President Winnecke: Would you please stand and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance?

(Pledge of Allegiance was given)

President Winnecke: At this time I would entertain approval of the minutes from our February 2 meeting.

Councilmember Wortman: So moved.

Councilmember Raben: Second.

President Winnecke: Motion and a second. Discussion? Roll call vote please.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Tornatta?

Councilmember Tornatta: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Sutton?

Councilmember Sutton: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Abell?

Councilmember Abell: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Goebel?

Councilmember Goebel: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Raben?

Councilmember Raben: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Wortman?

Councilmember Wortman: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: Yes.

(Motion unanimously approved 7-0)

President Winnecke: Okay, at this time I’ll turn the microphone over to our finance chairman, James Raben, to discuss and consider the appropriation ordinances that are before us.

CLERK

Councilmember Raben: Okay, thank you, Mr. President. First on the agenda today is the County Clerk. I’ll move that 1010-1990 Extra Help be set in at $481; 1010-1900 FICA $37, for a total appropriation request of $518.

Councilmember Sutton: Second.

President Winnecke: There’s a motion and a second. Questions or discussion?

Councilmember Abell: Mr. President, I’d just like to request that when Extra Help or actually, I think this is from some monies that someone that was worked last year and they’ve already put in the time, that the department head provide us with either the Kronos printout that these people did, in fact, work those hours or some type of documentation. I’d like to see that attached to this.

President Winnecke: Okay, very well. Other discussion or questions? Roll call vote please.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Tornatta?

Councilmember Tornatta: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Sutton?

Councilmember Sutton: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Abell?

Councilmember Abell: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Goebel?

Councilmember Goebel: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Raben?

Councilmember Raben: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Wortman?

Councilmember Wortman: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: Yes.

CLERK                                                                   REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Motion unanimously approved 7-0)

SHERIFF

Councilmember Raben: Okay, next, Mr. President, County Auditor, County Treasurer, County Recorder, those three requests have been withdrawn so we’ll move on to the County Sheriff. First, under 1050-1130-0008, Lieutenant $5,600; 1050-1130-0053 Deputy Sheriff $161; 1050-1130-0199 Part-time Clerk, the correct figure is $6,215; 1050-1130-0215 Property Management Clerk in the amount of $3,919, for a total request of $15,895. I’ll move approval.

Councilmember Sutton: Second.

President Winnecke: Motion and a second. Questions or discussion? Mr. Wortman.

Councilmember Wortman: Yes, in reference to the Auditor, Treasurer and Recorder, should that be set in at zero when its withdrawn, Mr. Chairman?

President Winnecke: I believe for the purposes of what we’re doing, I think withdrawals are fine.

Councilmember Wortman: Okay.

Councilmember Raben: We can set it in...let’s finish up with this vote. I can go back and set those in at zero to make it clean.

President Winnecke: Roll call vote.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Tornatta?

Councilmember Tornatta: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Sutton?

Councilmember Sutton: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Abell?

Councilmember Abell: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Goebel?

Councilmember Goebel: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Raben?

Councilmember Raben: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Wortman?

Councilmember Wortman: No.

Teri Lukeman: President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: Yes.

SHERIFF                                                                REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Motion carried 6-1/Councilmember Wortman opposed)

AUDITOR

TREASURER

RECORDER

COUNTY ASSESSOR

Councilmember Raben: Okay, Mr. President, for a matter of record, County Auditor, County Treasurer and County Recorder, I move that – along with that, I’ll also add County Assessor, that those line items be set in at zero.

Councilmember Wortman: Second.

President Winnecke: Motion and a second. Questions or discussion? Roll call vote.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Tornatta?

Councilmember Tornatta: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Sutton?

Councilmember Sutton: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Abell?

Councilmember Abell: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Goebel?

Councilmember Goebel: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Raben?

Councilmember Raben: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Wortman?

Councilmember Wortman: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: Yes.

AUDITOR                                                               REQUESTED       APPROVED

TREASURER                                                         REQUESTED       APPROVED

RECORDER                                                           REQUESTED       APPROVED

COUNTY ASSESSOR                                           REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Motion unanimously approved 7-0)

JAIL

Councilmember Raben: Okay, next under Jail, 1051-1130-0339 in the amount of $395; 1051-1130-0340 $424; 1051-1301 Civilian Overtime in the amount of $1,000; 1051-1531 Shift Differential in the amount of $100; 1051-1850 Union Overtime $25,000; 1051-1950-1051 Teamster Educational Fund $2,000, for a total appro-priation of $28,919. I make that in the form of a motion.

Councilmember Sutton: Second.

President Winnecke: Motion and a second. Questions or discussion? Roll call vote please.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Tornatta?

Councilmember Tornatta: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Sutton?

Councilmember Sutton: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Abell?

Councilmember Abell: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Goebel?

Councilmember Goebel: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Raben?

Councilmember Raben: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Wortman?

Councilmember Wortman: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: Yes.

JAIL                                                                       REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Motion unanimously approved 7-0)

PROSECUTOR

Councilmember Raben: Under Prosecutor, 1080-1380-1080 Deputy, the correct figure is $36,937; FICA the correct figure is $2,826; PERF $2,124, for a total request of $41,887. I’ll move approval.

Councilmember Wortman: Second.

President Winnecke: Mr. Raben, did you say $41,887?

Councilmember Raben: Yes, 41,887.

President Winnecke: Thank you. Motion and a second. Questions or discussion? Roll call vote please.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Tornatta?

Councilmember Tornatta: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Sutton?

Councilmember Sutton: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Abell?

Councilmember Abell: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Goebel?

Councilmember Goebel: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Raben?

Councilmember Raben: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Wortman?

Councilmember Wortman: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: Yes.

PROSECUTOR                                                      REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Motion unanimously approved 7-0)

President Winnecke: And Mr. Raben, before you go on, I think I’d just like to remind everyone that these are all issues that we heard and had discussion on at last week’s meeting.

CENTER TOWNSHIP ASSESSOR

KNIGHT TOWNSHIP ASSESSOR

PIGEON TOWNSHIP ASSESSOR

Councilmember Raben: Center Township Assessor, this request has been withdrawn, I will move that we set that line in at zero or that request in at zero. Knight Township Assessor, zero; Pigeon Township Assessor, zero. And I’ll stop there and we’ll pick those back up under Reassessment.

Councilmember Wortman: Second.

President Winnecke: Motion and a second. Questions or discussion? Roll call vote please.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Tornatta?

Councilmember Tornatta: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Sutton?

Councilmember Sutton: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Abell?

Councilmember Abell: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Goebel?

Councilmember Goebel: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Raben?

Councilmember Raben: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Wortman?

Councilmember Wortman: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: Yes.

CENTER TWP. ASSESSOR                                  REQUESTED       APPROVED

KNIGHT TWP. ASSESSOR                                   REQUESTED       APPROVED

PIGEON TWP. ASSESSOR                                  REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Motion unanimously approved 7-0)

ELECTION OFFICE

Councilmember Raben: Okay, thank you. Election Office, 1210-1910 PERF in the amount of $84. I’ll move approval.

Councilmember Wortman: Second.

President Winnecke: We’ve got a motion and a second. Questions or discussion? Roll call vote.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Tornatta?

Councilmember Tornatta: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Sutton?

Councilmember Sutton: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Abell?

Councilmember Abell: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Goebel?

Councilmember Goebel: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Raben?

Councilmember Raben: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Wortman?

Councilmember Wortman: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: Yes.

ELECTION OFFICE                                               REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Motion unanimously approved 7-0)

COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS

Councilmember Raben: Okay, next under Community Corrections, I’ll move that the request be approved as listed for a total of $17,091.

Councilmember Wortman: Second.

President Winnecke: Motion and a second. Questions or discussion? Roll call vote please.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Tornatta?

Councilmember Tornatta: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Sutton?

Councilmember Sutton: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Abell?

Councilmember Abell: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Goebel?

Councilmember Goebel: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Raben?

Councilmember Raben: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Wortman?

Councilmember Wortman: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: Yes.

COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS                              REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Table continued next page)

(Motion unanimously approved 7-0)

SUPERIOR DRUG COURT

Councilmember Raben: Okay, Superior Drug Court, I’ll move that the appropriation be approved as listed for a total of $11,459.

Councilmember Wortman: Second.

President Winnecke: Motion and a second. Questions or discussion? I would just add as a reminder, that April 4th is the next graduation date that Judge Trockman told us about last week, at 5:00. Roll call vote please.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Tornatta?

Councilmember Tornatta: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Sutton?

Councilmember Sutton: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Abell?

Councilmember Abell: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Goebel?

Councilmember Goebel: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Raben?

Councilmember Raben: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Wortman?

Councilmember Wortman: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: Yes.

SUPERIOR DRUG COURT                                   REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Table continued next page)

(Motion unanimously approved 7-0)

REASSESSMENT/CENTER TOWNSHIP ASSESSOR

REASSESSMENT/KNIGHT TOWNSHIP ASSESSOR

Councilmember Raben: Okay, next, Mr. President, under Reassessment funds, again, Center Township Assessor, that request has been withdrawn. I’ll move we set that in at zero. Under Knight Township Assessor, account 2490-1130-1120 Office Coordinator, zero; 2490-1130-1990 Extra Help, $7,500; 2490-1130-1900 FICA $575; Perf & Insurance both set in at zero, for a total of $8,075. I can continue on or I can stop.

President Winnecke: Let’s take them individually please.

Councilmember Raben: Okay, I make that in the form of a motion.

Councilmember Wortman: Second.

President Winnecke: Questions or discussion? Mr. Sutton?

Councilmember Sutton: Yeah, since we did get a request in the General Fund budget and now on the Reassessment side, under the Extra Help side, is the intent to try to address that same line item in these other requests? Is that why you’re going to take them all together or is this the only one that we’re going to address the Extra Help on?

Councilmember Raben: I’m going to address the Extra Help with the other ones as well.

Councilmember Sutton: Well, I just wanted to make sure we’re equitable across the board or we’ll definitely see some people visiting our microphone, if not.

President Winnecke: Roll call vote please.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Tornatta?

Councilmember Tornatta: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Sutton?

Councilmember Sutton: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Abell?

Councilmember Abell: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Goebel?

Councilmember Goebel: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Raben?

Councilmember Raben: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Wortman?

Councilmember Wortman: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: Yes.

CENTER TWP. ASSESSOR                                  REQUESTED       APPROVED

KNIGHT TWP. ASSESSOR                                   REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Motion unanimously approved 7-0)

REASSESSMENT/PERRY TOWNSHIP ASSESSOR

Councilmember Raben: Okay, Mr. President, Perry Township Assessor, Extra Help in the amount of $3,000, I’ll move approval.

Councilmember Wortman: Second.

President Winnecke: Motion and a second. Questions or discussion? Roll call vote.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Tornatta?

Councilmember Tornatta: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Sutton?

Councilmember Sutton: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Abell?

Councilmember Abell: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Goebel?

Councilmember Goebel: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Raben?

Councilmember Raben: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Wortman?

Councilmember Wortman: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: Yes.

PERRY TWP. ASSESSOR                                    REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Motion unanimously approved 7-0)

REASSESSMENT/PIGEON TOWNSHIP ASSESSOR

Councilmember Raben: Okay, Pigeon Township Assessor, 2490-1150-1990 Extra Help $7,500; 2490-1150-1900 FICA $575; all other requests as listed, for a total appropriation of $16,575. I make that in the form of a motion.

Councilmember Wortman: Second.

President Winnecke: Motion and a second. Questions or discussion?

Councilmember Sutton: Could you repeat that one more time, Jim?

Councilmember Raben: Extra Help $7,500; FICA $575; and then Office Supplies, Dues, Printing, Travel/Mileage, Software as they are listed.

Councilmember Sutton: Okay. And the total amount is –

Councilmember Raben: $16,575.

Councilmember Sutton: Thank you.

Councilmember Raben: I might, if I can, Mr. President, I spoke with the Pigeon Assessor, Paul Hatfield, I don’t know if he’s in the audience or not. In the event that we see other requests, if everyone recalls, these other accounts are where he transferred funds earlier in the year because he had a need for a scanner/copier. I spoke with him about the possibility, should we see additional requests like for instance, Knight Township that’s kind of in the same block that he’s in, if it looks possible for him to share that piece of equipment. He’s volunteered to do that. He said it’s something they don’t use every day, something they need, but something they don’t use every day so he would share that if there’s any needs to or requests from other offices.

President Winnecke: Other discussion or questions? Roll call vote please.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Tornatta?

Councilmember Tornatta: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Sutton?

Councilmember Sutton: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Abell?

Councilmember Abell: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Goebel?

Councilmember Goebel: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Raben?

Councilmember Raben: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Wortman?

Councilmember Wortman: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: Yes.

PIGEON TWP. ASSESSOR                                  REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Motion unanimously approved 7-0)

SURVEYOR CORNER PERPETUATION

Councilmember Raben: Okay, Mr. President, we’ll move on to County Surveyor, we’ve already zeroed that out or did we?

President Winnecke: We did not.

Councilmember Raben: County Surveyor, I’ll move that that request has also been withdrawn, we’ll set that in at zero.

Councilmember Wortman: Second.

President Winnecke: There’s a motion and a second. Questions or discussion? Roll call vote please.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Tornatta?

Councilmember Tornatta: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Sutton?

Councilmember Sutton: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Abell?

Councilmember Abell: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Goebel?

Councilmember Goebel: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Raben?

Councilmember Raben: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Wortman?

Councilmember Wortman: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: Yes.

SURVEYOR CORNER PERPETUATION             REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Motion unanimously approved 7-0)

SHERIFF MISDEMEANOR HOUSING

Councilmember Raben: Okay, next under Sheriff Misdemeanor Housing, I’ll move that this request be approved as listed for a total of $15,000.

Councilmember Sutton: Second.

President Winnecke: There’s a motion and a second. Questions or discussion? Roll call vote.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Tornatta?

Councilmember Tornatta: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Sutton?

Councilmember Sutton: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Abell?

Councilmember Abell: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Goebel?

Councilmember Goebel: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Raben?

Councilmember Raben: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Wortman?

Councilmember Wortman: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: Yes.

SHERIFF MISDEMEANOR HOUSING                  REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Motion unanimously approved 7-0)

SHERIFF

JAIL

ASSESSOR

Councilmember Raben: And last, Mr. President, I move that we accept all transfers as listed, that being the Sheriff, the Jail and County Assessor.

Councilmember Wortman: Second.

President Winnecke: Motion and a second. Questions or discussion?

Councilmember Tornatta: Just a comment and –

President Winnecke: Mr. Tornatta?

Councilmember Tornatta: I talked to our County Assessor on this, as far as furniture, although we’re not going to be into buying a lot of furniture in a tough year like this, she has no furniture in her office and when I talked to her about it, we do need to provide her with furniture as an officeholder and make sure that there is something up there that’s respectable when people come in there. So just mentioning that for those who see the furniture issue if somebody outside another office sees that, we’re just taking care of an officeholder and making sure that we have. And Curt, there are no desks available downstairs. Thank you.

Councilmember Wortman: Mr. Chairman?

President Winnecke: Yes sir?

Councilmember Wortman: What’s happened, I think the former Assessor put her own furniture up there and took it with her, so that left her with card tables, more or less.

President Winnecke: Actually, I understand that the previous two Assessors had their own furniture in there, so...

Councilmember Wortman: Okay.

President Winnecke: Other questions or discussion?

Councilmember Sutton: May as well keep tradition going.

President Winnecke: Roll call vote please.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Tornatta?

Councilmember Tornatta: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Sutton?

Councilmember Sutton: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Abell?

Councilmember Abell: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Goebel?

Councilmember Goebel: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Raben?

Councilmember Raben: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Wortman?

Councilmember Wortman: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: Yes.

SHERIFF                                                                REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Table continued next page)

JAIL                                                                       REQUESTED       APPROVED

ASSESSOR                                                           REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Motion unanimously approved 7-0)

Councilmember Raben: Okay, Mr. President, next under the Salary Ordinance amendments, it’s quite lengthy today. In fact, there’s four pages of them, so I’m going to ask that this document be made part of the record and I will list or I will call out the departments and names which are associated with this: County Clerk, County Auditor, Treasurer, Recorder, Sheriff, Jail, Prosecutor, County Assessor, Center Assessor, Knight Assessor, Pigeon Assessor, Community Corrections, Superior Court, Center Assessor/Reassessment, Knight Assessor/Reassessment, Perry Assessor/Reassessment, Pigeon Assessor/Reassessment, Surveyor Corner Perpetuation Fund, Sheriff Misdemeanor Housing and Burdette Park. I make that in the form of a motion.

Councilmember Wortman: Second.

President Winnecke: Motion and a second. Questions or discussion? Roll call vote please.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Tornatta?

Councilmember Tornatta: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Sutton?

Councilmember Sutton: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Abell?

Councilmember Abell: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Goebel?

Councilmember Goebel: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Raben?

Councilmember Raben: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Wortman?

Councilmember Wortman: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: Yes.

(Motion unanimously approved 7-0)

President Winnecke: Any old business to come before the Council? At this time County Attorney Ted Ziemer is going to replace Council Attorney Jeff Ahlers. As you may know, Mr. Schopmeyer is from the same law firm as Mr. Ahlers, and Mr. Schopmeyer is representing Mr. Schroeder and the Crestline folks on the abatement, so Mr. Ziemer is going to join us. Thank you. First I’d like to offer Mr. Schroeder and Mr. Schopmeyer the opportunity to answer any questions that anyone may have. I know we have a couple of other folks who are here to speak to the issue, too, we’ll give everyone the opportunity if they so desire. Mr. Schopmeyer?

Mike Schopmeyer: My name is Mike Schopmeyer, Kahn, Dees, Donovan & Kahn, here on behalf of S Properties, which is affiliated with Cresline, Wabash and Crescent, and several other companies that you’re looking at building their new nationwide corporate headquarters in Evansville and Vanderburgh County, of course. I’m not going to go through everything we talked about at the committee meeting last week to save time, I’d just like to emphasize a few points. This project is in front of us largely because of the expansion of Diamond Avenue and it’s the parking for this office building and these national headquarters is across the street and the adding of the lanes and so on is going to make that obsolete and the building unusable. The construction jobs on this are obviously going to be created at a sizable set of new incomes for the community. The amount of the investment, to remind you, is 2.5 million. It’s a 20,000 square foot facility and the wage levels on these are $50,000 and above. These are very high paying wages, preservation of jobs. I would like to add five our six points that we did not talk about last time that I’ve discussed with several of you over the phone since the committee meeting. First of all there’s been a question I believe Councilman Wortman had raised on the number of jobs, and we had tendered an application to you with non – our clients are very conservative, as you know, there’s an annual reporting requirement. We have looked at this closer with the board of directors and we would on the record today say that we will commit over a five year period, three to five jobs. Now if you look at this in the sense of manufacturing or the typical job, it would probably be more like 15 jobs, which is what Wabash had a related company in, I believe, a 2001 application, maybe not quite that many, but these are higher paying, $50,000 plus jobs. The commitment on those, I don’t know that in year one or two you’ll see it because it will have the building which takes up a lot of time and they have a considerable computer system, a large investment, which of course will be taxed that they’re putting in, which will be at this facility. Is that right, John? Which is not, you cannot on non-manufacturing facilities, we can’t apply for that. But that will be coming in, it will make some inefficiencies for this phase-in process, but the commitment will be three to five high paying jobs, executive level, most of them probably college educated, USI, we hope, grads or U of E, over the next three to five years. The other thing we want to talk about that I don’t think has been made clear is that there will be no tax increase on any other taxpayer in the community as a result of this project. None. In fact, this land currently lies vacant, there is nothing on it, its been laying vacant for a long time, folks. I mean, this question of cessation of growth, while this is a wonderful center, I think its one of Evansville’s finest, Cross Pointe has not seen a lot of development. This will be the largest office building. I would contend to you, this subdivision has been there for as long as Lloyd Expressway and the interstate have been built, which probably, I didn’t check, but better than a decade that we’ve not had investment here. This will be a two-story steel construction building. Many of the buildings that are out there have been one story wood construction. Mr. Fluty understands because he works with taxes, there’s a big difference in the tax that will apply to a metal constructed two-story building and a one-story building which is generally, can be wood construction. We assess based on a cost approach in Indiana, so the amount of tax here is considerable. One point that was not made before, the taxes that are paid at this point by the company on their other buildings, and there are buildings in Kentucky, there is the alternative site very much available in Kentucky, and depending on today will determine whether the investment is there or here and Warrick County is an option. Folks, I think most of you know and I’ve spoke to a few of the Councilmembers, Epworth Road is the subject of a TIF and is being expanded, so we do have competition now at this intersection. And Epworth Road within a year will be just like Burkhardt. Okay, its being expanded all the way, as I understand, we’ve been involved in that project with the Deaconess expansion that’s being taken all the way up to Morgan Avenue and I believe all the way down to at least Lincoln and maybe on down to Newburgh Road, I think its 662 there. Its almost a quarter million dollars, from 200 to 250 thousand that’s being paid right now. This building will be taxed at the highest rate because its an office building, brand new. It will be considerable tax and there will be taxes starting right away, within five years, even if you were to abate this at eight years as was recommended by the DMD, there will be considerable taxes paid within five years, probably in excess of $100,000 paid within the first five years even with the tax phase-in, even with the tax phase-in. The only way in which we can raise our tax rolls is for new investment. All property is depreciated. Personal property, under the tax codes today, if you had an accountant here, they depreciate in about five years. So if someone invests in a new machine, unless it’s a large piece of machinery, it will almost be off your tax roll in five years. Real estate, which is all we’re before you today on, only on real estate, is 40 year property. So this property, and these are the kind of investments, if we want to fund our schools, which are as we know, 60 percent of everything we pay here, and whatever your small share is in the county, 10%, but its not a very big share, we have to have new investment. The Diamond Avenue facility, one question was raised as we talked to several of you since the committee meeting, Diamond Avenue is not going away, it will continue to be there on the tax roll. One question that comes up many times as you have a tax phase-in that’s before you, are you going to lose tax revenue from one township? Our facility, currently, Diamond Avenue is in Pigeon Township and that’s been a concern. Pigeon, as we all know, has suffered the greatest in terms of tax roll and the tax assessment. This property will remain, Diamond Avenue is not going away, and will remain on the tax rolls, so we want to make that clear that this is not a trade-off to Knight Township from Pigeon. That will not occur. So we’d ask your support today. We’re agreeable to eight years which is what the DMD recommended. As you recall, our original application was for ten years and I think that covers everything. I think I’ve covered the six points to elaborate from the last meeting. Mr. Schroeder, John C. Schroeder, is here from Wabash as well as Cresline and Crescent and S Properties, and he’ll be happy to answer any questions you may have.

President Winnecke: Thank you, Mr. Schopmeyer. Any other questions for Mr. Schopmeyer or Mr. Schroeder? Mr. Wortman?

Councilmember Wortman: I have a question for the attorney, if we vote on it today, and its unanimous, you don’t vote on it the second time?

Ted Ziemer: That’s correct.

Councilmember Wortman: That’s correct, just like it always has been in the past.

Ted Ziemer: Right.

Councilmember Wortman: I do have some problems beings there is not a lot of new employees being put on because that’s always been the basis for them, but on the other hand, this company has been very successful. They’ve got good leadership, good management, they’re diversified, and they’re hometown people. And I’ve weighed this thing and weighed it and almost lost sleep over it, but the taxpayers I’ve talked to, they say kind of stay away from this because its not creating any jobs for the, more or less, you can use the word “working man”, you know what I mean? But its something to think about and I know I talked to Mr. Tornatta over there and he talked about that. But you emphasized a lot of points there in your little sermon there and so that’s kind of enlightened me a little more, but at the same time, you know, if we had a lot of companies like you, Mr. Schroeder, we probably wouldn’t need tax abatements, in plain words, is what it amounts to.

Mike Schopmeyer: If Kentucky and Illinois did not have tax phase-ins, we would not need tax phase-ins, but the problem we have in Evansville, Indiana where we’re in a tri-state region is that companies can go to Warrick, they can go to Henderson, they can go to Owensboro. For that matter, they can go to Mt. Carmel, and in most places, not lose a single employee. Many of our employees commute that far right now from Henderson, from Warrick, from – we have employees that drive all the way from Illinois to work at our place and I’m sure Mr. Schroeder’s. So that’s the – the disadvantage we have where we live, because we build a facility in Washington which is up against an ocean and there’s no competition, there isn’t tax phase-ins there. That’s on their code, but they don’t have to offer them because there’s no competition. But here, unfortunately, as we live in the tri-state, you know, that’s the reality of where we live unless those states will enter a treaty with us, and so that’s what we have to – and as you know, this company has been here since ‘49 and has a large tract, large acreage, more than enough to build this office complex on land they already own and a buy-back right on this property here in Evansville that they have presently. They have the land in Henderson, a buy-back in Evansville. It really does come down to this vote, though, for this long-time employer. I appreciate your comments. My great-grandfather was a preacher.

John Schroeder: Can I make one other point? Over the years we’ve added a number of employees here in the Evansville area. Out total employment, I think I mentioned last week, is about 500. And as we continue to grow and we intend to continue to grow in the future, we’re obviously going to have to add more administrative people and they will be at this location. So it only fits that yes, we are going to add more production jobs in the future, and when we do that, more people will be added to this location, too. Its just pretty hard to tell right now how many and at what time frame that will be. But we will tend to grow as we have in the past.

President Winnecke: Any other questions on this?

Mike Schopmeyer: If I may, there will be working jobs, the point that Curt made. There will be working jobs, we can’t put those in this one. If you have more administration, you can grow, there will be more working jobs that you were talking about at Diamond Avenue, at Birch Road, and as well at the Henderson plant.

Councilmember Sutton: I did want to bring up one point that was made last week and I think we need to make sure we are very clear on it and as we are in a competitive environment when it comes to economic development with neighboring states, they have some contingencies upon their tax abatements or tax phase-ins that maybe we do not have. In particular, Kentucky, you know, a company receives tax phase-in or tax abatement there, then they must hire people that are from Kentucky. So if we lose an employer that was located here to another state like Kentucky, those who reside here and work for that particular company, those jobs would, obviously, be lost. Truly, indeed, its more than just the relocation to another place for that company, but for all those employees. It is, obviously, jobs that are lost. So things that we can do to retain our base here locally, we are fortunate enough, we do have a diverse economy here. We’ve got some very strong companies like we have here before us and its good to see that there are some opportunities to be able to work to expand our existing companies in this competitive environment.

Rob Schaefer: I just wanted to say one thing, Rob Schaefer, DMD, this is in the Burkhardt Road TIF area, so it has to go to the Vanderburgh County Redevelopment Commission and it has to be approved by them, and then this will come back again next month for a confirming resolution. I just wanted to make sure that everyone knew that.

President Winnecke: Thank you. Is there anyone else from the audience who would like to speak to this? Good afternoon. Could you please state your name for the record?

David Coker: I’m David Coker, I’m president of the Vanderburgh County Taxpayers’ Association. And I happened to watch a portion of the presentation made last week on television and that was wonderful to be able to actually see you guys working on TV. And I’m thankful that we have that now. I wish we could get the school board on there, too, and show the public how they conduct their meetings and how it differs from the County Council and the City Council. Its been rather murky as to precisely how much money we’re talking about here. I don’t know whether its $50,000 or $100,000 or $150,000 a year, and its probably inconsequential to the overall tax base of the county, but I’m here speaking on behalf of my members and quite honestly, they’re shell shocked. They are getting their e-mail caches barraged almost daily by e-mails from particularly Democratic members of the General Assembly who have been relaying to us what is taking place in Indianapolis. And we’re currently seeing the budget that may raise taxes as much as 270 million dollars for fiscal 2006. Because of changes in the formula, we’re looking at an additional possible 71 million dollars in the school tax formula and they see these dollar figures and they’re alarmed. And then they hear that a tax abatement is being considered and there’s not essentially one new job being promised or required and they’re angry. And they think there’s an issue of fairness here that they’re very concerned about. A number of our members are farmers and they go out and buy a new hundred thousand dollar combine or a $70,000 tractor or they put up a new grain bin that costs 20 or $30,000 to dry grain and they don’t get a tax abatement for that. And they wonder why. And there are other business people around this community that may not employ as many people as this company does but they pay their taxes and they behave themselves, they follow the laws and all the rest of it and they wonder where their tax abatements are. So I think there’s an issue of fairness that we need to consider in light of all this. And there was some discussion about this land that the company owns in Henderson and that this decision could be a make or break proposition as to whether they build in Vanderburgh County. Well, I think that if that’s the case then perhaps its time that we start seriously considering a commuter tax in Vanderburgh County to recoup the taxes that we are losing to neighboring counties and across the river for people that happen to work in Evansville or work in Vanderburgh County and reside elsewhere. I don’t know if that’s ever been discussed before but I know that it is the case in other states, we’ve had commuter taxes for years. And its another way to equalize the burden. I mean, these people come here, they’re employed here, they travel on our streets, they use water and sewer and fire and police protection and all the rest of it, and yet, their tax dollars go elsewhere and we need to ameliorate that some way. I realize that my remarks here are probably not going to change any votes on the board and they’re really not meant to, but I just thought you all would like to know that our people are watching this very closely. They’re watching all of these tax abatements and they’re very concerned about them. And we want you to do the right thing, we want to keep decent businesses in this community, but on the other hand, there is the issue of fairness and what’s right for everybody in the community.

President Winnecke: Thank you, Mr. Coker. Appreciate it.

Councilmember Raben: Just a quick question, Mr. President, if its okay. This is a pretty general question and I don’t even know if you want to answer it, but have you ever considered or do you have any thoughts in regards to what type of value you put on a good paying job? I mean, if you look at it on an individual basis per job over the period of ten years, I mean, is it fair to say that you would agree that if that’s what we have to do to retain business or bring in additional jobs, that its fair for the county to share some of the burden? I mean, is that a fair assumption?

David Coker: It’s a philosophical question, actually, is what you’re asking. By hook or by crook we have emerged into a mixed economy. I mean, the lines between the private sector and the public sector have blurred significantly in recent years particularly in light of the, like the thing they did with Toyota. That was 50 million dollars. I still scratch my head frequently, the state doesn’t buy any of their vehicles, neither do any local units of government. There’s a lot of vehicles they build up there that we could probably use. And I realize there’s reasons why that doesn’t happen, but you know, we’re not recruiting Toyotas in this community, unfortunately. We went after Boeing in sort of a half-hearted way not long ago and we understand that went to Lafayette because of the location of Purdue and that community. You know, maybe we need to take a second look at who is doing the recruiting perhaps. We need to be generating high value added jobs and I think our academic institutions right now are doing everything they possibly can to provide the manpower for that. But, you know, I’ve been telling people for years, you cannot build the future of Vanderburgh County on river boats and taco factories. I’m sorry, that’s not going to do it. We need to be going into areas of high tech, high technology, aerospace, more of what we already have and emerging technologies instead of what we used to have in the way of smokestack industries around here. Our air quality situation has placed real constraints on high polluting industries, so you know, we’re in a box and we’ve got some major problems and –

Councilmember Raben: Not to interrupt, I guess we’ve gotten way off of the mainstream of – to make my question simpler, if it’s a good paying job –

David Coker: What do you consider a good paying job?

Councilmember Raben: Well, according to state records, and Councilman Hoy quoted that quite regularly in here, I think anything below eight something an hour is considered poverty –

Councilmember Wortman: Ten?

Councilmember Raben: I thought it was eight something, but you know, I think, what I consider good jobs is probably upwards of 12 –

David Coker: That’s what I’d say. Twelve, fifteen, seventeen. Hospitals pay that to nurses.

Councilmember Raben: My point is, looking back at Mr. Schroeder’s business, I don’t know where he was at when we granted the first abatement in `93 or `94 ten or twelve years ago, I’m sure that business has, as he stated, has grown to 500 employees. I don’t know that it would or would not have done that without the abatement. I think it probably had something to do with it and I guess that’s my point, you know, do we risk, do we take that gamble when there’s opportunities before us for not only for job retention, but job growth? Do we take that risk and not offer, you know, tax abatement? And that was my question. Do you, I mean, do you consider that there is a value to taking that risk?

David Coker: As you well know, –

President Winnecke: Excuse me, we need to change the tape. We’ll take this opportunity to change the tape here.

(Tape changed)

President Winnecke: Okay, thank you.

David Coker: Well, as you well remember, we went round and round on Azteca and we sat in Bettye Lou’s office one night and talked about the Azteca vote. And you know, they created somewhat of an environmental problem out there and we gave them tax abatements and I’m not sure that that’s totally dealt with. I still have problems with that one and there are probably others. I haven’t actually seen a printout of all of them recently. In fact, that might be a good thing to do is to get a copy of that, an updated one. I haven’t seen the comprehensive listing of all the tax abatements in the county, but I understand your point, but how do you explain that to a senior citizen on a fixed income that struggles to pay their property taxes on their house? That’s what you’re weighing here and there’s a lot more of those people in this community any more than there are of these kids here in this audience right now.

President Winnecke: We’re going to try and move this along. Mr. Goebel, did you have a comment or question?

Councilmember Goebel: Well, I am relatively new to the Council, but I think back to the issue of the abatement, for this particular company its, to me, supporting the type of jobs that you are in favor of: white collar, low pollution, high paying, taping the market of our local community schools, and if we would lose those 40 jobs, high paying, we also lose the union construction that will go on and I think the factories will probably remain regardless – is that correct? So we’re taking a risk, I would think, of maybe not allowing that expansion to happen but it might benefit – an abatement of some sort might benefit us and it might grow in that area the type of jobs that we really are looking for here in Vanderburgh County and I think we would probably see eye to eye on that. I know you don’t agree with the abatement, and the issue of abatement in general, but this particular case, I think we have to handle one by one.

David Coker: Well, as I said, I realize I’m not going to change any votes here, but could we roll it back perhaps to four or five years instead of the full eight? I think that would be a smaller bone to stick in the throat of the taxpayers out here if they’re going to – if we have to go in this direction. Maybe that’s what you ought to do because, you know, like I said, there are other employers in this community that do not receive tax abatements and they get upset about them all the time and I hear about it. And they feel relatively helpless and most of them won’t come up here and talk to you about it to be honest with you. Its easier for them to sit in their offices and write the check and pay their taxes as opposed to saying anything about it.

Councilmember Sutton: One of the more difficult things with this, and we probably can’t, haven’t maybe been as thorough maybe in the detail and I think they’ve tried to make a presentation to present some of the merits of this project is, I think what we’re trying to do is we’re trying to be competitive. We’re trying to be competitive with another offer that’s on the table so that we can keep the jobs here in this community. Is it totally fair across the board? I don’t think that’s ever going to happen. Is it going to advantage one over another? Maybe in some cases it could be viewed that way. Are we trying to do what we feel is in the greater interest of the community? I think that’s what we’re trying to propose here. The initial proposal on years is at eight and I think there have been some other discussions about what that length will end up being. I think probably if we were down to four we probably would lose the advantage competitively if we’re down quite that low.

President Winnecke: Mr. Tornatta is going to make a comment and then we have at least one more person from the audience who would like to speak to this, so Mr. Tornatta and then we will move on.

Councilmember Tornatta: I think we all appreciate the effort that this tax group has come up with and they’re keeping the heat on and we all realize it. And, of course, we do the same in our personal thoughts about different abatements. I think that we have thought about the issue on the length of time. Understand, this is an economic tool. Its an investment that reaps additional taxes; where we have low or no taxes on this property, we’re looking to try and reap a tax. Have you ever spent money with an investment firm and then they –

David Coker: County option income taxes –

Councilmember Tornatta: Right, but my point is, you don’t spend with an investment, you can’t spend money on an investment and expect the next day to get all your money back. Its an investment in the future and I think that’s kind of the way we’re looking at it. And also, we’d like to have people build and have other people build toward the success of the people that are building. And although I agree with you that I think eight and ten is too strong on the years, we can vary that back from one to ten. We can vary a tax abatement and if there is something that we can negotiate a fair settlement for the county, and I think that’s what we’re looking to do. And we want to have successful people in this area and we want to breed success next to them so then when they build in an area, hopefully, other people see that that’s a great place to go and they want to build next to them which enhances our investment. And to your point on the tax abatement, a ten year tax abatement, I believe, is $153,000. A five year tax abatement should be about $93,000. So its not yet half when we go through and that’s some numbers that I got, in fact, from –

David Coker: 93, and at five?

Councilmember Tornatta: – from the people – at five years.

David Coker: In revenue?

Councilmember Tornatta: In revenues. Now, the numbers that they’re producing now at that location is low or –

David Coker: No, its like 15 or something like that.

Councilmember Tornatta: So its nothing, but what I’m getting at is you can see how that will compound over the years and it would turn into a good investment for Vanderburgh County.

David Coker: And you’re probably going to recoup a part of that through county option income tax.

Councilmember Tornatta: Right, with their salaries.

David Coker: So, you know, I understand all that. I just wanted to say that people are paying attention and they’re watching this very closely and they asked me to say something about it.

President Winnecke: And we appreciate your comments and your time and you made good points. So thank you. Anyone else from the audience? We’ll come back around. Please state your name for the record.

Kim Howard: I am Kim Howard, I’m with the Chamber of Commerce, and I’m glad to hear that people are watching and people are looking. I think the economic development issues are significant. I think this is the kind of thing that allows us to take a leadership role. What I’ve seen in my last 90 days with The Chamber is that people think about economic development and they think about bringing in new business, bringing in new industry, its got to be new, we’ve got to bring them in. And they don’t take time to acknowledge the significant contributions of a valued employer like Cresline. Cresline has already made a commitment to our community, they’ve made a commitment in very tangible ways. They hire our college graduates, our high school graduates. They make contributions to our charitable organizations. They have made a commitment to us and I think we have an obligation to support them, to help preserve what it is that they have put into place and to help them grow in ways that are reasonable. So I’m asking for your support today in considering them. Thank you.

President Winnecke: Thank you. Mr. Wortman, did you have a comment?

Councilmember Wortman: I’ll just reference, Mr. Coker mentioned another tax, we have the county option income tax, everybody that lives out of the county, so whether they come from Vincennes or wherever they come from, you know, on that. So they pay the tax.

President Winnecke: Mr. Schopmeyer briefly, and then we’re going to open it up for the Council.

Mike Schopmeyer: To clarify a few points, and I appreciate the comments of Ms. Howard and Mr. Coker, as well. A couple of things, there is no bone in the throat of the taxpayers in any tax phase-in. It doesn’t matter whether its this one or any that’s before this body. We are never taking away any property taxes that are being paid. Never. All we’re doing is phasing in under the program that exists in Indiana, that exists in Ohio, that exists in Kentucky and Illinois. And that misconception is all the time, and particularly as we’re on TV today, is painted out to the taxpayers and its wrong. It is wrong. They will continue to pay every dime of tax that they’ve been paying and they will pay more but we phase in the tax amount so that they can get up and running, so that’s a misconception that, you know, stick it to the senior citizens, a bone in their neck, and that is just dead wrong. I think all of you know it but I want to make sure the public understands that. Ten years, I think, Royce, at one point you said eight years. We applied for ten. We have applied for ten for this and in those counties in Indiana, it would receive ten years for this project. In fact, I would suggest in 95% of counties, this would be a ten year project. Okay, Hendricks County, all around Indiana, so that, you know, eight is what DMD has recommended and that’s acceptable to us. But as you start talking about four or five or six, this becomes unacceptable and Henderson is an issue. This client of ours, and most all the clients of our law firm do not come in here for every $700,000 purchase, every $500,000 purchase, every million dollar, million and a half dollar purchase, which is – and I think its unfortunate that the farmers and their combine investments of $700,000, they should have a tax phase-in. We agree with that in principal. But we don’t come in for every hundred – we’ve got a computer system that’s going to be more than a combine and its going to be taxed at the full amount, five year property, combines are short-term. We’re not in here on every investment seeking – this is one of the largest investments that this company has ever made and they’re making it in the community. Someone, and then Mr. Coker addressed that and I wanted to say that they’ve made plenty of investments since they were last in here several years ago that they’ve not come in and asked for and we don’t do that on every investment. So those are a couple of points and the commuter tax, I suppose we would support that, but I don’t think you have the power to adopt a commuter tax yet in Evansville. So those are some points. One other thing that I think we need to emphasize, we’re not in here asking for you to give us money as was the case on the Executive Inn a few years ago, we’re not in here asking you to give us money as was the case on the Accuride. On a tax phase-in, you do not have to take any money out of your budget. We’ve not asked for that on this project, which many people – Accuride is an equivalent project to this, you pulled out of your pocket funds, if you’ll recall. Executive Inn, different project, but still – and certainly lower paying jobs, a lot of jobs, but lower paying. We’re not asking for that on this project. I think that’s important to know that that’s all that’s being sought on this project is the tax phase-in. None of these other inducements are being sought. Thank you.

President Winnecke: Thank you, Mr. Schopmeyer. I’d just like to make a couple of comments. Actually, this is sort of couched in a recommendation. First, again, thank you. I think this is probably one of the most healthy discussions we’ve had on just about any issue in quite a while, so I do appreciate everyone’s input. But from my perspective, I think the fact that an eight-year abatement, as DMD said this probably warrants, would generate approximately $153,000 to the county over that eight-year period. In fact, the current property is building vacant and the fact that the Diamond Avenue facility would continue to be a tax paying entity, to me, warrants an eight-year abatement and I would – my recommendation as the President of this body is that we move in that regard and I would hope that someone on this body would make a motion to that effect.

Councilmember Raben: Mr. President, I’ll move approval for eight years.

President Winnecke: We have a motion for an eight year abatement, do I hear a second?

Councilmember Abell: I’ll second that.

President Winnecke: We have a motion and a second. Any further questions or discussion? Mr. Sutton?

Councilmember Sutton: We’ve got a motion on the floor and I think, it seems to me, maybe I’m just reading into gestures, eye movements and all, I think there seems to be some support behind it, I’m not sure if the eight year figure is totally the sentiment seemingly. Like I said, maybe I’m reading more than what I thought, but I think we’ve got a good company but eight years, I guess with some of the other issues that we talked about, that might seem a little lengthy. I’m supportive of it personally, I mean, I’d like to see maybe about seven, I’m hearing six, but like I said, I’m probably feeling about seven. So I don’t know what the others’ thoughts may be there.

President Winnecke: Other questions or comments before we take a vote on an eight year proposal? Mr. Goebel?

Councilmember Goebel: If it, if this vote or measure does not carry, will we be bringing it back up for perhaps a seven year abatement?

President Winnecke: I would entertain another motion. Mr. Raben and then Mr. Wortman.

Councilmember Raben: I guess we run the risk, though, that there could be a motion for less than seven. That’s the risk we run here. So what I’m considering here, Mr. President, is a possibility of withdrawing my motion based on the amount of time it took to – I guess I would maybe consider amending my motion to seven with the hopes that it doesn’t get beyond that. So if my co-maker would accept my amendment, I would amend my motion to seven years.

Councilmember Abell: I’ll second the amendment to seven years.

President Winnecke: Okay, the current motion on the floor is seven years with a second to that. Mr. Goebel, did you have a comment or question? Okay. Roll call vote. Oh, I’m sorry, Mr. Wortman.

Councilmember Wortman: When I look at this situation, I look at the name Schroeder and he’s been around here, he’s not come in from out of the state or the county and I think he’s got both feet on the ground, so that’s to his advantage.

President Winnecke: Okay, roll call vote please.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Tornatta?

Councilmember Tornatta: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Sutton?

Councilmember Sutton: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Abell?

Councilmember Abell: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Goebel?

Councilmember Goebel: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Raben?

Councilmember Raben: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Wortman?

Councilmember Wortman: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: Yes.

(Motion unanimously approved 7-0)

President Winnecke: The preliminary resolution passes seven to nothing. It will be back next month for a confirming resolution. I do appreciate everyone’s patience and healthy discussion on this. Is there any other business to come before the Council?

Councilmember Abell: I have a couple of things - go ahead, Mr. Wortman.

President Winnecke: Ladies first, Mr. Wortman.

Councilmember Abell: I had talked to Computer Services about having email because I use that quite extensively and I had it when I was the Clerk here in the building. They have told me that they can set up email accounts for all of us. What they need from anyone who wants an email account is, and I’ve got a piece of paper here I’ll pass around for you to write your name and your personal email address. And what will happen is when your email comes to the county it will automatically be forwarded to your home email, that way your home email will not have to be made public in case you don’t want it, and yet, you will be able to get email from within this building. They’ll set up one for you. For instance, mine in this building is mabell@vanderburghgov.org. And they would use your name, if someone wanted to write you they could write you and then it would be forwarded to your personal email. So I’ll pass this around. If some of you don’t want it, that’s fine, but I’m having it set up and it doesn’t cost us anything. You may want to do that.

Councilmember Sutton: Marsha, that’s really an excellent thing. Now when we respond back to a particular request, how would we respond back without say a personal email account being compromised?

Councilmember Abell: It will be replied back from rsutton@vanderburghgov.org.

Councilmember Sutton: Okay.

President Winnecke: Okay, thank you. Good point.

Councilmember Abell: The other thing I want to bring up is, I wonder if we need to have some discussion on The Centre and the Democrats walking out of the house yesterday, and where that gets us with our proposal that’s been up there?

President Winnecke: Yeah, I don’t know the answer to that. Clearly, I mean, as we all know, there’s been a lot of discussions and, in fact, I had a conversation with Mr. Brown from the Convention & Visitors Bureau board this morning relating to that and I think a lot of people are just unsure as to what will happen. But clearly, the lines of communication between local officials and the state legislators are ongoing and I will continue communicating with that and I would urge any of you to continue talking to those that you know at the state level. Mr. Wortman and then Mr. Tornatta.

Councilmember Wortman: Beings we’re talking about tax abatement, I’m a part-time farmer so I might be interested in a tax abatement.

President Winnecke: New jobs? Probably not. Mr. Tornatta?

Councilmember Tornatta: One of the things that’s coming on pretty strong is the Commissioners are lobbying to utilize some different space in some different areas of this Civic Center building and I think that we need to request that they come before us and kind of give us an idea of what they’re planning on doing as far as utilization of space because we’re going to have a big space issue coming up here when the jail moves out and we’re going to have to have monies that goes toward those type of operations and I think we have to have an idea of what the fiscal balance is going to be once we start taping into some, maybe some Building Authority funds and not going to have those funds to do some later projects that we’re going to have to do to get this construction on the second and third floor, I guess, behind us at the jail remedied. So I would just like to request that we get the Commissioners over here. Mr. Wortman, if you would address that and maybe they can make a presentation of some of their things that they want to look at so we can keep an eye on the prize so far.

Councilmember Wortman: Mr. Chairman, I talked to Suzanne Crouch today and brought that question up that we’ve got to look at it and we’ve got to watch our money and so they’re going to – Mr. Rector, they’re going to kind of go around and doing this and that and see where the space is, what they can afford and whatnot. And then I will get back with her and have her report here if she will so that we can understand what’s going on, what space they’re going to add on or what have you. But I think one of the Commissioners is getting a little too far advanced here. We’re getting too much over there. So I think we don’t need all that space cut up. Thank you.

President Winnecke: Thank you, Mr. Wortman. Any other business to come before the Council? If not, I would entertain a motion to adjourn.

Councilmember Wortman: So moved.

Councilmember Abell: Second.

President Winnecke: We stand adjourned. Thank you.

(There being no further business to come before the County Council, the meeting was adjourned at 5:35 p.m.)

VANDERBURGH COUNTY COUNCIL

                                                                                                                                             President Lloyd Winnecke                 Vice President Marsha Abell

       Councilmember Jim Raben           Councilmember Mike Goebel

                                                                                                                                         Councilmember Curt Wortman       Councilmember Royce Sutton

Councilmember Troy Tornatta

Recorded and transcribed by Teri Lukeman.