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

(Pledge of Allegiance was given)

President Winnecke: Before we begin, I think most of us know that we’re working today without one of our colleagues. Councilman Curt Wortman is hospitalized at St. Mary’s. I’m sure, I know based on the discussions and emails and phone calls, that’s he is in everyone’s thoughts and prayers and I ask that you continue to keep Curt in your thoughts and prayers for a speedy recovery. Having said that, let’s press on.

President Winnecke: At this point I will entertain a motion to approve the minutes from our September 13th meetings.

Councilmember Sutton: So moved.

Councilmember Raben: 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: President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: Yes.

(Motion unanimously approved 6-0)

SHERIFF

President Winnecke: Okay, at this time, we’ll turn the floor over to the Finance Chairman, Mr. Raben, to consider our appropriation requests for the month. And I would remind those who are watching at home, these are requests that we heard last month. And I would remind everyone to speak directly into the microphone, especially those at the podium. I’m told that a number of us, myself included, were excluded from some of the recordings last week. So with that, Mr. Raben.

Councilmember Raben: Okay, thank you, Mr. President. First on the agenda under the Sheriff is 1050-2210 in the amount of 31,000, 1050-2230 in the amount of 18,000. I’ll address College Incentive and Overtime with the transfers, for a total of $49,000. I make that in the form of a motion.

Councilmember Sutton: Second.

President Winnecke: I’m sorry, could you repeat? I’m sorry, which line items?

Councilmember Raben: 1050-2210 and 1050-2230.

President Winnecke: Okay, thank you. There’s a motion and a second. Questions or discussion?

Councilmember Tornatta: And 2230 is the 18,000?

Councilmember Raben: Yes.

Councilmember Tornatta: Okay, thank you.

President Winnecke: 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: President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: Yes.

SHERIFF                                                                REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Motion unanimously approved 6-0)

JAIL

Councilmember Raben: Next, under Jail, 1051-2240 Medical in the amount of 71,000, I’ll move approval.

President Winnecke: There’s a motion -

Councilmember Tornatta: Second.

President Winnecke: Now 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: President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: Yes.

JAIL                                                                       REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Motion unanimously approved 6-0)

CORONER

Councilmember Raben: Okay, next under Coroner, 1070-3640 15,0000 and 1070-3650 Autopsies in the amount of 50,000, for a total request of 65,000. I’ll move approval.

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: (Inaudible)

Teri Lukeman: Actually, I think the problem is there can only be four microphones on at a time, and Mr. Tornatta, Mr. Sutton and Mr. Winnecke, you already have yours on.

Councilmember Raben: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Thank you. President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: Yes.

CORONER                                                             REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Motion unanimously approved 6-0)

Councilmember Tornatta: Can we get a full rules disclosure on these deals?

President Winnecke: At least its not a computer.

Councilmember Sutton: Maybe we can get an extension on the rule here and get six microphones on at least at the same time, instead of four.

President Winnecke: Remember, I have the priority switch.

SCOTT TOWNSHIP ASSESSOR

Councilmember Raben: Okay, next under Scott Township Assessor, 1160-3605 Moving Expenses in the amount of 1,200. I’ll move approval.

Councilmember Sutton: Second.

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

Councilmember Abell: Is this Moving Expense, like, to move? Isn’t he in his house? What’s this – I don’t know what this is.

Councilmember Raben: This is to move from, right now, the Scott Township Assessor and the Trustee are the same office. You know, now that its being split, all the Assessor’s records and equipment and what have you, has to move to a new location.

Councilmember Abell: He’s not going to move from there to another location then in January? Because I know he’s looking at other space. Are we going to move him twice or is this just for one move?

Councilmember Raben: You’ll be moving him once as far as I understand.

President Winnecke: Okay, 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: President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: Yes.

SCOTT TOWNSHIP ASSESSOR                          REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Motion unanimously approved 6-0)

BURDETTE PARK

Councilmember Raben: Okay, Burdette Park, 1450-1180-1450 Other Employees for 25,000, 1450-1190-1450 2,000, 1450-1900 FICA 2,066, for a total of 29,066. I’ll move approval.

Councilmember Tornatta: 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: President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: Yes.

BURDETTE PARK                                                 REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Motion unanimously approved 6-0)

CUMULATIVE BRIDGE

Councilmember Raben: Cum Bridge 2030-4335 in the amount of 85,000, I’ll move approval.

President Winnecke: There’s a motion, do I hear a second?

Councilmember Abell: Second.

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

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Tornatta?

Councilmember Tornatta: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Sutton?

Councilmember Sutton: I’m going to vote yes on this but I just want to, as I indicated last week, just want to make sure we are very careful in looking at overages on these kind of projects and keep a close eye on this. Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Abell?

Councilmember Abell: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Goebel?

Councilmember Goebel: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Raben?

Councilmember Raben: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: Yes.

CUMULATIVE BRIDGE                                         REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Motion unanimously approved 6-0)

LOCAL ROADS & STREETS

Councilmember Raben: Local Roads & Streets, 2160-4310 Road Equipment in the amount of 250,000, I’ll move approval.

Councilmember Abell: Second.

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

Councilmember Sutton: Yes, at our meeting last week we asked Mr. Duckworth if he could prepare some information for us. We were discussing the leasing option rather than just buying straight out. You did provide some – could you kind of walk through that information for us, because obviously, everyone doesn’t have the benefit of getting the information that you provided for us, but we can get a better understanding of our options.

Mike Duckworth: Sure. Thank you, President Winnecke and members of the Council. I provided to you as early as I could due to the fact that the companies that were requested to submit didn’t get it to me until rather late. So yesterday I had it delivered to your offices or places of work or home. We had looked at the possibility of leasing a paver. The estimated cost, $250,000, and the question that you posed to me was in kind of polling these, some of these companies that provided this equipment or tries to sell this equipment, whether or not, what percentage of the lease would go toward purchase. And I did that and I provided to you copies from – I basically sent out a questionnaire regarding the type of equipment needed, the lease amount, request of what would go toward the purchase and the delivery time estimates. And all three companies submitted, indicated that 100% of the lease price would be applied toward the purchase if we chose to go that way. And the delivery time estimated, ranged somewhere between 30 and 60 days. I don’t know that leasing it at this time would be that advantageous other than the fact that my goal here was to try to, number one, get ahead of the new year increases in some of this equipment, and secondly, to actually get it physically here on our property and ready to go for next paving season, because as I talked to these companies, they indicated that the beginning of the year, it usually takes longer to get this kind of equipment because you have the paving companies and other municipalities and those kind of groups ordering them. So this is kind of a shot for us to get in there and get it in here quick, and be ready for next year.

President Winnecke: Mr. Tornatta?

Councilmember Tornatta: Yeah, Mike, do you think, is there anymore paving that can be done this year or do you shut it down at a certain time or if the weather permits?

Mike Duckworth: Well, we are finishing up now. We’ve got approximately – we’ve got one road, major roadway, that was on the paving list to complete and that’s Hogue Road. And they actually started today. There are a couple of major projects going out there, so the availability of mix has been kind of hit and miss. Rudolph, for instance, will tell you that they’ll go all the way up to December depending upon the need. So we’ve got some smaller patch jobs that we need to do. And to be very honest with you, the existing paver, I believe, can – you know, we’re kind of keeping to together the best we can, but we’ve not had any major problems with it and it appears to be okay to help us finish out this year’s paving.

Councilmember Tornatta: I guess what I’m looking at is if, I did see in here that you had somebody who could deliver in two weeks. If we were able to kind of facilitate getting that going and then we add a six month period before we actually had to put all the money down, that might be an option to –

Mike Duckworth: That would be an option. I would tell you that after this process, I have to go through the complete bid process again. Now that information is ready to be submitted to purchasing to put the bid documents and the specs out and everything. But that’s going to be a two or three week period, even though it would be a lease to purchase. We still have to go through the regular bidding process because of the amount.

Councilmember Tornatta: Then as a spec, can you put in a period of time?

Mike Duckworth: Yes.

Councilmember Tornatta: So in that case, if you could say, and we would like it for two weeks after the bids have been taken in, and maybe that then would allow us to –

Mike Duckworth: We can sure do that.

Councilmember Tornatta: Okay, thanks.

President Winnecke: Other questions? Mr. Goebel?

Councilmember Goebel: Mike, are these – I received your packet and thank you. Are these different bids you’re going to be taking pretty comparable machines and prices? Or is one clearly ahead as far as –

Mike Duckworth: No, I think they’re pretty comparable from – I mean, there’s paving companies that use– the three that have submitted, and I don’t know that there may be more and there may not be, but the three that have submitted their information to us have sold pavers to paving companies as well as municipalities throughout this region. So we give kind of a menu of the items that are particular for our needs for county roads and they all seemed to feel like they could meet those requirements as well as having – what they’ll tell you is, well, we can get one to you in two weeks now because we have one. But if we sell that tomorrow, that may go to 30 or 60 days because they kind of have them built according to the specs that they have.

Councilmember Goebel: Okay, but there’s no real sense of urgency on your part to get the paver at this time except just to try to beat the price increase?

Mike Duckworth: Beat the price increase and get ahead of the first of the year onslaught of orders that these companies will get.

Councilmember Goebel: I understand.

President Winnecke: Other questions or discussion? Mr. Sutton?

Councilmember Sutton: Mr. Duckworth, but you could, I mean, you could conceivably, about price increases, you could conceivably put your order in now and say I don’t want it until next February or March.

Mike Duckworth: Well, I think the law, and I think Mr. Fluty will tell you, and one of the things that we’ve run into with other pieces of equipment to purchase, before I can accept a bid, that money has to be in place in the budget, in the line item. So I can’t order a piece of equipment and say I’ll pay you in ‘07 without it being ‘07 and that money actually being in the account.

Councilmember Sutton: Well, and that’s the reason I discussed the possibility of that lease option.

Mike Duckworth: You could lease it from now up to the first of the year, go through the bidding process, and then ‘07 have the money available and pay the balance on it.

Councilmember Sutton: And then you’ve already locked in your price, I guess, conceivably.

Mike Duckworth: Yes, that’s exactly the scenario. And by leasing it, we would have the piece of equipment. That gets us the head start that we’re – its really a Council decision on whether or not you want to spend the whole amount now or lease it up until the first of the year and then spend the remaining amount.

Councilmember Sutton: Well, I guess, frankly, on my part, I really don’t want to spend $250,000 right now. I’d prefer to stretch that out if we could because we’ve got some Patient/Inmate in there, we’ve got some more bills probably coming in on that side, and I guess I’m a little cautious about our unappropriated balance.

Mike Duckworth: And this allows us to do that. Yes. I think you’re right.

Councilmember Sutton: So, I recognize we’ve gotten a lot of wear and tear out of this piece of equipment over and above what might normally be expected to be on its life span, but just want to be cautious of just balancing what we have on hand to what we need there in your department. So likely, if this comes up the way its proposed, I’m probably going to vote against it and only because I’d like to see us look at the other options.

Mike Duckworth: Well, I guess the other question I would have is, the money in the account that this is in, I don’t know that it could be used for anything else.

Councilmember Raben: This is in Local Roads and Streets, so we can’t use it for anything outside of –

Councilmember Tornatta: Maybe we could encumber the money into next year.

Councilmember Sutton: Carry over the balance.

Councilmember Raben: Frankly, I think if we have an opportunity and we know the funds are available today, let’s get the money set aside whether we lease it or buy it outright really doesn’t matter at this point. But we know the funds are available and it probably makes even more sense today to allocate the funds because with a lease, we may be looking at a two or three or four or five year lease. Again –

Mike Duckworth: I don’t think you can lease this over six months in this kind of a situation. But I think you’re right to the point of where, because its in an account that you can’t use it for anything else, if you have the money available, it might be advantageous to go ahead and do it and secure the piece of equipment.

Councilmember Tornatta: I mean, we can make interest on the money, pay the lease as it goes, and then end up a little bit farther ahead than if we pay it right now. So, I mean, we could spread it out and from what I read, the opportunity to have six months to hold $250,000 would be to our benefit. Once we start paving, heck, we’ll be into paving season before we’ll actually have to shell out the end amount of the money. So I mean, and that’s way in 2007, somewhere around May. So at that point, I think it’s a great opportunity and option. And really, we won’t start that six month clock until probably December.

Mike Duckworth: That’s right.

Councilmember Sutton: And if we can go that way I’d feel a lot more comfortable with it. The other question that we brought up, too, was you brought up, there’s two different varieties on this particular piece of equipment, one that adds about 20 or $30,000 on to the price. What did you find out on that information that we asked?

Mike Duckworth: Well, its somewhere between 15 and 20,000 and its called front end assist. I spoke with the mechanics that work on these pieces of equipment and I spoke to a couple different paving companies and basically, they suggested, their recommendation was, if we’re going to go ahead and spend this money at this time, that it would be a feature that we probably should add to it because of the terrain that we pave. There have been a couple of times that, and I know this is a much older piece of equipment, that we struggled to get it up a few hills because of the weight that it carried. And, you know, it’s the same question of whether or not you want to buy a four-wheel drive or a two-wheel drive or a front-wheel drive. I mean, those are questions that I depend upon the mechanics that work on the pieces of equipment and these other companies that deal with this on a regular basis, their recommendation, and I guess my recommendation to the Council is for us to go ahead and spend that extra money to ensure that we have the type of equipment that we need.

Councilmember Sutton: That’s all the questions I have about this concern, just if we can look at that lease option and then just getting it outlaid in 2007, then I’m fine with it, otherwise.

President Winnecke: Mr. Goebel?

Councilmember Goebel: So to make it clear, your plan now is, if we appropriate the money by December, to have the machine ordered and then go on the lease payment for –

Mike Duckworth: Well, there’s one of two ways we can go. I do have current money in my lease equipment account that could carry – I’m estimating that the lease is going to be about $10,000 a month. I have enough to carry me through the rest of this year to lease it and then I would suggest that at some point in time, when that lease would run out, that the remainder of that be carried over to pay it in `07.

President Winnecke: It seems to me what probably the necessary thing to do is approve the full amount today and encumber that because we won’t have an approved budget for `07 until, as we all know, sometime into the, late into the first quarter.

Mike Duckworth: That will go into the account this year and that will allow me, by law, to go ahead and enter into the bids and put the specs out and so on and so forth.

Councilmember Goebel: Will the excess money then, that we’ve appropriated today, fall back or will it stay in the lease account?

President Winnecke: We could encumber that into that line item.

Councilmember Goebel: Okay.

Councilmember Tornatta: Okay, but how much do you have in the line item right now?

Mike Duckworth: I’m thinking, there was originally 60,000, I believe, allocated and I believe we’re somewhere between 45 and 50,000 in that account at this point in time.

Councilmember Sutton: And this is the only piece of equipment that you’re intending on buying, so conceivably, we –

Mike Duckworth: Well, this isn’t in an account that I can purchase out of. This is an account that I, for instance, you know, leasing equipment, that kind of thing. So it would be germane to what I need to do, which would allow me to use money out of that account.

Councilmember Sutton: Well, what I am saying is, you don’t have any other plans for that account?

Mike Duckworth: No, not at this time.

Councilmember Sutton: Okay.

Councilmember Goebel: Could we not lower the amount and include your current line item, lower the amount we’re going to appropriate today and so it adds up to 250, we’re okay?

Mike Duckworth: I would recommend, you could drop it to 210, I think 40,000 very comfortably, which might leave me 2 or 3,000 in case I need to rent a small piece of equipment for the rest of the year for something. And by combining the two, I think we can get the job done.

Councilmember Goebel: That seems reasonable.

Councilmember Raben: Okay, Mr. President, I’m going to amend my motion for 2160-4310 Road Equipment to $210,000.

Councilmember Sutton: Second.

President Winnecke: Mrs. Abell made the initial second. Would you be amendable to that?

Councilmember Abell: Yes, I’ll change my second.

President Winnecke: Okay, so now the motion is for line item 2160-4310 in the amount of $210,000. Any other questions or discussion on this line?

Mike Duckworth: Just one last thing. I’ll need to get with Mr. Fluty to make sure that – do I need to put in for a transfer now for the 40,000 or are you going to put it all in one account? Sorry I don’t understand. Forty thousand from the lease, should we just go ahead and enter into a lease agreement with that money and then for the balance to be paid out of the 210 account? I mean, I don’t really understand the process there.

President Winnecke: Well, the initial, if I understand it correctly, you’re going to make the initial payments from your lease line. This money will be, when its needed, will be used to purchase.

Mike Duckworth: Right. So I guess that would be two different P. O.’s, is that right?

Bill Fluty: Yes.

Mike Duckworth: Okay, I understand.

President Winnecke: Other 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: President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: Yes.

LOCAL ROADS & STREETS                                REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Motion unanimously approved 6-0)

President Winnecke: Thank you, Mr. Duckworth.

SHERIFF/MISDEMEANOR HOUSING

Councilmember Raben: Okay next, Sheriff Misdemeanor Housing, total request of 8,487, I’ll move approval.

Councilmember Sutton: 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: President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: Yes.

SHERIFF/MISDEMEANOR HOUSING                  REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Motion unanimously approved 6-0)

LEGAL AID/UNITED WAY

Councilmember Raben: Okay next, Legal Aid/United Way in the amount of 8,056, I’ll move approval.

Councilmember Sutton: Second.

President Winnecke: 8,756, I believe, is the correct –

Councilmember Raben: 8,756.

President Winnecke: Motion and a second, questions or discussion? Mr. Tornatta?

Councilmember Tornatta: Yeah, I did have an additional question for Sue, please. Sue, I apologize, its been a busy week, so I haven’t been able to get in touch with you, but on the Miscellaneous, could you just explain that line item?

Sue Hartig: Sure, there are things that we have to purchase with United Way funds, say paying for a luncheon, sending flowers, buying our share of the decorations for the annual meeting that really don’t fit under any other line item, (Inaudible).

President Winnecke: Sue, could you step closer to the microphone?

Sue Hartig: Oh, I’m sorry.

President Winnecke: Or maybe pull it down a little further? There you go. Thank you.

Councilmember Tornatta: Okay, and I guess it shows a balance of about 100 in that line item?

Sue Hartig: Uh-huh.

Councilmember Tornatta: Okay, and do you anticipate from now to the end of the year that you’ll spend $6,500?

Sue Hartig: Probably not.

Councilmember Tornatta: Do you have a better idea of an amount you might spend other than $6,500?

Sue Hartig: What are you wanting to move –

Councilmember Tornatta: I’m just saying, looking at the amount we budgeted was a little over $2,300 and I just noticed in that account that we’ve been somewhere around between 2 and $3,000 that we’ve spent out of that account.

Sue Hartig: Right. Right.

Councilmember Tornatta: And to put $9,000 in that account just seems like its maybe going overboard in lieu of some of the things that we’ve talked about, how the money rolls and what role its going to play in the county budget as well. So I guess I didn’t know if there was an amount that would work, whether a thousand dollars would get you by to the end of the year.

Sue Hartig: I’m sure it probably will but then we have to put the rest of it somewhere, so it is appropriated.

Councilmember Tornatta: Well, as we’ve talked, the rest of that money essentially would go into a – be drawn first out of the county and then at that time, that money would be depleted –

Sue Hartig: Right, but we can’t draw it unless its appropriated.

Councilmember Tornatta: Well, we would take that money first – we’d use those funds first is what I’m getting at. Those would be the first funds we’d use before we’d use county dollars. We’ve kind of done it backwards. We use county dollars first and then use United Way, that’s why you have a balance right now.

Sue Hartig: Well, I think we discussed that. We can’t necessarily use one or the other first. For example, you asked last week what the balance was. Currently, before the appropriation, our balance is $23,000 in the United Way account for the rest of the year, $20,000 of that is salary that will be drawn out every other week.

Councilmember Tornatta: Okay, so you’ll be left with 3? Is that where you’re going?

Sue Hartig: Uh-huh.

Councilmember Tornatta: How did we end up with 6,500 then?

Sue Hartig: Well, the three is what is already appropriated. What is in the –

Councilmember Tornatta: Okay, so today, let’s just look at it today and we’ll iron all this out. I’ll talk with Auditor Fluty and we’ll get this all ironed out so we know exactly where things stand. And like I said, I apologize about this week, its been a busy one. But would $1,000 get you by for the year? If you need some more, we’ll come back and address that.

Sue Hartig: Sure, but then we need to appropriate the remaining balance so all of our funds are appropriated and they’re not just sitting there in that account.

Councilmember Tornatta: And I think we can do that before the end of the year. That will be available.

Sue Hartig: So you want me to come back with another appropriation?

Councilmember Tornatta: I don’t know if we’ll need to. We’ll discuss that with the Auditor and come back and see what we need.

Sue Hartig: I think its an easier accounting procedure if the money is appropriated so we know –

Councilmember Tornatta: It doesn’t have to be appropriated. Its hung over year after year after year as it is. That’s why you’ve got an accumulated balance. And what I’m saying is, instead of you having an accumulated balance, the county needs to accumulate a balance in the county general fund. So we’re –

Sue Hartig: This is United Way money, this can’t go in –

Councilmember Tornatta: That United Way money is money that was put in there and instead of using the United Way portion, we use the county first, which allowed money in the United Way fund to hang out over here.

Sue Hartig: We don’t use the county money first. We use some of each all the way through the year.

Councilmember Tornatta: I’m not going to argue about this. I’m just telling you, we talked about this. We’re discussing that in these terms, there are duplicate line items in both budgets, okay? And we have used county’s first before we have used some of the line items out of the United Way. So in retrospect, we look at using more of the United Way first because the county general rolls into our general fund. Yours sits in a fund out there in la-la land, and we want to try and get away from that, and try and bring everything into the county general. That’s what I’m going for.

Sue Hartig: The United Way funds can never be in the county general fund.

Councilmember Tornatta: And I’ll be happy to explain and we can go over it with the Auditor on exactly how this can function. I am absolutely not trying to start anything, I’m just telling you that in the past, that fund has built up and I do not want it to build up on that side. It should come back into the county general if at all possible.

President Winnecke: Other questions or discussion? The current motion on the floor is to approve the request of $8,756. Other questions or discussion? Roll call vote please.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Tornatta?

Councilmember Tornatta: No.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Sutton?

Councilmember Sutton: No.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Abell?

Councilmember Abell: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Goebel?

Councilmember Goebel: This money stays in the United Way if its not spent?

Sue Hartig: Yes sir, the United Way account. That’s pursuant to the inter-local operating agreement that was passed some years ago.

Councilmember Goebel: Well, I agree with Councilmember Tornatta’s logic, that the money should be spent possibly out of United Way first for your funding and then come to the county general. However, this seemed to be agreed upon last week and if you clear it through Mr. Fluty, and we have how you spent the money, I guess that will be okay for this particular item, so I will vote yes this time.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Raben?

Councilmember Raben: I guess before I say yes or no here, the question still comes back to if the United Way carries a balance over of $20,000 from 2006 into 2007. I think the question that Councilman Tornatta is trying to make, can we reduce our general fund by the same like dollar amount?

Bill Fluty: Well, any unspent or unappropriated United Way fund money would just roll over into her cash balance, and you will always take her cash balance into consideration when you do your funding, which will be in your budget cycle. So you’ll look at that each time. You will look at her cash balance and you’ll look at her request for her general fund. And obviously, if the United Way fund has a cash balance, then you can reduce your general fund, and I think that’s what you’re speaking to now. And then the option, the money doesn’t have to be appropriated this year. Of course, it needs to be appropriated if you need to spend it, but it doesn’t need to be appropriated this year because it will just fall into your cash balance and be available for next year’s budget cycle. So if you have a need, surely it needs to be appropriated now.

Councilmember Raben: Okay, thank you. With that being said, considering that we’ve budgeted just over $2,300 this year and that’s probably about the norm, that’s probably what its been in the past, I’ll vote no.

Teri Lukeman: President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: I’ll vote yes. Its 3-3, so it does not pass.

(Motion fails 3-3/Councilmembers Tornatta, Sutton & Raben opposed.

Councilmember Tornatta: I’d like to make a motion to allow $1,000 in the account of 4290-3990.

Councilmember Raben: I’ll second.

President Winnecke: Would you repeat the line item, please?

Councilmember Tornatta: 4290-3990 for $1,000.

President Winnecke: Any questions or discussion on that? Mr. Raben?

Councilmember Raben: One quick question, did you consider anything on Travel/Mileage?

Councilmember Tornatta: Oh, I’m sorry. And Travel/Mileage would stay the same 4290-3130 for $2,200, 4290-3990 for $1,000, for a total of $3,200.

Councilmember Raben: I’ll second that motion.

President Winnecke: Okay, is everyone clear on what the motion is? Further 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: President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: Yes.

LEGAL AID/UNITED WAY                                    REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Motion unanimously approved 6-0)

Sue Hartig: Thank you.

President Winnecke: Thank you, Sue.

AUDITOR

Councilmember Raben: Okay, next under County Auditor, we have a transfer request in the amount of $3,500, I’ll move approval.

Councilmember Abell: 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: President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: Yes.

AUDITOR                                                               REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Motion unanimously approved 6-0)

SHERIFF

JAIL

Councilmember Raben: Okay, other transfers, the Sheriff, I will move that 1050-1130-0099 in the amount of $7,000, 1050-1130-0209 in the amount of $5,000, 1050-1130-0231 in the amount of 3,000, 1050-1130-0011 in the amount of 4,000, 1050-1130-0055 in the amount of 3,000, be transferred into account 1050-1210 College Incentive in the amount of $5,000 and 1050-1300 Overtime of 17,000. Along with that, I will go ahead and include the Jail. Move that we transfer from 1051-1130-0352 to account 1051-1130-0364 in the amount of $125. I make that in the form of a motion.

Councilmember Sutton: Second.

President Winnecke: Motion and a second. Mr. Sutton?

Councilmember Sutton: Councilman Raben, I didn’t – I had a difficult time following you on that transfer there. Could you repeat that on that Sheriff?

Councilmember Raben: I certainly will and I think everybody understands what’s going on there, but we approved appropriations that offset some of these transfers in the beginning of the meeting. And the same goes with the Jail, we approved the $71,000 Medical, so that’s why the other transfers aren’t going through. But the transfers that I’m making a motion to approve are 1050-1130-0099 in the amount of 7,000, 1050-1130-0209 in the amount of 5,000, 1050-1130-0231 in the amount of 3,000, 1050-1130-0011 in the amount of 4,000, 1050-1130-0055 in the amount of 3,000, those amounts be transferred into 1050-2210 in the amount of $5,000, and 1050-1300 in the amount of 17,000. And then on Jail –

Teri Lukeman: Excuse me, that’s 1210.

Councilmember Raben: Excuse me, 1050-1210 and 1050-1300. Okay, on the Jail side, 1051-1130-0352 in the amount of $125, transferred into account 1051-1130-0364 in the amount of $125. Everyone clear?

Councilmember Tornatta: Got it.

President Winnecke: Questions or –

Councilmember Sutton: I’ll just get the notes after the meeting.

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: President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: Yes.

SHERIFF                                                                REQUESTED       APPROVED

JAIL                                                                       REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Motion unanimously approved 6-0)

AREA PLAN COMMISSION

HEALTH DEPARTMENT

UNION ASSESSOR/REASSESSMENT (LATE)

Councilmember Raben: And, Mr. President, I will move that all other transfers be approved as listed.

President Winnecke: Do I hear a second?

Councilmember Tornatta: Second.

President Winnecke: 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: President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: Yes.

AREA PLAN COMMISSION                                  REQUESTED       APPROVED

HEALTH DEPARTMENT                                       REQUESTED       APPROVED

REASSESSMENT/UNION ASSESSOR                REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Motion unanimously approved 6-0)

SHERIFF                                                      BURDETTE PARK

AUDITOR                                                     JAIL

Councilmember Raben: Next we’ll move on to the Amendments to the Salary Ordinance. First, I’ll move under Sheriff, we amend salary line 1050-1300 Overtime as previously adopted, 1050-1210 College Incentive as previously adopted. Under Burdette, I move that we amend salary line 1450-1180 Other Employees as previously adopted. Under County Auditor, line 1020-1990 Extra Help as previously approved. Under Jail, I move that we amend salary line 1051-0364 Detention Officer Supervisor as previously approved. The current employee’s hire date is September 29th, 1997, with an annual salary of $36,068. And under County Clerk/Election Office, amend salary ordinance to allow one lead person in the Election Office to be paid at a rate of $10 per hour. And that’s all I’ve got, Mr. President. I’ll make that in the form of a motion.

Councilmember Abell: Mr. Raben, I’d like to vote separately on the County Clerk/ Election Office, please.

Councilmember Raben: Okay, Mr. President, I will remove from my initial motion the County Clerk’s amendment in the Election Office.

President Winnecke: Okay, would someone like to make a second then on the motion that excludes the County Clerk?

Councilmember Tornatta: Second.

President Winnecke: Okay, 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: President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: Yes.

(Motion unanimously approved 6-0)

Teri Lukeman: And may I change the tape?

President Winnecke: Yes, we will change the tape.

(Tape changed)

President Winnecke: Okay, Mr. Raben.

CLERK

Councilmember Raben: Okay, the last amendment would be County Clerk/Election Office, amend Salary Ordinance to allow one lead person in the Election Office to be paid at a rate of $10 per hour. I’ll move approval.

Councilmember Tornatta: Second.

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

Councilmember Abell: I disagree with this for two reasons. One is, the person who is supposed to be the lead person in that office is supposed to be the person who is paid to be the Assistant Chief Deputy of Elections. And that’s a position that we even considered getting rid of at one time. And one year, that person doesn’t work in the office at all. So always, the Assistant Chief Deputy has been the one who has been the lead person in that office. You don’t need two leads. And besides that, this is a split political office with equal number of Democrats and Republicans, and if you give $10 to one person, you’re going to be giving it to one political party, and I disagree with that, also. I think that that’s an unfair advantage. And the other thing is, is that it makes it extremely hard when that person is gone to ask someone to do that job when they’re not getting paid to do it. The person who is in charge is the Assistant Chief Deputy of Elections and when she’s not available, the County Clerk should take over. So I don’t think this is a necessary expenditure.

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

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Tornatta?

Councilmember Tornatta: Thank you, Marsha, and I agree, if you’ve been in that side of things before, so I’ll vote no.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Sutton?

Councilmember Sutton: Ditto. No.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Abell?

Councilmember Abell: No.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Goebel?

Councilmember Goebel: No.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Raben?

Councilmember Raben: No.

Teri Lukeman: President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: No.

(Motion fails 0-6/Councilmembers Tornatta, Sutton, Abell, Goebel, Raben & Winnecke opposed)

President Winnecke: Okay, two last pieces of business before us. One, our filing deadline for the November 1st meeting is October 12th.

President Winnecke: Also, you have before you a resolution. If you’ll recall, back in the beginning of the year, this body voted on a four to three vote to increase the monthly 911 fee to $.95. We have not decided how to allocate the funds. The resolution that is presented before you is a proposal to distribute the funds as such. If the county, meaning Vanderburgh County, would retain 35 cents, which we presently retain, 25 cents would be allocated to the city of Evansville, and 35 cents will be allocated to fund capital improvements at the Central Dispatch Center. Its also noted in here for clarification, the county receives the wireless monies that come in. That would remain the same. Presently, this is funded two/thirds one/third. Two/thirds by the city, one/third by the county. So at this time, Mr. Tornatta?

Councilmember Tornatta: Would you please talk about the relationship with the city and their approval and maybe what your conversation with the Mayor has been over this process?

President Winnecke: Off and on over the last several months, literally since last January, we’ve had discussions with various members of the Central Dispatch Board. I sit on that board along with Commissioner Musgrave. They do have – Central Dispatch has a laundry list of capital improvements that it needs to move forward on which is one of the reasons I am bringing this to the floor today because it does need to make plans. You know, there’s a lot of talk about how to distribute this. I think the city is comfortable with this. The good news, I think, from both the city and county’s perspective is, that we both enjoy relief by setting aside money for capital improvement. In past years, we’d have to dig into that fund which we would also pay for, pays for our share of the funding of it for capital improvements. This sets aside, you know, what will be in the neighborhood of over 400,000 a year to fund capital improvements. The city is pleased with it because they enjoy the same relief in terms of future capital expenditures and clearly would appreciate the 25 cents that they have never received. In fact, in my opinion, we fund one/third and they fund two-thirds of it, we still get the lion’s share of the 911 fee, so that’s –

Councilmember Sutton: Mr. President, I’d offer a motion to accept the resolution as it has been structured and presented before us. And I think you’ve already elaborated upon some of the key features with this. The county’s position does not change in terms of the income that is received and then as well, the future planning requirements with the equipment are well taken care of, so I make a motion that we approve it.

Councilmember Tornatta: Second.

President Winnecke: Motion and a second. Do we have other discussion or questions? Mr. Goebel, and then we’ll come around.

Councilmember Goebel: And this will allow Vanderburgh County taxpayers to have no increase, is that correct? Property tax increase, I mean, and it will also allow Vanderburgh County residents who live within the city to have maybe a little bit of relief from property tax increase, is that your understanding?

President Winnecke: Theoretically, if you are talking about the city of Evansville, theoretically, the city of Evansville would spend less property tax money to fund its two/thirds share of the operation. That is correct.

Councilmember Goebel: Okay, I think it’s a good resolution then.

Councilmember Raben: I needed to clarify a few numbers. First, it’d like to address Councilman Goebel’s first question. No, this resolution would not offer any further relief on the property tax side. In fact, the county’s share of 911 is almost 995,000. This fund annually, at the rate of 35 cents, generates 335,000 for the county, so the property tax is picking up the balance of that, approximately 600,000. I am not supportive of this resolution for the simple matter that I’m elected on the county board, not the City Council. And my favoritism goes towards County Council and County residents. So I think that the split should maybe be looked at differently. I think its very important that we look at improving things that are at the center. I know we went through a lengthy production on the capital improvements that are needed and I think that what was prepared was approximately – was it $10,000,000 in capital? So 400,000 really doesn’t get you very far. So I would like this board to consider upping the capital instead of 35 cents, to possibly 50, and throwing another 15 cents into the county’s portion.

President Winnecke: Just one thought. Actually, the county does enjoy 3 to 400,000 in revenue from the wireless funds that come, that are channeled through the state, so the balance is not 600,000 from the general fund.

Councilmember Raben: But it’s a tax that belongs within the county. Potāto, potäto – a tax is a tax. It belongs to the taxpayers of Vanderburgh County.

Councilmember Sutton: The city is in the county. And so when we kind of look at how it should be distributed and which governing body should get, you know, for the last several years, the county has gotten 35 cents off of this particular levy here. Our position really has not changed, but I think what we are attempting to do is, equitably across the board, since this is a joint city/county office, is ensuring that the cost that we have, that they’re being offset. The accounts that the city has, attempting to offset that, so I don’t see it as only trying to protect one body as opposed to the other. I see it, on the whole, we’re trying to be equitable and then preserve for good planning purposes when we look at the capital improvement side.

Councilmember Raben: Yeah, but at the rate of 400,000, if there’s $10,000,000 in improvements, by the time you begin making the improvements, before you’re finished, the initial ones are going to need to be improved upon again. I think this whole thing was created based on the need, the sense of urgency for updating and upgrading equipment and what have you at the center. So, you know, I think if that was what our true interest was when we increased the tax, and believe me, there’s a lot of taxpayers that aren’t happy about the increased phone tax, so I think if our real intent for increasing that tax was to make improvements at the center, at it was stated that it wasn’t about offsetting the city’s budget, then we need to allocate more funds for what we told the taxpayers was the reason we were increasing the tax.

Councilmember Tornatta: I mean, I think one of the reasons we’re trying to upgrade that tax was – or fee, Mr. Raben, fee – was to make sure that we offset the running of that institution as opposed to putting more tax dollars into it. And I think you’re finding that across the counties, across other states, that they’re trying to get away from more property tax based issues and try and move it more into fee based issues where the fees are actually taking care of an office. And I think that, a pie in the sky would be, we would try to get the fee put at a level much like we do in certain other offices and areas that it would cover the running and the feasibility of that office. But the one thing that I don’t want to see is the county get hit with, to come out of the pocket, 6 - 8, a million dollars in order to take care of something that drastically needs to be improved at that center. And so, possibly by setting some monies back, by only making a small disparity and hitting our county taxpayers in a small way, we will prevent it from being hit in a big way if we have to do something large on a capital scale.

Councilmember Raben: And that’s my point, I don’t think we’re putting, again, we sold this to the public, to the taxpayers that we were increasing this fee because of all the capital improvement projects. I don’t think it was ever conveyed to them that we were also going to use it to offset the city’s budget. So, again, I don’t think we’re putting enough in for capital improvements. We said that’s why we were increasing the fee, we need to, at least make it worthwhile, we need to throw more money at what we said we were doing. And by the same token, I think we need to throw a little bit on the county side.

Councilmember Tornatta: But the other issue in this was we wanted to make sure that we had the city in the fold because the city can always not opt to work with the county on this issue, and I think right now, we have two groups that have negotiated a fee by which they can live with. And at that point, we have the city actually assisting us with some issues on this particular fund where we might not have if we say, okay, we’re taking all the dollars and the people inside the city have to pay double tax for this type of fee. You know, Royce said, we want to try and make it equitable across the board and I think by, in talking with the Mayor and talking with the City Council Finance Chair, that was very much in their eyes, they think that they are giving some, we know that we’re giving some, but in turn, we are trying to spread it out as much as possible. And I think we’re still getting the wireless, we end up in a pretty nice situation. And probably not too far from where we’ve been in the past.

President Winnecke: Mr. Goebel, and then we’ll come back around.

Councilmember Goebel: I think we discussed it earlier, but for every land-based line in the county, its going to be a $7.80 a year increase, is that correct, for the 911 fee? I think everyone is in agreement that how necessary 911 must be funded, and this is not going to increase property taxes for anyone in Vanderburgh County. So I think we’re going to have the funds in place and maybe the major projects of the 911 center won’t be all funded at once, but we can phase those in, I would think, with 400,000 a year. So I still think it’s a good program or a good idea.

President Winnecke: Jim, did you want to say anything else?

Councilmember Raben: No, again, I want to make sure my point is clear. I think we’re under funding the capital side and again, I think we owe it to the people, this is how we sold it. We didn’t sell it that we were doing anything other than making capital improvements. So I think we need to re-distribute these funds, reallocate them other than what’s on this resolution.

President Winnecke: Mrs. Abell, did you have a comment?

Councilmember Abell: I have a question. If a business has 20 lines that come in, do they pay 20 times that?

President Winnecke: Yes.

Councilmember Abell: Okay. Thanks.

President Winnecke: Anyone else? Roll call vote please. Just for clarification, that’s already, that vote was made, to your point, the increase was already approved. Just for clarification.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Tornatta?

Councilmember Tornatta: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Sutton?

Councilmember Sutton: I vote yes for this fee allocation.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Abell?

Councilmember Abell: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Goebel?

Councilmember Goebel: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Raben?

Councilmember Raben: No.

Teri Lukeman: President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: Yes.

(Motion carried 5-1/Councilmember Raben opposed)

President Winnecke: Any other business to come before us? Oh, and if everyone would sign the resolution before they leave. And again, to keep Mr. Wortman in your thoughts and prayers. And we’ll stand adjourned.

(There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 a.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