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 a motion to approve the minutes from our September 14th meeting.

Councilmember Tornatta: So moved.

Councilmember Wortman: Second.

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

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Tornatta?

Councilmember Tornatta: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Sutton?

Councilmember Sutton: 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 6-0)

President Winnecke: At this time I would entertain a motion to approve the minutes from our final budget meeting of September 14, 2005.

Councilmember Raben: I move approval.

Councilmember Sutton: Second.

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

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Tornatta?

Councilmember Tornatta: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Sutton?

Councilmember Sutton: 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 6-0)

President Winnecke: Okay, before we begin with our appropriation requests, I thought I’d just remind the folks who are viewing at home and also who are in the audience who may not be with us on a regular basis, that the votes we are about to cast, we heard a lot of information on last week. So if we don’t ask questions today, we are apparently comfortable with the request before us and with that caveat, I’ll turn it over to our finance chair, Mr. Raben.

JAIL

Councilmember Raben: Okay, thank you, Mr. President. First, under Jail, 1051-1950-1051 through 1051-2242 for a total request of $203,964, I’ll move approval.

Councilmember Tornatta: Second.

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

Councilmember Sutton: Yes, Councilman Raben, I guess I’m focusing on our unappropriated balance in the General Fund is, I don’t know if my report, the report is dated 9/15 and we’ve got $198,812 in there, –

Councilmember Raben: I can answer that. We’ll be following up with a Repeal just shortly for about 240 or $250,000.

Councilmember Sutton: As well, I mean, we are – still have a couple of more months to go in the year, so just trying to get an idea if we’re fully aware of what we’re working with on limited funds here.

Councilmember Raben: You’re exactly right, things are going to be close. The unappropriated balance after today will fall in just below $80,000. One thing we do have to remember that there are other funds should we have an emergency such as our COIT Windfall account or even our set aside that we needed to pull monies out for an emergency, we can certainly do that.

Councilmember Sutton: And I guess maybe along that line, I mean, if there are some things that we anticipate through the end of the year that really demand our attention, we really need to get those requests in as soon as possible and not wait until December. That will be for all department heads, officeholders, so that we can be as adequately prepared to make any transfers or pull from other funds if we need to do so.

Councilmember Raben: We may just have to buckle up and put everything off, too.

Councilmember Sutton: Absolutely.

President Winnecke: I think that request is a good one and, Mrs. Deig, if you could make a note to send a memo to the department heads and officeholders to apprise us of especially large spending requests they might anticipate before year’s end, that would be good for us to have before our next meeting.

Councilmember Tornatta: And probably put P.O.’s in there as well.

President Winnecke: Right. Any other questions or discussion? Roll call vote please.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Tornatta?

Councilmember Tornatta: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Sutton?

Councilmember Sutton: 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 6-0)

CORONER

Councilmember Raben: Okay, next under Coroner, 1070-3650 Autopsies in the amount of 40,000, 1070-3200 Utilities for 2,000, for a total of 42,000.

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 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.

CORONER                                                             REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Motion unanimously approved 6-0)

COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

Councilmember Raben: Okay, County Commissioners, 1300-1930 down through 1300-3420 for a total of $116,191, I’ll move approval.

President Winnecke: There is a motion. Do I hear a second?

Councilmember Wortman: Second.

President Winnecke: Questions or discussion?

Councilmember Sutton: The Office Supplies request, Commissioner Musgrave, could you talk about that request? I know last month we had some discussion about Office Supplies, so if you could maybe give us some insight on this request here.

Cheryl Musgrave: I attempted to prepare for today’s meeting as I was not here for the discussion last month. And I am here today as Commissioner Crouch is out of town. And I was unable, even though I requested the minutes of that meeting, to obtain a copy of the minutes. And so I am not aware of the discussion about the Office Supply line item and I would request that you convey to me what the concerns were so that I may address them.

Councilmember Sutton: Well, maybe if you could just speak to maybe what the request is here then maybe we can reflect on what it was – if you can just talk about this.

Cheryl Musgrave: The bulk of this money, I’ve been told that $5,000 worth of it, is to pay for the paper that is used in the common copy machine in the Auditor’s Office and it pays for the paper that all of the offices run through that machine.

Councilmember Sutton: Okay, well, that is a different issue from what we were talking about last month so, –

Cheryl Musgrave: Okay.

President Winnecke: Other questions?

Councilmember Tornatta: Yes. One is the travel request. We show that we spent roughly $8,800 through the year, yet we have $3,800 still in the balance –

Cheryl Musgrave: I’m sorry, what did you say the balance was?

Councilmember Tornatta: The current balance is $3,800. I take that back, there is a – do we have what we’ve spent in the account? I’ve got the wrong number here.

Cheryl Musgrave: I am told that today’s balance is $3,436.36.

Councilmember Tornatta: What have we spent so far this year?

Cheryl Musgrave: I don’t have that figure –

President Winnecke: It would be roughly $11,000.

Councilmember Tornatta: Right. And I guess what I’m asking, in two months we think we’re going to go through $8,800 in that account?

Cheryl Musgrave: I’m told that this amount is hard to predict as the Commissioners pay for the travel of various officeholders who go to conferences and so its not just the Commissioner’s budget and that the fall conferences are coming up for all of the officeholders. For example, Mr. Fluty is not here today because he is at the fall Auditor’s conference. I will be at the fall AIC conference as will Z Tuley and I believe its her Chief Deputy have also asked for the Treasurer’s office. So there are a number of conferences coming up and I’m told that this is the amount of money that appears to be necessary to keep us going through the end of the year.

Councilmember Tornatta: And we’re not condoning at this point, with limited funds, that there be multiple people in an office go. I think we’ve kind of let that cat out the bag earlier this year. But $3,800 to me seems like plenty of money to get us through the year on the travel side. Legal Advertising, I’m fine. On the Postage, for the taxes, is that where the Postage stands?

Cheryl Musgrave: No, and that’s why I approached the microphone today, President Winnecke. I’m happy to be able to reduce that – is that a $60,000 figure?

President Winnecke: Yes, ma’am.

Cheryl Musgrave: Down to $10,000. We’ve had a conversation with Linda in Purchasing and you’ll note that the Commissioners, just like the paper with the copier in the Auditor’s office and the travel, the Commissioners pay for the postage for all the offices and now Purchasing believes that $10,000 will see us through to the end of the year so you can take $50,000 off the request today.

Councilmember Raben: Okay, Mr. President, I’m going to amend my motion: 1300-1930 Unemployment in the amount of $20,000, 1300-2600 in the amount of $5,430, 1300-3021 in the amount of $17,761, 1300-3120 Postage in the amount of $10,000, 1300-3130 Travel in the amount of $2,500, 1300-3420 Legal Advertising for 8,000 and I believe the corrected figure should be $60,691.

President Winnecke: 60,691?

Councilmember Raben: Yeah, if someone has a calculator, they may want to double check that, but that’s what I’ve got.

President Winnecke: Mr. Wortman, will you amend your second?

Councilmember Wortman: Yes.

Councilmember Tornatta: And then I just have one quick question please. As far as the paper, we’re planning on buying $5,400 worth of paper for that Auditor’s machine? I mean, are those – we’re buying a bulk amount for the Auditor’s office in paper?

Cheryl Musgrave: That’s what I’m told will take us through to the end of the year. I’m told that we have $45.60 in that account right now. If you feel that number should be different, that’s fine. Again, that’s the common copier for all of the offices.

Councilmember Tornatta: $5,000 is a lot of paper.

Cheryl Musgrave: We’re also happy, if you do not give us that $5,000 and you instead ask the Auditor to appropriate that since the copier is physically located in the Auditor’s office and they are in a better position to give you the counts on that machine and the traffic on that machine. We’d be more than happy to take that away from our line item and give it to the Auditor.

Councilmember Raben: First, I think the correct figure should be $63,691, 63,691. Back to the issue of the paper, I don’t know that we’re going to address that particularly since the Auditor is at the Auditor’s conference.

Councilmember Tornatta: Well, could we not set that in at zero and then they can make an appropriation?

Councilmember Raben: Well, we can, but if we’re going to be appropriating $5,000 and –

Councilmember Tornatta: Well, I don’t know that that’s the number. That’s what I’ve asked. Is that the number we’re looking for a big crate of paper to last us two and a half months? I don’t know, that’s why I’m asking.

President Winnecke: Eventually we’ll need, I mean, the paper is not going to go bad.

Councilmember Tornatta: That’s the question, are we buying it all on paper? I mean, that’s what I think we’re hearing, but I don’t know if that’s what’s actually happening.

Cheryl Musgrave: The Commissioners would be fine if you took the $5,000 out of our budget which we were obligating toward paper, take it away entirely, and ask the Auditor. That is what the money is for.

Councilmember Raben: I’m comfortable with that. I think we’ve, again, –

President Winnecke: Comfortable leaving it as it is?

Councilmember Raben: Yes.

Councilmember Sutton: I did have one more question for the Commissioners and that’s on the Unemployment. Is that kind of, that figure, how did we arrive at that? Do we have some things that are coming up that helped us get to that number or –

Cheryl Musgrave: There are current claimants receiving benefits and this is the correct number to reach to the end of the year for that line.

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

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Tornatta?

Councilmember Tornatta: No.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Sutton?

Councilmember Sutton: No.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Goebel?

Councilmember Goebel: No.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Raben?

Councilmember Raben: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Wortman?

Councilmember Wortman: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: President Winnecke?

President Winnecke: Yes.

COUNTY COMMISSIONERS                                REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Motion fails 3-3/Councilmembers Tornatta, Sutton and Goebel opposed)

President Winnecke: Okay, I guess we’ll address this at a later time.

Councilmember Goebel: Can I ask a question? If we adjust the Office Supplies, can we come back and do that and grant the rest of the request?

President Winnecke: Yes.

Councilmember Tornatta: We have to open it.

President Winnecke: I would consider a motion at this time to reopen these line items.

Councilmember Sutton: So moved.

Councilmember Tornatta: Second.

President Winnecke: Motion and a second. Roll call vote.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Tornatta?

Councilmember Tornatta: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Sutton?

Councilmember Sutton: 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.

(Motion carried 5-1/Councilmember Wortman opposed)

Councilmember Raben: Mr. President, I’m going to move that 1300-1930 be set in at 20,000, 1300-3021 $17,761, 1300-3120 10,000, 1300-3130 2,500, 1300-3420 8,000, for a total of 58,261.

President Winnecke: Do I hear a second?

Councilmember Tornatta: You need to zero –

Councilmember Raben: I’ll come back to it.

President Winnecke: We’ll vote on it separately.

Councilmember Tornatta: And your total, I’m sorry.

President Winnecke: 58,261.

Councilmember Raben: Okay, I could, let’s do that. I’m going to amend my motion to zero 1300-2600, set that in at zero. All other as previously stated. That will save us opening back up again.

Councilmember Tornatta: Second.

President Winnecke: Okay, now questions or discussion? Roll call vote.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Tornatta?

Councilmember Tornatta: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Sutton?

Councilmember Sutton: 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.

COUNTY COMMISSIONERS                                REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Motion carried 5-1/Councilmember Wortman opposed)

SUPERIOR COURT

Councilmember Raben: Okay, next Superior Court, 1370-3980 Transportation of Children & Miscellaneous in the amount of 4,500, I’ll move approval.

Councilmember Tornatta: 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 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 COURT                                               REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Motion unanimously approved 6-0)

CIRCUIT COURT SUPPLEMENTAL ADULT PROBATION

Councilmember Raben: Okay, next under Circuit Court Supplemental Adult Probation, 2600-3530 Contractual Services in the amount of 12,000, 2600-4250 Miscellaneous Equipment for 2,000, for a total request of 14,000. 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 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.

CIRCUIT COURT SUPPLEMENTAL

ADULT PROBATION                                             REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Motion unanimously approved 6-0)

REASSESSMENT/KNIGHT ASSESSOR

Councilmember Raben: Let’s go back up. Knight Township Assessor, 2490-1130-1930 Unemployment for $488, I 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 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.

KNIGHT ASSESSOR                                             REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Motion unanimously approved 6-0)

SHERIFF

Councilmember Raben: Okay, next under Repeal, under Sheriff 1050-0007, the correct figure should be $34,000, all other accounts as listed for a total of $62,400, I’ll move approval.

Councilmember Sutton: Second.

President Winnecke: Motion and 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 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)

(Motion unanimously approved 6-0)

JAIL

Councilmember Raben: Okay, everyone is clear what these are all about, correct? Okay, under Jail I’ll move that all repeals be approved as listed. 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 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

(Table continued next page)

(Table continued next page)

(Motion unanimously approved 6-0)

CORONER

Councilmember Raben: Okay, next under Transfers, the Coroner, 1070-3190 down through 1070-2710 into account 1070-3530 down through 1070-2210 for a total of $2,900.

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 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.

CORONER                                                             REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Motion unanimously approved 6-0)

CIRCUIT COURT                                         COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS

COUNTY COUNCIL                                     RIVERBOAT

CUMULATIVE BRIDGE                               CIRCUIT COURT SUPPLEMENTAL

RECORDER (LATE)                                    HIGHWAY (LATE)

CUMULATIVE BRIDGE (LATE)

Councilmember Raben: Mr. President, next we have Community Corrections, County Council and Circuit Court and Riverboat, Cum Bridge, Circuit Court Supplemental Adult Probation and Recorder, along with those we also have County Highway which were late transfers that everyone has and then Cum Bridge. I’ll move that all transfers, including the late transfers, be approved as listed.

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 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.

CIRCUIT COURT                                                   REQUESTED       APPROVED

COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS                              REQUESTED       APPROVED

COUNTY COUNCIL                                               REQUESTED       APPROVED

RIVERBOAT                                                          REQUESTED       APPROVED

CUMULATIVE BRIDGE                                         REQUESTED       APPROVED

CIRCUIT COURT SUPPLEMENTAL

ADULT PROBATION                                             REQUESTED       APPROVED

RECORDER                                                           REQUESTED       APPROVED

HIGHWAY                                                              REQUESTED       APPROVED

CUMULATIVE BRIDGE                                         REQUESTED       APPROVED

(Motion unanimously approved 6-0) 

Councilmember Raben: Okay, last under Amendments, I move that we amend Salary Ordinance for the Sheriff’s department as the Repeal previously adopted, under Jail, amend the Salary Ordinance as the Repeal previously adopted. Under Community Corrections, I move to amend the following salary lines after being assigned to cross training and it’s 1361-1200, which is a Correction Officer that the current employee’s hire date is 3/31 of `97 with a base pay of $31,081 and two increments at $500, resulting in $31,081 annual wage rate; 1361-1220, the current employee’s hire date is 9/27/91 with a base pay of $31,081 and four increments at $500, resulting in $33,081; 1361-1450, the current employee’s hire date is 7/7/03 with a base pay of $31,081; 1361-1850 Union Overtime set in as previously approved. Recorder, 1040-1190 Deeds Deputy, set salary in at $25,854, the current employee is a COMOT IV, Step 2, 1040-1200 Entry/Bookkeeping Clerk, set salary in at $25,886, that current employee is a COMOT III, Step 4. And last, Circuit Court Supplemental Adult Probation, amend salary line to pay one part time employee up to $10 per hour. 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 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 6-0)

President Winnecke: Okay, next we have, under new business, last week we talked about the compliance on the tax phase-in. I don’t believe we had any follow ups to that. At this time we are to take up the issue of the tax phase-in request for Rexam. I see Mr. Drennan and Mr. Kimpel are here. Any questions for them as a follow up to last week’s presentation? I believe the recommendation from the Department of Metropolitan Development was, what was it a seven year phase-in?

Rob Schaefer: Eight.

President Winnecke: Any questions? Mr. Goebel?

Councilmember Goebel: Yes, I think if we look at it, some of that is maybe a little bit subjective as far as our scoring goes, but I think to stay in line with the other grants we have, its not quite the same but similar, I think we should lower that eight at least to a seven year tax phase-in.

President Winnecke: If there is no other discussion, I would entertain a motion for a preliminary resolution.

Councilmember Goebel: I’d like to make a resolution to accept the phase-in at seven years.

President Winnecke: There is a motion, is there a second?

Councilmember Tornatta: Second.

President Winnecke: Motion and a second. Other questions or discussion?

Councilmember Tornatta: Mr. President? I’d just like to say that we’re very glad to have Rexam in the community. This is a little bit different project than we’ve been given in the past. There were a couple, as Councilman Goebel said, a couple of scoring areas where there probably is a back and forth between, its right on the border of seven and eight years where we saw that. I was kind of right on the high side of seven, where we were at that point in my scoring but do want to say that we appreciate having the company in town, we appreciate the expansion and we definitely want to help this company to do something on a county level so that we can make sure that this company flourishes in our area.

President Winnecke: I would just add that we had a discussion along these lines near the first of this year and that is that we would see a number of tax phase-in requests this year that were really more geared toward retention than job acquisition and that there would have to be probably a change in paradigm as to how we looked at tax phase-ins, and I think this is one of those projects. And I concur with Councilman Tornatta, we’re lucky to have Rexam here and lucky that the company is looking to figure out a way to retain 32 jobs and I think this is an important vote that we make today. And I think Councilman Goebel is correct, I think seven years is a good number given all the variables and if there are no other questions or discussion at this time, roll call vote please.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Tornatta?

Councilmember Tornatta: Yes.

Teri Lukeman: Councilmember Sutton?

Councilmember Sutton: 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.

(Motion carried 5-1/Councilmember Wortman opposed)

President Winnecke: Okay, so the preliminary resolution passes. We will do the declaratory resolution next month. So thanks for your time. Thank you, Mr. Drennan.

President Winnecke: The next thing on the agenda is to set our filing date for the November meeting. That’s October 13th.

President Winnecke: And then the very last thing on the agenda, relatively brief agenda today, is consideration of a resolution to approve a referendum for the concept of a unified government. We have Dr. Phil Fisher and John Dunn from the Unification Committee here. If there are any questions or points of clarification anyone would like to make with them before we vote. I thought it might be appropriate, we did provide a copy of the resolution to everyone last week, but I thought it might be appropriate to go ahead and read it into the record what the language is and at that time I would entertain a motion for approval and then we would get into some floor discussion. This resolution is of the Vanderburgh County Council supporting a public referendum on the unification proposal. It states:

         “Whereas, the Vanderburgh County Council is committed to improving local government and the delivery of services to citizens of Evansville and Vanderburgh County; and

         Whereas, as part of its commitment to improving the operation of local government, the Council made appointments to a citizens committee known as the Evansville-Vanderburgh County Unification Study Committee for the purpose of studying the local government structure and alternatives thereto in an effort to improve local government for the benefit of all citizens of Evansville and Vanderburgh County, Indiana; and

         Whereas, the Committee has concluded a two-year study relating to local government structure and alternatives thereto; and

         Whereas, the Committee has reported its findings, conclusions, and recommendations to the Council; and

         Whereas, one of the Committee’s recommendations is to request the State of Indiana to enact legislation to allow the unification of city and county government structure in Vanderburgh County, Indiana; and

         Whereas, the Council believes that the citizens of Evansville and Vanderburgh County deserve an opportunity to voice their support for, or opposition to, the recommendation of the Committee to unify local government; and

         Now, Therefore, Be it Resolved that the Council, while taking no formal position concerning the proposal of the Committee to unify local government, hereby supports the Committee’s recommendation for a public referendum to allow the citizens of Evansville and Vanderburgh County to voice their support for, or opposition to, the unification proposal.”

At this time, I would entertain a motion to approve.

Councilmember Sutton: Mr. President, I would offer a motion to approve the resolution as has been presented.

President Winnecke: Do I hear a second?

Councilmember Goebel: Second.

President Winnecke: We have a motion and a second. Questions, discussion?

Councilmember Raben: Sure. Yeah, I’ve got just a few questions. I’ll try to limit them. I guess my first question would be what has the committee came up with in regards to non-constitutional offices and the continuation of those offices?

Phil Fisher: Would you please rephrase the question?

Councilmember Raben: Okay, has the committee addressed the issue with what happens once the Metro Council is formed in regards to non-constitutional offices?

Phil Fisher: Those offices that are not covered in the proposal, which of course, includes the County Council and the City Council and the Commissioners and so forth, they remain in place until action by the new Council. So lets say township assessors, for example, they would remain in place until some sort of counteraction on the part of the new council.

Councilmember Raben: So from this day forward through the referendum, should the referendum pass, we don’t really know the fate of what those particular offices, including the township offices might be until the Council is formed.

Phil Fisher: That’s correct. The committee has a vision for this and that is that the changes are made, if changes are made, they’re made one at a time and that they’re made incrementally.

Councilmember Raben: Because, you know, again, I guess most of the contacts that have been made by citizens to me, most of them have been from citizens outside in the county. And, you know, that’s a great concern. I mean, they want their township representation in terms of tax assessment and what have you. Another concern is in regards to the volunteer fire departments. Let’s discuss that.

Phil Fisher: Well, the committee concluded that we’re going to continue to need suburban fire departments manned by, largely by volunteers for any time in the foreseeable future. And, of course, any change in that would be up to, again, the new council. The committee does believe that there are areas which now really need full-time fire protection. This would give the Council the power to extend full-time fire service through the mechanism of expanding partial taxing districts or full service taxing districts to just those areas. We think it’s a more efficient way. One of the things that I think this Council and the City Council might be faced with some time down the road is three or four full-time fire departments. And I think if that happens there’s going to be a lot of duplication. Then you have the situation that they have today in Marion County or certainly on a smaller scale. But we think that we’re going to continue to need volunteers for any time in the foreseeable future just on a cost basis.

Councilmember Raben: I tell you, the county residents are quite proud of their volunteers. They do a wonderful job. Before I forget, also, I think everyone was given a rather large envelope this morning or today and its from John Buckman, who is over the German Township Fire Department. John is quite respected in, not only just this state, but throughout really the whole country. John has served and has chaired various boards and, I mean, we’re quite fortunate to have him in Evansville or in Vanderburgh County. But along those lines, there is a letter and along with that some surveys that I’ve not had an opportunity to read, but I think its important that everyone read that letter because he addresses the concerns that their volunteer staff has along with – and he speaks for the citizens, too. I mean, I really believe that, but I would like that this letter be made part of the minutes because I think its very important. Okay, you know, one of my concerns is and always has been that I’m concerned that should a referendum pass, and I really don’t have a good feel for it or not, but its kind of wait and see what you get. I mean, I don’t think there’s enough spelled out here. I think there is a lot of unanswered questions that I think we need to slow down and if we need to address this issue over the next two years, I think we need to allow that time. But I can sit here and list several other questions but I don’t want to take everybody’s time away.

Phil Fisher: I think that the philosophy of the committee, when they considered all of these issues was that if they made recommendations with respect to the kinds of things that you’re talking about, township assessors and volunteer fire departments, that that would be set for some time to come and what really is needed is an opportunity for the Metro Council to manage the resources in the most efficient way and provide services where they are needed. And this approach of giving broad powers to the council permits that. I also would point out that there are currently, including County Council, City Council and County Commissioners, 19 people involved in some form of legislative action, if you will. There are 15 people on the new Council. We think that the new Council would probably be made up almost entirely of people who are now serving. And that the likelihood of radical change is not very great from a practical matter.

Councilmember Raben: I don’t know. I mean, I think, again, that’s one of the unknowns. I think it could change drastically and it might possibly be for the better, it could be for the worse. But another example is what is the plans for the Evansville Police Department? I think there is roughly 250 uniformed officers there. We have, on the Sheriff’s department, 210, 212, some thing like that.

Phil Fisher: Again, that is left up to the council. However, the committee started feeling, after looking at the two departments, taking into consideration the different pay scales, the different pension funds, the fact that the City Police have union representation, the Sheriff’s department does not, and as best as we could find out from talking to people in both departments, the cultures of the two departments are different. And also, county residents have made it very clear that they want Sheriff patrols to continue. So we’ve left that unchanged. However, again, the Council would have the power to change that. It may be that there are some areas which are now not convenient to be well served by the Sheriff’s department which really should have police patrols. Again, I can think of commercial areas and industrial areas adjacent to the city, outside the city limits that probably could use both full-time fire protection and full-time police protection. And it may be our vision for what the council would be doing is extending those on an incremental basis.

Councilmember Raben: And it may be me, but to me, the whole thing sounds very cloudy. I mean, it seems like there is a lot – you’re asking a lot of the taxpayers to support a referendum and wait and see what happens. I mean, I think all these issues should be addressed prior to the day people go in and place a ballot. I mean, I don’t even think you’re giving it a fair chance by not doing that. Again, part of it could be to leave it cloudy, but I think, you know, there’s a lot of unknown variables out there that I’m certainly not comfortable with at this point.

President Winnecke: If you could hold that thought, we’re going to change the tape.

(Tape changed)

Phil Fisher: No, I think, as I said before, the committee deliberated these issues and thought the best approach was to allow the new council and mayor to manage the resources in the way that they see best. They are, after all, answerable to the people.

Councilmember Tornatta: Two years ago, obviously there were some asked to join this committee and to take that on took some nerve to be able to take that and do something with it. And I just thought that’s a tough thing to do to go in there and to make up some type of how government is going to run, what things are going to happen, how to form teams, how to get the ideas out, how to get ideas back in, and you guys have run through that process better than anybody could have set it up. You also went through a political election that was heavily contested keeping out of the political eye. Although there were many questions in many of the events that I attended, there was never a focus from this committee to address a candidate with making a decision on consolidation. That was always left up to the people outside, the people at the forums. They might ask the question, but it was never asked of a politician off that committee to address whether they were for or against that particular item. It was only asked, what ideas do you have and can you bring any ideas to the table or can you answer our questions so that we can be the best served. Now the only problem I see with assigning you the task is you’ve built a team, you’ve brought the team a long way, you now are at the pinnacle, you are at the Super Bowl of your event and for me to vote no, I would say that you can’t play in the Super Bowl. I would think that would be very unfair to a football team, making the athletic reference, and I think it would be very unfair to this commission to ask you to go through all the effort that you’ve gone through, the many nights, and I know there’s been more nights than have been publicized, to get as many people involved and talk to those people and then to bring those things to fruition. As far as the cloudiness, as I’ve gone around and I’ve talked to not only Louisville, but some people from Indianapolis, those who have consolidated, Lexington, we know now that at this point, we can change these same items using our mayor, our City Council our County Council and our County Commissioners, we can make all these changes right now. So we haven’t heard remonstration on making those changes at this point. I think that there is going to be some sculpting done. I think there will actually be some more information that will be brought out through more committee meetings and the push to make things happen. We’ve met up at the – those who have pushed this have met up in Indianapolis and have made their concerns known, have answered questions of a committee, and have really been a fruitful comment because the state is looking to this area to see how they are going to proceed, maybe before another community will proceed in a same or like manner. And whether I vote for or against consolidation and have not been asked, and today will not be asked to do one or the other, I think that it is imperative that we put a big question out to the public much like we’ve done in other instances like the thought that we would possibly have a baseball stadium or the thought that we would possibly have a riverboat in town, those things, the EVSC has even put a referendum, the referendum is put in place so that those things can be – those big items can be looked at from a community point of view as opposed to having one person to kind of lay the line. So, in short, I will not block this vote. I will have, on my side I will have a referendum for this county and I will let your good work go out. Whether the county listens and likes or whether they turn you off and say no, that has no decision on my decision to vote yes for this referendum.

President Winnecke: Any other comments or questions? Mr. Goebel?

Councilmember Goebel: I think both Councilman Tornatta and Councilman Raben have brought up some very good points and I’m sure that you’ve heard these same questions over and over. I think there is a gray area as far as what is in