statewide associations, do you have the opportunity to get that convention or those meetings in Evansville, perhaps, from time to time?

Bill Fluty: Yes, that has happened. The Auditor’s Association hasn’t been to Evansville for a while. Their habit is to hold one in Indianapolis, centrally located, and then one somewhere else throughout the state. But they actually, the president, vice president, treasurer and secretary decide on those every year. So they do come here and look at our facilities, but they haven’t been here lately.

Councilmember Shetler: So your presence, being involved in a group like that could also help generate additional type of funds when they come down here for meetings, and the more you’re involved in things like that, the better for our community as far as convention and tourism type activities and stuff.

Rick Davis: Rick Davis, Vanderburgh County Treasurer. Just so you know, last year, the Treasurer’s Association actually had their conference here in Evansville and we had all 92 county treasurers and many chief deputies or first deputies who came down here and booked rooms and the hotels and went to eat in our restaurants here in the Evansville area. They even went to the Log Inn for dinner one night. So you are absolutely correct. It is a nice convention and visitors bureau type function, and last year the Treasurer’s Association did come to Evansville. And a few years ago, the Association of Indiana Counties had their entire convention here in Evansville as well, and that wasn’t just treasurers and auditors, that was councilmembers and commissioners and all types of county functions, so it can be a major boost to convention and tourism type dollars in Vanderburgh County. You’re absolutely correct.

Councilmember Shetler: I just wanted to point that out, that there is a certain byproduct, I guess, that comes out of those expenses of the traveling and stuff, that is important for us to keep in mind, because that can be considerable. Now when they go into Gibson County to eat, that doesn’t help us a whole lot, so maybe the next time we’ll have them eat chicken here in Evansville.

Rick Davis: Well, actually, the president of the Treasurer’s Association was from Gibson County last year, and he’s the one who got it here, so you have to throw them a bone occasionally, even if it’s a chicken bone. Also, it’s very good for educational purposes. We are informed about new changes in state law that affect our office. We get our input to our president regarding issues that are affecting our office, changes in operations and climate and they can take that information to the state house that this time of year, when they’re passing laws that affect our office concerning property taxes, and in my case exemptions, and in the Auditor’s case. So it’s a very good conference to go to and it’s very educational for people, especially me, that was my first year as Treasurer last year, and it’s very good to be able to speak to other Treasurers, especially smaller ones who have different issues than you do, or bigger ones where you can talk about issues that are affecting your office and how they solve their problems, and you can bring that back to Evansville and try to apply those remedies in your office as well. So, it’s very educational.

President Lloyd: Along those lines, I know officeholders that are active, those associations, a lot of times you need to be on their board or on their policy committee to try to drag those conventions down here. And I know when I was mayor, we were always trying to drag the mayors and the cities and towns to Evansville, when we could. I mean, I think that’s important and the Convention & Visitors Bureau is very helpful in that regard as well.

President Lloyd: We’ve got another travel request, Item 9F5, County Assessor. Any questions from Councilmembers? And this is actually, well, there’s a couple of them here, you’ve got the Assessor’s Winter Conference, they’ve all been done in January, you also had...we sent a board member, Mr. Nance, from the PTABOA to the conference and I guess that’s, past practice we had not sent board members in the past, so that’s something I think we may want to talk about. But anyway, these have already been done, they actually went to the Commissioners at our last meeting. But it was brought over to us since we took over this function January 1^st. Any questions from Councilmembers? Is there a –

President Lloyd: Right. If there’s no questions, then I’ll entertain a motion to approve.

President Lloyd: Okay, motion Mr. Bassemier, second Mr. Raben. Any further discussion? All those in favor, signify by saying aye.

President Lloyd: No, we’ve got one more. County Highway, training, Purdue Road School. Any questions? Entertain a motion to approve.

President Lloyd: Okay, motion Mr. Raben, second, was that Mr. Kiefer or Mr. Goebel? I’m sorry. All those in favor, signify by saying aye.

President Lloyd: Item G, Proposal by Waggoner, Irwin, Scheele & Associates for operations review. We discussed this last week and Commissioner Tornatta brought this to the Commissioner’s meeting on January 19^th. There is a contract proposal from Waggoner, Irwin, Scheele. They actually have some history with the county. They were the original job study creators and worked on the job descriptions and organization back in the mid-1980's, so they would do an operational study of the county for between 60 and $65,000. Commissioner Winnecke questioned whether this would be an effective use of funds being that there is a possibility of the government reorganization committee coming up with possible recommendations to change city and county government. Regardless, we’ve got the proposal from Waggoner, Irwin & Scheele and I also requested Tim Deisher from BKD to give us a similar proposal, which is item H. Before we go to item H, does anybody have any questions on the Waggoner, Irwin & Scheele proposal? And I don’t, we’re not going to act on this today, but since it was brought up at the Commissioner’s meeting, the Commissioner’s asked that we take a look at it. Any questions on it?

Councilmember Sutton: The scope of work, there’s no one here from the Commission and for those who didn’t get to hear Commissioner Tornatta’s presentation last week, what would that include with this review?

President Lloyd: Okay, this engagement, operations review, collect data from each department including budget, staffing, services provided, current and planned projects, review organizational structure and future needs of county offices and department staffing, technology, equipment, assessment in-house versus outsource functions, and then review past practices. So they would go into these departments and gather the data and then prepare a report for county government.

Councilmember Sutton: I think what also would be helpful for us, and that’s a good explanation, we are one of 92 counties in Indiana and every single county has a basic similar operation in terms of every office that we (inaudible) if you exclude Marion County off the radar screen. I would like to see or hope that they can find as a part of this review, whether we go with Waggoner Irwin, BKD, whomever we decide to go with, if we could get a sense of what some other counties are doing that are of comparable size and population like your Elkhart County, St. Joe County, Allen County, that would be helpful information for us as we begin to look at efficiencies or ways to streamline or improve or combine service, whatever the case might be, there is some value that can be gained by looking at the others. We may find that we’re leading the way in several of the things that we do or we may find that there’s some things that we can truly add some value by virtue of what’s already been studied and done in other counties. So whatever that engagement agreement ends up being, and whoever is selected, I hope they take advantage of what I think is a great opportunity for us to learn about what we do as well as the experiences of others.

President Lloyd: So what you’re saying is, add to this a request that whoever is going to do this study, you would like to see some prior experience that they had with governments, and, for example, St. Joe County, South Bend, or a similar sized county to Vanderburgh?

Councilmember Sutton: Yeah, and I just think there is a great value. I think the opportunity is missed. If they go into the Auditor’s office, Bill Fluty’s office and say okay, you’ve got 12 people in your office, these are duties that we think should be aligned this particular way. Give me another basis by which you make that conclusion as opposed to only just looking at what you see in his office. Give me something to compare things against.

Councilmember Kiefer: Mr. President? I think – and maybe they’ll do this, but I think they need to really get into the nuts and bolts of how a department operates. For example, and this is just a very brief analysis, you know, when I had been meeting with the Assessor’s office, I noticed they had gathered data from the Building Commissioner, where the Building Commissioner entered data and then it was submitted to the Assessor and then they re-entered the data. And, you know, just from a cursory view, I thought, well, why are we entering data twice? You know, that could save money if there was a way to transfer what the Building Commissioner already had spent time entering and kind of labor intensive time. So I hope that this group looks at some nuts and bolts of how these departments operate because I know there’s probably some ways they could operate slightly differently and save time, which is money. So that’s why I would say like, with what Commissioner Winnecke had said, he suggested holding off, I don’t know that what that merger committee is doing is going to be anything like this where this is going to be more of a nuts and bolts, get into how they do their daily tasks day in and day out to see if there’s some efficiencies that could be found in how they operate.

President Lloyd: And that’s why I asked the Assessor, Mr. Weaver, when he was elected or he was running for office, his department had like 12 employees or something like that, the townships were eliminated, so he ended up with 50, and we’ve pared it down. But I think this would be obviously ripe for a group that knows best practices as you described coming in and looking at that, and, as you mentioned, where there may be some duplication, things like that.

Councilmember Kiefer: And I think the Assessor’s office would be an ideal place as well as, perhaps, maybe the Clerk’s office because they have a large number of employees.

Councilmember Shetler: You know, following along with what Councilman Kiefer is saying here and also what Commissioner Winnecke had suggested, and that I think we need to look at, you know, through inter-office, intra-office, we also need to look at it from a micro and a macro standpoint. And what I’m afraid could happen, and I think this is what Commissioner Winnecke was concerned about, is that we have somebody come in and spend $65,000 or thereabouts on looking at the different offices and then we pass a referendum, a new form of government which may totally alter the way we’re doing things today anyway, and that may be $65,000, in essence, down the drain somewhat. So I, for one, while I think it’s important for us to move forward and I’ve been trying to lead the charge on thinking out of the box, and I don’t think we should stop there at least among ourselves, I just don’t know that we want to go outside, spend $65,000 at this present day, and find ourselves in November confronting an issue that government is going to be radically changed come January 1, and we’ve spent the $65,000.

Councilmember Kiefer: I’m not suggesting that we spend 65,000, but I think whether you have, say, a merged government or the same way we’re operating now, you’re always going to have an assessor doing assessments. I mean, that’s a practical part of how government operates. We have to assess properties to know the values of them unless we eliminate property taxes altogether, which, I don’t see that happening. You know, so what I’m suggesting is perhaps we narrow the scope down to one department to test the waters to see, and we can obviously determine that the Assessor’s office is a big department and maybe just do one department like what President Lloyd said. Instead of spending 60, 65,000, maybe it’s only 15 to do one department. And we could obviously see if he finds a lot of efficiencies there, then, oh, this is a good deal. You know, we have maybe an opportunity to explore other departments from that point.

President Lloyd: Well, and if you go to, I guess, we’re using the Assessor as an example, if you come up with a recommendation to eliminate four positions, that could be 120,000 or more, you’re talking about some big money, that would be well worth the study.

President Lloyd: Why don’t we go ahead and go to item H, proposal by BKD? We have Mr. Deisher here, let’s have him briefly bring that proposal forward and if there’s any questions that we Councilmembers have.

Tim Deisher: Tim Deisher, BKD. We have a group that does operations studies, Herb Hanselmann out of our Indianapolis office has done these – he grew up in the manufacturing, engineering area. He has in recent years done studies of the Marion County Airport or Indianapolis Airport Authority, the Marion County capital improvement, Ivy Tech, he’s done studies at Indiana State University. What we have talked with President Lloyd about is, him coming down and just doing an exploratory, if the Council wants to just try one office, come down and talk to you all, seek your input, if it would be the Assessor’s office, and meet with him just to get an idea of where we go and he would present his plan and cost associated with it.

Councilmember Goebel: This would be handled by someone totally out of this area, though? I mean, not living in Vanderburgh County with no connections, is that correct?

Tim Deisher: It’s with our firm, BKD, but Herb is out of the Indianapolis office.

President Lloyd: Other questions? I guess the methodology, either he or he would have a staff member come in, I guess they would do preliminary work, look at all the job descriptions, look at maybe the functions of that area, and go in and interview?

Tim Deisher: Look at the processes. I mean, the example of duplicate entering of data is just a good example. Look at what the functions are, what the processes are, where the information comes from, how it’s processed.

Councilmember Kiefer: I’d just say I’d be in favor of getting an estimate to do one department and if Council said the Assessor, he seemed agreeable, you asked him point blank and he said yes. You know, I’d be agreeable to at least get some pricing on doing the one department.

President Lloyd: Okay, well, we’ve got a kind of preliminary operations review that you have provided us. If you would like to provide an estimate of one department, the Vanderburgh County Assessor, we’d certainly want to entertain that. We have a gentleman in the audience, Mr. Heck, you want them to do the Health department as well?

Gary Heck: I sure would. We’re still – Gary Heck, Vanderburgh County Health department. There’s been, since April of 2008, there’s been a job study moratorium on looking at job positions as they work their way through the departments. The Assessor’s office was one of the first one’s done along with the Treasurer and the Auditor’s Office. The Health department is still waiting. We would love to volunteer for either project. Not that there’s anything wrong with the Assessor, because you’re absolutely right, there has been some major changes in there, but we’re still operating under those original job studies from the mid-80's and 1993, in particular when the city/county health department became part of the county under that big umbrella there. We’re the seventh largest county, Vanderburgh, as I’m sure you all are aware, third largest urban area, and we would love to be able to have the benefit of this kind of study for the Health department. Thank you.

Councilmember Bassemier: Would that be at our expense if he does the Health department or is there money in their budget to cover this expense for that study?

Gary Heck: Well, I believe, as I’ve stated before, this Council has done these studies all along, we’ve just been waiting our turn. And the answer is no, there’s no money in our budget to cover a study like this, but I don’t think there was money in anybody else’s budget to do the other job studies and those job reviews. We’ve just been patiently waiting and it’s, it just hasn’t trickled down to us yet.

President Lloyd: It might have to be an additional appropriation unless we could carve it out of the Commissioner’s budget. Alright, thank you. Thank you, Tim. I appreciate it.

Tim Deisher: Do you want Herb to come down and present to Council as he’s meeting with Jonathan to work out what the scope is and –

Councilmember Bassemier: Is there an expense to this for him to come down here and give us a presentation?

Tim Deisher: I don’t think there would be a cost for him to come down and scope the project to be able to come back to you with a price for the job.

Councilmember Kiefer: It would be nice to have him speak to us after he talks to Jonathan and did that preliminary discussion just to get his, he might give us a quick, say no, there’s probably not much I could do there or he might say yeah, I think a study would be effective.

President Lloyd: Well, it probably would be beneficial for him to come to the Personnel & Finance and just maybe give us a general overview, so I would say yeah, we want to pursue that.

Councilmember Bassemier: If I remember, last week, I think we had a problem in Susie Kirk’s office. I mean, that would be a study also because she has to face the judges and all that, you know. I mean, they can recommend whatever they want to, but you know, there’s two entities there that I think Susie was kind of concerned about of doing a study on her department. I mean, you know, that’s –

Councilmember Kiefer: Well, I mean, if we’re just going to do one and the Assessor has agreed to it, you know, I think we start with one.

Councilmember Bassemier: (Inaudible) for now, it doesn’t hurt to hear him out.

President Lloyd: Okay, thank you. Appreciate it. Okay, so I guess the answer is yes, we’d like to have him come before Council, and we can, you can contact me and we’ll work out a time.

President Lloyd: Number 10, Amendments to salary ordinance, go to Mr. Shetler on this.

Councilmember Shetler: I think everybody has been handed an amendment to the Salary Ordinance, so I would move that we enter this into the record as presented.

President Lloyd: Okay, motion to approve the salary ordinance Mr. Shetler, second Mr. Kiefer. Roll call vote please.

(Motion unanimously approved 5-0/Councilmembers Sutton and Raben were not present for this vote)

President Lloyd: Okay, before we get to public comment, we were given some contracts that the Sheriff’s department, I guess, had been, they were given to the Commissioners for the management of Community Corrections and the county jail. We have not had a chance to review those, so we’re going to review those and we’ll take them up at the next Council meeting. The other item of business, filing date for the March 3^rd County Council meeting, we would like those requests in by February 11^th, a little bit earlier because of the holiday.

(Portions of Treasurer Rick Davis’s comments were inaudible because the microphone power was turned off)

President Lloyd: Now Item 11, public comment, is there anyone from the public that needs to address the County Council? Yes, Mr. Davis? We also have a new GAGE member back there, I see her.

Rick Davis: Hello, Rick Davis, Vanderburgh County Treasurer. I’ll try to be brief. This is nothing I’m going to ask you to vote on, just for information purposes only. Earlier in the month I went to the County Commissioners meeting and gave them a rundown on the amount of interest the county earned on investments, (inaudible) and this gives the fiscal body an accounting. I thought it would be wise to come before you and give you a similar report. In 2009, the county earned $868,000 plus in certificates of deposit (inaudible) and we also earned nearly $150,000 in the TrustINdiana fund. So combined, Vanderburgh County earned just a shade over one million dollars’ interest on our investments last year. That is significantly down from the previous year, (inaudible) we earned in 2008, but the average interest rate on our investments was 2.7, and that was in 2008. In 2009, the average interest rate was just 1, so, as you can see, we all know the reason why, the financial system was near a meltdown last year (inaudible). Since the beginning of the banking crisis there have been, I will tell (inaudible) I’m sorry, I apologize. I looked on the Internet before I came here today. There were 183 banks that have failed since the beginning of the banking crisis: 140 in 2009, and there have already been 15 banks that have failed this year in just five weeks. To give you an example of the challenges we faced last year, we had an eight day investment of three million dollars, and the public may wonder why we would make an eight day investment of three million dollars. We invest all types of revenue that come in through the various forms, one of them being County Option Income Tax from the state. We get it the first, it has to go out by the tenth, we try to get it and it’s usually around three million and you want to invest it and earn interest off of that money. And the end of 2007, that eight day investment of three million dollars was a 4.3% interest rate, earning almost $3,000. In 2009, that same eight day, three million dollar investment only earned $233. And that was a .35 interest rate and that is a 91.87% decrease. So that will help explain to you why we went from nearly four million dollars in interest one year to just one million the following year. You know, the interest rates drive everything. I’m happy to report, however, that the last three investments that we made at the end of 2009 are going to bring in nearly $121,000 in interest. And in 2010, there are 16 investments that are due to mature and those total 262,000. That is more than what I estimated for the entire year, so the good news, despite the fact that we had a down year as far as investments go, the good news is, when you guys received an investment income estimate from me for the year of 2010, I put 200,000 because last summer it was very difficult to gauge, especially with interest rates continually sliding down, what we could bring in. That one million that I talked about, half a million was off of one investment, that was a long term investment. So 200,000, I didn’t want to under estimate, but I also didn’t want to over estimate, because I know you’re basing your entire budget on revenues, and the revenue forecast. So in 2010, we put 200,000, we’ve already surpassed that, if all these CD’s mature. When I come before you again for budget hearings, I will be able to tell you for 2011, I’ll be able to gauge a little bit better and it will be better than the 250,000 that I originally gave you before because with this TrustINdiana, we’ve diversified our funds and that has enabled us to, the best way in public funds investment and to earn a higher interest rate and earn more interest, is to take these investments farther out. And we’ve been able to do that. So if you have any questions, I’ll be glad to answer them. I just wanted, you are the fiscal body of the county, I wanted to make you aware of the interest that was earned last year and we’re sitting pretty well compared to what was expected last year during the summer.

President Lloyd: So what you’re seeing is, there’s at least the average rates are maybe up slightly and you’re extending maturities to get a better rate for the county?

Rick Davis: That is exactly right. And for the folks at home, the higher interest rate, I have to go by. The state says that we have to invest in very safe funds and when we get these CD rates from the local banks, I have to go with the highest rate. The catch there is that that means it’s a riskier investment. So while I’m out there trying, fishing for a higher interest rate, you have to also be careful because some of the investments, if it’s 1.0 with one bank and .3 with another, that means the 1.0 has a greater risk than the .3, a much higher risk statistically.

President Lloyd: Well, and we saw, I guess last year, some of the colleges and universities were caught with some of these funds that ran into trouble.

President Lloyd: The college fund. But in our case you steer clear of things like that and mainly I guess you can look at the list, but banks and state of Indiana type instruments that are very safe.

Rick Davis: Yes, and if I’m not mistaken, I think only one bank in Indiana has failed, it was Irwin Union Bank and Trust in Columbus and I believe another bank swooped in and basically took over the deposits and we didn’t have situations where banks have failed and people have been relying strictly on the FDIC insurance to pay them back for their investments. So Indiana, as we all know, is a very conservative state especially with public funds.

Councilmember Shetler: Not to steal any thunder from Dr. Arensman, I’ll give him credit, so in order words, basically, it’s a whole lot better, while it may be a low interest rate to buy into US Treasury and US backed bonds, a whole lot better to do that than it is to Pakistanis who may have a five or six percent interest rate. A lot more desirable, I guess, is what I’m saying.

President Lloyd: Pam Martin, did you want to address the Council, or no? Can we get her up here? Opportunity for public comment.

Pam Martin: Thank you. I didn’t really intend to address you this morning, take up your time. I’m Pam Martin with the Growth Alliance for Greater Evansville and I am the new director of government relations and downtown development. I will be facilitating the county phase-in process, but I also want you to know that I offer my resources and my assistance how ever you need it. So do not hesitate to contact me for research purposes, assistance of any type. GAGE has a full compliment of resources and experts at your disposal. So just know that we intend to be a good partner with you.

President Lloyd: Right, and we’ll continue to get the service on the tax abatements, analysis that you guys have given in the past?

Jeff Ahlers: Okay, good. Well, I just wanted to know who, because when we do that it would be helpful, I can get you my email address or whatever and you can send me drafts of things.

Pam Martin: Yes. I will be compiling the compliance report for you and presenting it to you this year and I also will be facilitating processing every application that you have come in.

President Lloyd: Thank you. Any other questions? Any other questions from the public? Okay thanks, Pam. We are adjourned. Thank you.

(There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 10:21 a.m.)

1070-1210-1070	Assistant Coroners	5,000.00	5,000.00
Total		5,000.00	5,000.00

From: 1460-1150-1460	Senior Legal Secretary	13,814.00	13,814.00
1460-1190-1460	Jr. Legal Secretary #2	2,075.00	2,075.00
To: 1460-1971	Accrued Payments	13,814.00	13,814.00
1460-1990	Extra Help	2,075.00	2,075.00

From: 4290-1150-4290	Senior Legal Secretary	975.00	975.00
4290-1190-4290	Jr. Legal Secretary #2	1,175.00	1,175.00
To: 4290-1971	Accrued Payments	975.00	975.00
4290-1990	Extra Help	1,175.00	1,175.00