VANDERBURGH COUNTY

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS

MARCH 17, 2003

The Vanderburgh County Board of Commissioners met in session this 17^th day of March, 2003 at 5:30 p.m. in Room 307 of the Civic Center Complex with President David Mosby presiding.

President Mosby: Call to order Board of Commissioners of Vanderburgh County for March 17, 2003. Introductions are as follows, Tammy McKinney, Superintendent of Buildings; Corporate Counsel, Kevin Winternheimer; Commissioner Fanello; myself; Commissioner Crouch; Auditor, Bill Fluty; Recording Secretary, Madelyn Grayson. If everybody would, please stand and say the Pledge.

(The Pledge of Allegiance was given.)

President Mosby: Do I have a motion to approve the March 10^th meeting minutes?

Commissioner Fanello: So moved.

Commissioner Crouch: Second.

President Mosby: A motion and a second. So ordered.

President Mosby: Executive Session summary minutes.

Commissioner Fanello: I make a motion to approve the Executive Session summary minutes. The Executive Session began at 4:45, and ended approximately 5:20, and discussed a personnel matter only.

Commissioner Crouch: Second.

President Mosby: So ordered.

President Mosby: I don’t believe we had any bid advertisements this week, did we? Discussion items, Judy Weatherholt. Yes, you’re here with us. This is a public hearing for Jobe’s Lane water and sewer extension. If there is anybody who would like to speak to Jobe’s Lane tonight, I have a sign up sheet here.

Judy Weatherholt: I’m Judy Weatherholt with the Southwestern Indiana Regional Development Commission, and this is a public hearing for the Jobe’s Lane application that is to be submitted April the 4^th for this Community Development Block Grant project. We do, Commissioner, I have letters from each one of the homeowners out there that are willing to sign a waiver on the easements to donate the easements for this project. So, we will be obtaining the official paperwork that we will be submitting with the application for the site control of that project. So, just wanted to let you all know that they have all agreed to sign waivers to donate the easements to that. I think there is a number of residents here that maybe would like to make some comments.

President Mosby: Okay. Was there anybody that wanted to speak?

Mike Lockard: Good evening. My name is Mike Lockard. I’m speaking on behalf of my parents, William and Shirley Lockard, and many of the residents who could not be here tonight due to job conflicts and other personal matters. They asked us to all convey our thanks and appreciation for you, for having the hearing and moving this project forward. As you know, you appropriated, and the County Council appropriated $230,000 towards this project. Then Water and Sewer appropriated, I believe, another $110,000. So, that still leaves a portion remaining that’s needed to make up the entire proposed bid price on this. I think you all know, from looking at the evidence that has come before you before, this project dates back , what, 20 some odd years that it’s been a problem in the area. It not only affects these particular residents, but also tens, if not hundreds of lives downstream, because this is located on one of the higher portions of Vanderburgh County. As a result, everything, you know, it all flows downhill from there. There is a stream that feeds directly into Carpentier Creek and Bayou Creek. So, there is a large number of residents, bodies of water and areas that are potentially affected by the ecoli, and the other coliforms. So, this is not just a problem just for these people, but potentially downstream, you know, you’re talking about a true public health hazard that, luckily, now due to the grants that are coming through, can potentially be taken care of. So, we are appreciative that you all have helped out with this, and we hope that this goes forward, and that the grant is approved. Hopefully, by this time next year, you can all come out and have a drink of water and flush the toilet with us. Thank you.

President Mosby: No problem. Was there, excuse me, was there anybody else from the neighborhood that wanted to speak? I believe, Judy, if I’m right, anybody that was here on this needs to sign this.

Judy Weatherholt: Yes, yes, please do.

President Mosby: Before you leave, I will lay it right over here on the desk, and I’ll have Tammy put a pencil over there, and please just sign your name if you were here for the hearing. Is there any questions by any of the Commissioners? No, she wants to put it over there so anybody that was here can sign it. Kevin, do we need a motion or anything?

Kevin Winternheimer: No.

President Mosby: This was just set out as a public hearing? If there is nobody else to speak regarding the public hearing, then we will adjourn the public hearing end of it, and go back into the regular Commissioners meeting. If you would, like I said, before you leave, please sign that so we can send that along with the application of the grant. Hopefully, we’ll hear something soon.

President Mosby: Next we’re going to hear...was County Assessor pulled?

Commissioner Fanello: Yes, she did ask, I did receive an e-mail. She did ask that this be deferred until March 31^st.

President Mosby: Next we have an Old Courthouse lease agreement with Jon Jennings. I believe everybody’s got it in your packet. If there is any questions.

Commissioner Crouch: What is this gentleman’s business? I was just curious.

President Mosby: I can tell you. His name was in the paper the other day. He, Jon Jennings is setting up a committee to run for 8^th District Congressional race. He wanted to rent a room over at the Old Courthouse. So, yeah, it was in the paper with about three or four other names the other day.

Commissioner Crouch: The “Friends Of” kind of tipped me off.

President Mosby: Is there any questions on the Courthouse lease? If not, chair would entertain a motion? Kevin, you’ve looked at it?

Kevin Winternheimer: Yeah, it’s a standard lease agreement.

Commissioner Fanello: Motion to approve.

Commissioner Crouch: Second.

President Mosby: I have a motion and a second. So ordered.

President Mosby: Is there anybody in the public, in the audience that would like to make any comments or discussion on any items? Seeing none.

President Mosby: Old Business.

Commissioner Crouch: I’ve just got one item, I don’t know if it’s old or new. We all received a memorandum from Judge Niemeier regarding the YCC, and them raising their per diem from $150 to $172. I was wondering if now may not be a good time to perhaps look at the juvenile detention issue, to see if they are still interested in coming forward with a proposal for this Commission to consider on behalf of the county. Then look at that in relation to what it would cost, or what would be involved to the county doing their own facility. This seems to kind of make it timely, the cost.

Commissioner Fanello: I had asked Kevin to look at doing a contract, like we had done with the village up in Vincennes, to provide for the services that they are currently providing for. But, I think this is a perfect time to look at the juvenile. Judge Niemeier and I had discussion, actually about two months ago, and he was supposed to meet with the DOC this month sometime. They could not get down here until March, but they wanted to talk to him about the juvenile issue. So, we probably need to follow up with him to see if he’s met with the DOC yet, and once he had that meeting we were going to kind of get together. I know he called me last week about setting up a meeting over the next couple of weeks. So, I think everybody’s looking at it. It will be just, basically, what our budget can afford, I think. I think it’s the perfect time to come up with those comparisons of building versus contracting.

Commissioner Crouch: Would we also contact Steve Perry and ask them to submit a proposal for them building the facility, and, you know, operating it on behalf of the county? Could we look at that also?

Commissioner Fanello: Sure. I think we have to compare it with building our own facility.

Commissioner Crouch: Okay. If he’s meeting, if Judge Niemeier is meeting with DOC this month? Is it March?

Commissioner Fanello: I thought he said, I thought it was actually supposed to be the 12^th. I’m not sure.

Commissioner Crouch: Okay. Perhaps we could look at addressing this issue in an April or maybe even a May meeting.

Commissioner Fanello: Right.

President Mosby: Okay.

Commissioner Crouch: Before we start moving forward out at Wansford Yards.

Commissioner Fanello: Well, yeah, and I was actually going to lead into New Business with another issue, but that’s probably a perfect segue into the Community Corrections issue. Which ,I think, we probably all read the newspaper this weekend that the building that currently houses the Safe House is up for sale. I think this is the perfect opportunity for us to come to a conclusion of how we want to spend the $2 million that was given to us by the DOC. I know the Sheriff and I worked very hard on that money, and we don’t want to see it go to waste. So, I think it’s time for us to look at that. Probably looking for any thoughts that the Board has, but I think that we need to come back with a recommendation in the next couple of weeks how we want to move forward, you know, with either constructing a new facility, or how we want to handle this.

Commissioner Crouch: Did, isn’t a Dr. Latessa supposed to be studying this, and coming forth with a report? I think, probably it would be wise to wait until we do get that report.

Brad Ellsworth: Right. Dr. Latessa is in the middle of doing an analysis of our system. Unfortunately they asked for an extension on the program, and I found out in the last week that it’s going to be May before his final report is due. So, I’m not sure we’re going to have the luxury of waiting for him, and if he’ll be able to actually...we don’t know if he’s going to come out and say, here are ideal numbers for what size facility. I mean, I don’t know if that’s going to be in his report. The one thing that I did want to add when I was sitting there was that with the schematic design phase of the jail going on, the more we wait on deciding what we’re going to build out there adds to the problems for the architects. Like I said, they are finishing, and they are doing engineering, and electrical, and HVAC and that. The longer we delay on if we’re going to add this other building, or pod, or whatever we want to call it, it’s slowing the architect down on that. So, like I said, we might be able to wait till May, but I don’t know if it’s going to produce what, a number where Latessa comes in and says, you only need 150 beds. I think that might have to be a local decision between you all and the judiciary.

Commissioner Fanello: I think we’ve studied this issue long enough that we can come to that decision. I think the judges are in a place they know what we need. This Board has studied this issue, you know, we’ve had a study that the county paid for a couple of years ago, and I think we’re at a point where there’s no need to hold off this decision. The state wants a final plan by June 30^th of how we will spend the $2 million. I have asked our architects and engineers to give us some estimates over the next week or so. So, we will be getting those back. So, I think we’re in a perfect position that we have enough information that we can make an intelligent decision.

Commissioner Crouch: Didn’t the Community Corrections Board authorize this Dr. Latessa to do the study? Who’s paying for that?

Brad Ellsworth: The DOC is actually paying for his study.

Commissioner Crouch: I would think that they would want us to consider that before they give us $2 million. I don’t know, but it seems if public money is being spent for this study, and I know in the past the argument has been made by this Commission that we need to wait until that study is done. I don’t think that another month and a half, or, you know, is going to make a difference.

Commissioner Fanello: Well, it’s actually more than a month a half, but I just feel like we’ve studied this issue to death. That’s my personal opinion.

Brad Ellsworth: I can try for next week to see, contact Latessa’s group and see if numbers might be in, you know, a number or, what I think you’ll see out of that is possibly a recommendation on what type of inmates are actually sentenced out there, and what charges are appropriate for Community Corrections and what aren’t. That may drive the numbers. I don’t think he’s going to come out and say you only need 150, or you only need 125. Over the last seven years of studying this, and after listening to the judges, I know what they think what we need. It’s, I guess, it’s going to involve the Council too, and what they are willing to spend on the size. That’s your all’s pleasure. I just know that Paul, the architect, has said it is slowing him down at this point, in his work, to not know if we’re going to have this or not, so.

President Mosby: So, you’re saying May before they can get us anything?

Brad Ellsworth: Before they are going to come in and do the report, they have asked for May.

President Mosby: I guess, my feeling is we could go ahead to try to decide what we want to do with the information we have. I mean, we’ve got plenty of information. I guess, we can make a somewhat of a decision, maybe not a final decision, but try to come to a conclusion on what we want and help the architects along here so that we don’t have to go back and redo work that is going to end up costing us money. Then incorporate Dr. Latessa’s study into what we think we need, and see where we stand.

Brad Ellsworth: One thing that might drive it is that if we get a firm commitment from the Council. If $2 million is the exact, I mean, they are not going to make this thing a $4 million building regardless, then we know we have that much to build whatever came in. If $2 million will build 150 beds, that’s probably what we’re going to get. Enough with office space for day reporting and all that. If $2 million will build 500 beds, then maybe we need to relook at that, and rethink that, but if Paul comes back and says you’re only going to get 125 beds for $2 million, and the Council’s not going to throw into that pot, then I think we know what we’re going to end up with.

President Mosby: Was this supposed to be a matching grant? Or is it just $2 million, do what you want?

Commissioner Fanello: I have the letter right here, and it says that;

“The $2 million grant is a one time grant that will be utilized to build a residential facility that will serve both male and female Community Corrections offenders, exclusively replacing the current Safe House facility.”

There is nothing in here about matching grant or anything like that.

Commissioner Crouch: Well, and, I guess, my feeling is, as I stated earlier, to have a local board authorize a study that public monies is being spent on, and then for us to have stated in the past that that study is important to the big picture, and then for us to move without that study being in, I think, is us missing a big element.

President Mosby: I don’t think you can wait, in my opinion, I don’t think you can wait for Dr. Latessa’s study, and then have time to, basically, decide what you want to do, have time to, I mean, depending on the cost. I mean, if we contact Paul as late as May or June, and they give us a cost, and we find out it’s more than $2 million, it’s going to be another 30 to 60 days before you can get into Council. By then you’re into July and you’re money is gone. I mean, if we wait till May, I mean, you know and I know the Council only meets once every month. If we need money, or if we’re looking at additional money, or if we need to match this money, I mean, depending...we’ve got to start somewhere. We can’t wait until May. You know, it could be July 1^st before we get into Council.

Commissioner Crouch: I guess–

President Mosby: I would hate to lose $2 million.

Commissioner Fanello: $2 million, in the big scheme of things, from the state, who is in a financial crunch, at this point, is a big deal. We cannot afford to lose this $2 million.

Commissioner Crouch: Have they told us we’re going to lose it if we don’t take action by–

Commissioner Fanello: We have until June 30^th.

President Mosby: June 30^th.

Commissioner Crouch: Right, but–

Commissioner Fanello: We will not have it after June 30^th.

Commissioner Crouch: That’s correct, but there’s nothing about May 1^st, if a decision hasn’t been made.

Commissioner Fanello: But you don’t have enough time to come up with a full blown plan if we wait until May 1^st.

Brad Ellsworth: If I could, if I could contact Latessa’s group this week, before next week’s Commission, and see if...if the report comes back it’s, their studies are called, “What Works”. They may come back and say they’re looking at our programming and saying, yeah, this is a great program, Community Service is not useful anymore and that. If that’s the kind of thing this brings back, and they don’t talk numbers or that, then we’re going to have wasted time. If they say, yes, this will help you with determining the size of your Community Corrections, maybe that will be helpful. I can tell you next Monday night.

Commissioner Crouch: Yeah, could you ask them for something in writing as to what that report is going to...actually what kind of information is going to relay to us?

Brad Ellsworth: Right, and I’ll review the contract on, the original contract that we signed with them. That was at the recommendation of the DOC. They said why don’t you hire this guy and have him come down. It’s kind of weird they’re putting their money, the DOC, and people that buy into Latessa’s program is where they’re lending, that’s where they’re financing. So, that was kind of on their suggestion that we contracted with Latessa.

Commissioner Crouch: Can you also check with DOC to see if this report is crucial, or weighs in at all on their decision as to the $2 million that they will allot us?

Brad Ellsworth: Right. I don’t think it will. I’ve had enough discussion with Mike Brown and those people, that I don’t think you’re going to see...they know we’re doing that. It’s sideways. That’s more of a report to help us, a check and balance that we’re doing the right things out there for Community Corrections. I don’t think, I mean, the meetings that we had–

Commissioner Fanello: Right.

Brad Ellsworth: –they never mentioned wait and see what he does. It was just, in fact, I think the fact that we were going through this, Latessa’s program, helped influence that they would give us some money. That we were willing to go through that. I think we’re going to fare well. I think, according to Major Woodall from the interviews with the graduate assistants that are down, is, they like our program. I don’t think everything will be perfect, but I think we’re going to be pleasantly surprised with what they see us doing out there.

Commissioner Fanello: Well, why don’t you get back with us–

Brad Ellsworth: Let me see what I can find out this week.

Commissioner Fanello: –on that over the next week. In the meantime, I believe, we still need to be looking at the information we do, which is a report that the prior Commission paid for from PMSI, which did lay out the recommendations for Community Corrections facility. So, that was $100,000 spent right there, and I don’t know why we can’t take that information and use it.

Brad Ellsworth: It’s been a long debate. You know I’ve had anywhere from 125 beds, up to 350 beds or more. We’ve argued that out for a couple years.

Commissioner Fanello: I think, really, the only thing that’s going to drive it is what this county can afford.

Brad Ellsworth: Can afford.

Commissioner Fanello: I’m getting ready to inform this board of the discussion that was, that had taken place at the County Council meeting, at the last meeting.

President Mosby: Okay.

Commissioner Fanello: That kind of leads into that discussion that happened at the last Council meeting.

President Mosby: Okay.

Commissioner Fanello: Basically, as you know, the County Council had made a commitment to set aside $2.7 million each year to help fund the jail project. That was done, basically, upon recommendations of the Council, and they thought that the $35 million was what we could afford, and the $2.7 would be the amount, which would probably equate to our lease payment. Unfortunately, the Council did announce at the last Council meeting that they would not be able to set aside the $2.7 million this year. If everybody got, the Auditor put a financial statement in our packets last Friday, or last Monday, so everybody’s had a chance to review it. You can kind of see where we’re at right now, which is not a very good position. So, I think, you know, that with the Community Corrections issue, we’re only going to be able to do what we can afford to do. I’m kind of concerned at this point that we’re not setting aside the $2.7 million, because I made my decision, basically, on the fact that the Council told us $35 million is what we can afford. Now, I’m not sure we can afford this, and we’re getting ready to issue a bond issue here in a couple of months. So, I’m very concerned about that, and would like to hear from the Board, from their feelings on the issue.

President Mosby: I mean, I would have to hear the Council’s end of it. I mean, it might be that we have the Council President or the Finance Chairman come into the meeting...is it on? Have one of them come in and explain to us where they stand on the $2.7 million, and they how they intend to go forward with this. You know, what their intent is. If we can afford the $2.7 million. I don’t know. I mean, the Auditor is here, but, and the former Auditor.

Commissioner Crouch: Well, unfortunately, Vanderburgh County has fallen victim to the same circumstances that the state and the national economy has. When your interest income is down, which is a major source of revenue to the General Fund, and your COIT’s down, that can’t help but have an impact. So, I mean, I think that things change that cause people to have to re-evaluate situations, and make judgements and determinations based upon those changing situations.

Commissioner Fanello: I think you had given us projections, I can’t remember for how long, is it possible for, you know, our now County Auditor to go back and revise those projections? I would kind of like to see where this county is going to be over the next three to five years, based on where we are right now in the economy. I’m very concerned, because we have a lot of projects on the table, and, you know, the city is going to build a new baseball stadium, we have the schools are going to issue, you know, taxes are going to go up because of the referendum. So, I don’t think our seniors can afford much more. I’m very concerned about where we are.

Bill Fluty: Well, Catherine, as on the federal level or the state level, it’s come to Evansville right now.

Commissioner Fanello: Right.

Bill Fluty: We seem to do well a lot longer than some of the other counties, but it’s hit us at this point. There is some good news. We are just bonding out at $35 million, instead of $65 million, which was proposed at one time. The Council had the good fortune to put $5 million away for over a two year period, and they actually set aside their COIT Windfall. So, they have been prudent in saving for hard times, and they are here now. So, we will have to be careful with our budget, and with our projects, that we do pick the right project, and do the best that we can. We will have to pick and choose from here on out.

Commissioner Fanello: Well, but as it stands right now, what concerns me is that we can’t, it doesn’t look from this that, you know, even next year they are probably going to be able to set aside the 2.7. So, that’s why I’m asking you if maybe you could take the original projections that were given to us by the former Auditor, and revise those projections, and show us where, basically, what we’re looking at financially.

Bill Fluty: You’re working with a bond counsel currently. What are their suggestions to you at this time? Because I know you’re ready to let this shortly, so you have some information. Can you share that with us?

Commissioner Fanello: Well, they had suggestions on how we should finance the project, but those are–

Bill Fluty: Well, I think that should be shared.

Commissioner Fanello: –weren’t needed. But, what I’m referring to is what, Suzanne did some projections for us, and that’s what the Council worked off of to be able to decide what they could afford. So, I guess, what I’m looking at, since things have changed, is if you could go back, and maybe revise those projections.

President Mosby: I think, if I’m not mistaken, the bond counsel, I think, at one time, said when we started this that we couldn’t afford the $2.7 million.

Commissioner Fanello: Right. We had a meeting with, you’re correct.

President Mosby: I mean, they gave us that in writing.

Commissioner Fanello: Right.

President Mosby: That we were never going to be able to, but we could, yes, if everything else come to a stand still. I think that’s what’s happened here. I mean, and I understand everything you just said was pretty well correct, but when we were talking about building $60 million, we were also talking about alternative financing. It was the Council that said they didn’t want to do the $60 million, they wanted to do the $35 million, because they could afford it. Now, it’s come to the point, we can’t even put $2.7 million aside. It used to be we took Local Option Income Tax and put two or three million towards roads and streets too. Well, they cut that out a year or two ago. They cut it down to a million, and then to nothing. I mean, so, you know, they’ve taken that four or five million and shifted it. Now, they’re saying we can’t even put the jail money aside. So, I mean, you know, where are we? I think that’s what we need to hear from, you know, the Council.

Commissioner Fanello: Just to let you know, there are other counties who are building jails right now who have looked at alternative financing, and one of them is Clark County, who looked at the, who has taken up the issue, and did exactly what we wanted to do when we took office, and what was proposed by the bond counsel. So, you know, the bond counsel was very frank with us when they met with us that, yes, we could probably set aside the $2.7 million if we didn’t, if expenses didn’t go up, and we ran a very, very, very tight ship. I don’t think that that’s just feasible.

Commissioner Crouch: And revenues considered to grow–

Commissioner Fanello: Right.

Commissioner Crouch: –which hasn’t happened. So, we’re a victim of the economy. I think that perhaps what would be helpful is if President Mosby would contact President Raben and ask his thoughts on that, and report back to this Commission.

President Mosby: I mean, I’ll be more than glad to ask him. I’ll be more than glad to ask him to come down and speak with us, because, I mean, it concerns me when I look at the General Fund. I mean, there’s not that much there in COIT Windfall. I mean, together is not going to handle what this county needs, plus $2.7 million to be put aside for the jail. So, I mean, that’s my biggest concern, I guess, at this point is to find out where we’re heading.

Commissioner Fanello: I guess, I would maybe ask that you also maybe pass some information along to him of, you know, some suggestions from other people who talk about county budgets, and I think they need to look at, whenever they do the budget this year, they don’t need to just look at 2004's budget. They need to be looking at three and four and five year budgets. Because I don’t know that we’re going to, the economy is going to quickly turn around, and we need to be planning for the next three, four, five years.

President Mosby: Is there any other questions? I’ll contact Councilman Raben.

Madelyn Grayson: May we make a tape change please?

President Mosby: Sure.

(Tape Changed)

Madelyn Grayson: Thank you.

President Mosby: Is there any other Old Business?

President Mosby: Any New Business?

Commissioner Fanello: I’ve got a couple of things. Sorry.

President Mosby: Go ahead.

Commissioner Fanello: One thing that I did have that was, I will pass a copy to each of you. This is actually the suggestion of our Chief Deputy, Eric Williams, whenever we talked a few weeks ago about purchasing procedures, and bidding procedures, you know, I said that we have to have more communication, and we need to step up the involvement, and the review process. Chief Williams was kind enough to pass along an idea of a form that we could possibly use, and I think that this Board ought to think about doing that, and involving all of the offices whenever we advertise bids, and making sure that communication has taken place between each department. So, I’ll give that to you for your consideration, and your thoughts on that. If you have any changes to it, just let us know.

Madelyn Grayson: Is there a copy for the record?

Commissioner Fanello: You can have David’s copy. I had two other small things, Commissioner Mosby. I met with, excuse me, Mayor Lloyd a couple of weeks ago, and continuing our discussions about our contract with ACS, and he feels and I feel that we probably should have someone help us with the contract negotiations, because we are looking at a totally different contract with ACS. Something that is more in line with the services that we should be receiving. I can make a copy of this for everyone after the meeting. I forgot to make it before the meeting, but will give it to you to look at over the next week, and would like your input on it, and how you would like to proceed. So, I’ll make sure that everybody gets a copy about that. I talked to Chief Williams before the meeting also about some ideas about handling the negotiations, and think it would be a good idea if we probably put together a small committee with Data Board members who would help move those negotiations along with Gartner, if we choose to hire Gartner to help us with the negotiations. I had one more thing. I contacted the County Attorney a couple of weeks ago about a couple of claims that the County Auditor was kind of hesitant about paying. Both of them are insurance items. One of them was insurance on the O’Day Discovery Lodge, which is a builders risk policy. One of them is title insurance for our property that we will be purchasing at Wansford Yard. Kevin can probably expound on the issue, but the fact of the matter is he has checked with the State Board of Accounts, and it is appropriate for us to pay both of these items out of the Insurance line item. I know that Bill had a little bit of a problem with that, and he may want to explain his position, but Kevin did bring this to me on Thursday or Friday to let me know that he had talked with the State Board of Accounts in Indianapolis, and that they were perfectly okay with us paying these out of the Insurance line item, since they were both insurance claims. So, they have not been paid, and I was concerned because they were still laying on our desk. I wanted to bring them to the Board to see exactly how they wanted to proceed on those.

Bill Fluty: Catherine, those claims are for title insurance, which is part of the project, the jail project, and the other one is builders risk. Builders risk we haven’t paid before. Normally that’s been done by the contractor. Title searches, title insurance has been paid at closing when the bonds are issued, historically. The 1300 account for Insurance is really for liability. It wasn’t budgeted for that purpose. To keep our line item budgeting on track, we’ve asked to pay certain things from certain line items. Already this year that account has fallen short, and one of the reasons was the P.O. that was put in place for that $54,000–

Commissioner Fanello: That’s not the reason, we still have $50,000 in there.

Bill Fluty: Yes, that’s true, but, it wouldn’t have been as short as it was. I’ve talked to Tom Simpson with the State Board of Accounts, who’s the head of the southern half of the audits for the counties. He’s in agreement that that is not the proper place to pay it from. That either out of your Land money, the million one you have is a better place, or at the time of the closing for the bonds. I’ve talked to Allen Linnenweber, who’s also here, and he’s in that agreement. I did talk to Tammy White, she is in agreement with me that that is not the proper place to pay it, but she says you can. Ultimately, you can pay it out of that, and that was also the same remarks that Bruce Hartman with the State had. That, yes, you can, but it’s not the thing you should be doing.

Commissioner Fanello: Well, it’s really a mute point, because it gets reimbursed out of the bond issue. So, it’s really actually a mute point.

Bill Fluty: We haven’t had that discussion before, that it would be reimbursed.

Commissioner Fanello: The builders risk insurance, there is no reason why that can’t be taken out of the Insurance account. Absolutely none.

Bill Fluty: They believe it would a better fit out of the project.

Commissioner Fanello: Well, that’s different than the conversation that Mr. Winternheimer had. Maybe (Inaudible).

Kevin Winternheimer: When I talked to Tammy White she said it was the Commissioners call. They would not have a problem with taking it out of that account when they do their audit. That what monies are paid out of that account for what insurance items are the Commissioners call, not the Council’s or the Auditor’s. Interestingly enough, she agreed with me in that regard. I don’t know what the two auditors here feel exactly, but that was the person I was directed to. I contacted the Indianapolis main office, and they said that was no one’s call other than the Commissioners.

Bill Fluty: I actually talked to Tammy at length after I received your e-mail on Friday. What she told me is, she believes it’s not the right account, not what you should be doing, but she agrees you can make that call, and actually pay it out of that account. Two different issues.

Commissioner Fanello: Why wouldn’t it be appropriate to pay insurance out of an insurance account?

Bill Fluty: It should be paid out of the bond closing.

Commissioner Fanello: No, I’m talking about the builders risk on Burdette Park building.

President Mosby: There is no project–

Bill Fluty: It should be out of the project’s fund, the CCD, the original cost.

President Mosby: The project is already $250,000 short.

Commissioner Fanello: Right.

President Mosby: That actually was brought up at Council last month, and still is not resolved. So, I mean you have an Insurance account, why would you not pay insurance out of it?

Bill Fluty: It wasn’t budgeted for that purpose.

Commissioner Fanello: Insurance is budgeted for insurance. We’re the one’s in control of our insurance budget.

Bill Fluty: There’s a difference between budgeting for insurance and projects.

Commissioner Crouch: If I may jump in, as Auditor, what the State Board of Accounts would always advise us is, you know, there’s a way to do it, and then there’s another way. Sometimes they take exceptions to the other way, and sometimes they don’t. But, ultimately, it’s the Commissioners call on whether a claim is approved. That’s why in the past claims have come before this body when there was a question, and then it’s ultimately, at least that’s how it was always explained to me. Whatever the Commission decides, is what is done. Is that not your understanding?

Bill Fluty: That’s correct. You can decide to pay it out. We haven’t gotten to that point. That was always something that we could have gotten to. We didn’t discuss that, but, yes, that’s true.

Commissioner Fanello: I kept getting the claims back. Tammy kept giving them back to me. So, that’s why I gave it to Kevin, because I was concerned mainly, not as much about the title insurance, because that could wait, but, mainly concerned about the builders risk insurance for the O’Day Discovery Lodge. Especially, since it’s under construction.

Commissioner Crouch: If you entertain a motion, and it’s voted on by this body, it can be paid. The Auditor will have to pay it. I will vote against it, but if you ultimately make a motion, and you vote to have those paid, then the Auditor must pay them out of those accounts.

President Mosby: Can I ask you what your reason would be for voting against builders risk insurance?

Commissioner Crouch: What has always been the practice is that there must be consistency. If it hasn’t been done in the past, then that is, that would be what I would rely upon with the State Board of Accounts, is consistency. If it’s not been paid out of that line item, then that would be something, in terms of keeping better...what the State Board of Accounts is concerned about is keeping track of money, and keeping a good line item. We’ve encountered that many times with grant monies that we’ve had to kind of go around about in terms of having a paper trail for it. So, the consistency, and then the clear paper trail, and the clear accounting trail to a particular account would be the reasons.

President Mosby: Then where would you offer a suggestion for it to be paid from? What would be your suggestion? I mean, we need, we have to have builders risk insurance.

Commissioner Crouch: Well, I believe the Auditor said out of the project.

President Mosby: There is no money in the project.

Commissioner Crouch: Right, in the line item.

President Mosby: No, we just went back to Council last month, and Steve Craig is not here, but Gary is, we just asked for $245,000, and they turned it down. Now, I mean, if you go back, and you should remember this project, it started well before I was here. We’ve tried, and tried, and tried to get this project off the ground. We finally did it with CCD money the first of January 2001 when we came into office. This project finally got off the ground, and they whacked $435,000 out of it at that point in time. Steve Craig has in turn went from $435,000 down to $240,000, and that’s what we’re still short. So, I mean, there is no money to pay this. I mean, you have an insurance account. You have money in an insurance account, and you need builders risk insurance.

Commissioner Fanello: And I have a claim made out to ONB Insurance–

President Mosby: So, I mean, I don’t understand that.

Bill Fluty: Just let me, I understand that you are short on money, but we are still trying to pay out of, we have a line item budget. There’s a method of asking for more money through appropriations or transferring more money. That’s how we do line items that are short, or funds that are short of money, we move money into those accounts.

President Mosby: Well, we just did that last month.

Bill Fluty: It’s unfortunate you don’t have money in there, but that’s what we do.

Commissioner Fanello: Well, I’m going to be against paying an insurance item out of a building account. So, I will vote against that.

Commissioner Crouch: Well, why don’t you make a motion, and we’ll just move this along.

President Mosby: No, but, I mean, after what he just said. I mean, he was at the Council meeting last Wednesday. He knows that they turned the appropriation down.

Bill Fluty: Two separate issues, David.

President Mosby: Okay, but how can we pay something if we have no money? You’re sitting there saying take it out of the project, and you know as well as I do they turned it down. We don’t even have money to put the lighting up. We don’t have money to do anything out there outside of build the building. I mean, I don’t know where the money is going to come from.

Bill Fluty: I believe you’ve got an appropriation in this month for that.

President Mosby: Yeah, we’ll see what happens.

Commissioner Fanello: Right, and that appropriation, I believe, was made out of COIT Windfall, which went in line with the February 6, 2002 minutes, which stated, or Councilman Raben stated that those extra items should be paid out of the COIT Windfall. Or could be paid out of the COIT Windfall.

President Mosby: I mean, I put a call in for Councilman Raben and Councilman Winnecke both last Friday. One of them was supposed to have gotten back to Tammy before 4:30, and neither one of them called. So, I mean, we filed the appropriation.

Commissioner Fanello: Well, I would like to make a motion to pay ONB Insurance for builders risk insurance out of the Commissioners Insurance line item.

President Mosby: Second, and so ordered.

Commissioner Fanello: And I have no problem holding up on the title insurance until we get closer to closing on the land. I don’t have any problem doing that. But, I still think that it can be paid at that time, if the bond hasn’t been issued, out of the Insurance account, because it’s going to get reimbursed from the bond issue.

President Mosby: Any other New Business? Okay, department head reports.

President Mosby: County Engineer, John Stoll.

John Stoll: First item, I would like to request the Commissioners approve condemnation on the Greer parcel on the Mt. Pleasant Road Project. The original offer amount was $5,650. Mr. Greer countered with $12,500. The right-of-way buyer since contacted Mr. Greer, since we rejected the $12,500 counter offer, and Mr. Greer stated that he is not willing to accept anything less than $12,500. He provided no documentation to justify his additional $6,850 that he is asking for. So, I would like to request that we proceed with condemnation on that parcel.

Commissioner Fanello: So moved.

Commissioner Crouch: Second.

President Mosby: So ordered.

John Stoll: Next I have a temporary right-of-way form for the Commissioners to sign off on. This is on the Graff Road culvert installation project. This is for a temporary right-of-way off the property owned by James Riger. He’s on the downstream end of this culvert we’re going to install, and, basically, we need to do grading work, and rip rap placement on his property.

President Mosby: Okay. Is there a cost?

John Stoll: No.

President Mosby: Oh, well.

John Stoll: No, there’s no cost on it.

President Mosby: There’s no problem with that whatsoever.

John Stoll: It’s a donation.

Commissioner Fanello: Do we need a motion?

President Mosby: Yeah.

Commissioner Fanello: So moved.

Commissioner Crouch: Second.

President Mosby: So ordered.

John Stoll: Next I have a soils agreement with Alt & Witzig Engineering for an amount of $4,000. This is for a soils investigation of the Oak Hill Road/St. George Road intersection project. It’s requested that this be approved.

Commissioner Fanello: So moved.

Commissioner Crouch: Second.

President Mosby: So ordered.

John Stoll: The last item I’ve got is a modified agreement with Bernardin Lochmueller and Associates for changes to the access road to access the proposed jail site. This is for, this agreement is for an amount not to exceed $126,000. The previous agreement was for $141,900. They have since done $7,500 worth of work. So, this agreement would be for a net savings of $8,400. This agreement calls for Bernardin Lochmueller to change the scope of work to go from crossing the railroad tracks and accessing Highway 41, to going more straight north to tie into the existing portion of Harlan Avenue, and then also tie into St. George Road, as they proposed back in the, I don’t remember what study it was, but the study they did last fall. They had three options, and this is one of those options that was presented then. I’ve got some aerial photos showing the proposed alignment, but, basically, this was an off-shoot of the meeting that was held out at the proposed railroad crossing site several weeks ago with INDOT and CSX officials. The CSX engineers were not in favor of the railroad crossing site. Primarily because there were two different crossings that would have to be constructed. The way it was set up previously the road was going to cross the tracks at this location right here. Because there was a separation, I believe it’s 125' between the two tracks at CSX, initially we thought we would have to construct two separate crossings. At that meeting, the field check with the CSX and INDOT engineers, they had stated at that time that we needed to take this rail line and realign it so that way both tracks would be crossed with a single crossing, instead of having two crossings. So, that would, in effect, add about $300,000 of track reconstruction to the project costs that was not foreseen previously. So, after that, other options were looked at, and that’s why this was re-evaluated again. What this calls for is, basically, building new road from here on south. This would just upgrade the existing portion of Harlan Avenue. What they’ve called for is a 36' wide pavement here that would provide a parking lane for these cars that you can see that are parking out on the Vectren property right here. This road would also be a curb and gutter street with storm sewers. So, hopefully, it will alleviate some of the drainage issues that are out there. I’ve spoken with Vectren representatives, and showed them these plans, and they have no problem with granting easements across their property to make this happen. Basically, that is in this area right here, and there’s also a small segment down here by this other tower. Same with CSX, it’s my understanding that they’re willing to grant these additional easements to go from this point where it was originally going to cross the tracks, northward up, basically, in this area right through here. So, that’s basically what the scope of work is for the revised agreement with Bernardin.

President Mosby: Also, I mean, I can add to this for you. We did meet, me and John went and met with the Mayor and Pat Keepes–

John Stoll: Jim Cameron.

President Mosby: –out of the Water and Sewer Utility. They are in agreement with this project also going down to St. George, because the Water and Sewer Utility is paying half of the cost of this whole project. They were going to pay half the cost of the project if we crossed the tracks. At one point, which was $1.35 million, and then with the added expense of what INDOT and CSX was wanting us to realign the rail and run it parallel, was going to be anywhere from another $250,000 to $350,000. So, we can get into this whole project with contingencies for $1.35 million. That’s what renewing this agreement. Like I say, the Mayor is in favor of it. Jim Cameron is in favor of it. They are going to pay half the costs, and we’ve got Vectren’s blessing, I believe, and waiting to hear back from CSX. But, initial contact with them is okay. They are going to dedicate their easement. There is no money exchanged between CSX or Vectren, either one. They are both doing it.

Commissioner Crouch: Have we notified the neighbors? Are they aware of this proposed change?

President Mosby: Not yet. I mean, that’s something we were going to go out and try to hold, possibly, a meeting. We had talked about this last Friday to hold an on-site meeting with, I think there’s 16 houses along Harlan.

John Stoll: I think there’s 20.

President Mosby: 16-20 houses along Harlan Avenue. We wanted to get this from Bernardin Lochmueller. We wanted to present it to the Mayor, and make sure we had the okay of the Water and Sewer Utility, and that they would still do their 50%. They were all in agreement. We had to make sure we could get the easement right-of-ways from everybody, but it is our intent to send a letter to the neighbors out there, and hold some type of a meeting with the neighbors, and show them what we’ve got. I mean, that’s why we went to the extent that we did on the 36', which gives everybody out there a parking lane. The road will be shifted 10' to the east to back it away from the houses. They will end up with 10' more green space. They will end up with 10' extensions on their driveways. I mean, as John said, they are going to get a storm sewer for once where it’s flat land, and it’s not draining very well. So, it’s very much an improvement to the neighborhood. They are going to get a totally new street.

Commissioner Crouch: Well, and I certainly think it’s admirable where we can look at a project and realize a cost savings, but, I think, when you have a decision that’s going to impact people’s homes and where they live and raise their families, we really need to have that input. I would suggest that we entertain having a public hearing here at the Commission, perhaps, where it could be laid out for them. I mean, I think have a meeting there with them, certainly, but, I think, something that affects people this much, we probably ought to have a public hearing here at this Commission.

President Mosby: We can have it here. Our thought was we, there’s a possibility we can get a place right out there by them where they won’t have to travel very far. To hold it right out there in the neighborhood, to me, would be better than trying to run them down here, find a parking spot, maybe at an inconvenient time. It was our every bit first thought to look at the neighborhood and take their homes and lives into consideration, and that’s exactly what we did. I mean, we even identified the drainage problem that they have, and we’re willing to correct that too. So, I mean, they’re going to, that is definitely our first intent, is to make sure it’s okay with them. But, we have to do this because we’re changing the scope of Bernardin’s work now, and save what, $15,000 to $20,000 in doing it.

Commissioner Crouch: Would you...oh, I’m sorry, John.

John Stoll: I was going to say, the scope of work in there does define that Bernardin Lochmueller would provide the legal descriptions for the easements we need off of Vectren, as well as the legal descriptions for the easements from CSX. So, that way, it’s my understanding, that’s the hold up on being able to close on the property. So, at least it would allow that to proceed as well. In regard to the property owner notification, something else that we did last year too was, once the plans were developed for the Elmridge and Congress drainage project, we sent out a set of plans to every homeowner who was affected. So, in addition to any hearings we might hold, we can also get them a set of the plans, once we get to that stage.

Commissioner Crouch: If we agree to this tonight, and, just walk me through the process. If we agree to this tonight, to this change with Bernardin Lochmueller’s agreement, and then, ultimately, the neighbors express enough concerns or enough points that we would want to reconsider that, will that be money that we will have wasted?

John Stoll: I would say potentially some of it could be, because anything that would be done north of the old proposal of tying into the tracks and Highway 41, anything north of there, if we backtrack and went back across the tracks over to 41, then anything north of that would be wasted. But, anything south of there, it would be basically the same road.

Commissioner Crouch: So, should we have a public hearing before we ultimately arrive at the decision and move forward?

Commissioner Fanello: I think they could be done concurrently, but we have to decide if we want to spend that extra money of moving across the tracks. I mean, we basically have a couple of options here, and we’re trying to go with the least expensive option.

John Stoll: Another factor too, I mean, there may be some people up there that may not like this, but the request from CSX also said that they would want us to close three railroad crossings in exchange for us establishing one new crossing. So, if they held us to that commitment, it would impact quite a few more people as well. I don’t know what three crossings we could even look at that would potentially not impact quite a few people.

Commissioner Crouch: I guess, with all the discussion about process in public projects, and the public’s input with it, I really think it’s the right thing to go ahead and have a hearing prior to arriving to a decision that is going to spend money.

Commissioner Fanello: Well, I mean, excuse me, what is your other option if all 20 houses object to a road? What is your other option?

Commissioner Crouch: Well, I think, we have to arrive at the decision, but to not allow people input is the wrong way to go about it.

Commissioner Fanello: I think, Commissioner Mosby specifically stated that we were going to, we want their input.

President Mosby: I’m more than willing, and we said that, me and John was talking about it the other day, and we told the Mayor we would go out and meet with them. You know, without going out and hearing their input. I mean, we have talked to Pat Keepes, we know what kind of drainage problems we have. We know it was put on the list with Clark Dietz when they did the storm water study back when I was still on the Council. I mean, we’ve looked at the improved lanes, we’ve looked at the parking, we know they were using the Vectren easement to park on. We’re going to put curbs on it. I mean, there’s no doubt we’ve looked at everything for that neighborhood. That’s why we’re shifting the road. That’s why we’re giving them more green space. We’re giving them longer driveways. I mean, it’s not like we haven’t taken, you know, the neighborhood into consideration, because they are probably getting a lot more than in a lot of cases.

Commissioner Crouch: I’m not faulting that. I know you’ve spent a lot of time on it. I’m just saying that I think people’s input on things that, on something that is their largest investment in their lives, deserves to be heard. I mean, we deserve to allow them a voice before we arrive at a decision that is going to ultimately affect them.

John Stoll: I was going to say, one other potential benefit that Sheriff Ellsworth pointed out, this may eliminate the need for having to construct the secondary access point off of Kentucky and Pfeiffer as well. So, there might be some cost savings with that, since this access point would not be blocked by trains, where the other one would have been.

Commissioner Fanello: You mentioned someone’s name. I didn’t hear the first part of that. Did you mention somebody’s name that you talked to ?

John Stoll: The Sheriff.

Commissioner Fanello: Okay. I didn’t hear what you said.

Commissioner Crouch: Well, could we, you know, would the Commission entertain a public hearing, not this coming Monday, but the following Monday, and move forward in that direction? At least notify the neighbors and allow them to come and to speak regarding the issue.

President Mosby: Do you want to do it here?

Commissioner Crouch: Well, the only concern would be having a place where, you know, have your sound system set up.

President Mosby: That’s okay with me.

John Stoll: Do you want me to just notify the people immediately abutting the proposed road?

President Mosby: You know, the 16 or 20–

John Stoll: I just want to make sure we notify the right people.

President Mosby: The 16 or 20 along Harlan right here, is the one’s that I would notify.

Commissioner Fanello: Because we’ve had several public hearings on the jail project itself in that area, and no one has come forward in that area.

John Stoll: Okay, so immediately–

President Mosby: Nobody else is going to be affected when it goes on down.

John Stoll: No. Nobody that wasn’t already affected. The alignment’s basically not changing south of the originally proposed railroad crossing. So, anything south of there, if those people would have been impacted they would have already had their opportunity to comment on it. So, no changes would occur there, but I can get a list of the owners, and send some notification out to them.

President Mosby: Or we can do it here. That’s fine.

Commissioner Fanello: That’s fine.

Commissioner Crouch: Okay.

Commissioner Fanello: Are we still going to proceed with the agreement so that Bernardin can get the legal descriptions together? Because we actually–

President Mosby: We need to.

Commissioner Crouch: I guess, I’m not comfortable voting on that until we allow people to have their input.

President Mosby: I’ll make a motion we proceed.

Commissioner Fanello: I’ll second, because I think Bernardin Lochmueller still needs to continue working. Whatever they do, I’m not going to, I think we’re going to have very good dialogue with the neighbors. Depending on what that outcome is, I mean, we’re not going to....we need the legal description so that we can close on the property.

John Stoll: I would say, ballpark guess would be that, for the most part, the next two weeks they might get the survey work completed, but I wouldn’t see a whole lot of additional work that may potentially be wasted would be done. The last time that they did the survey from the proposed railroad crossing south, it took a couple of weeks to work that into their schedule. So, I would say the survey work would be about the extent of what might get done. That’s what I’m hearing.

Commissioner Fanello: Well, knowing what budget crunches we’re under, I mean, I would hate for us to move forward, I mean, obviously, the crossing of railroad tracks is a viable option, and it’s definitely an option on the table, but I would really hate to spend an extra $250,000 to $325,000 when I know that we could do a road, you know, that would cost us less money. We have had I don’t know how many public hearings on this jail project, so.

President Mosby: A motion and a second. So ordered.

Madelyn Grayson: Excuse me. Kevin, is that something that will require legal advertising on our part? The public hearing?

Kevin Winternheimer: No. He’s going to directly contact the property owners by letter, I believe you said, John.

John Stoll: Yeah, I can do that.

Commissioner Fanello: Do we need to go ahead and make a motion about? We didn’t really actually make a motion–

President Mosby: It would just be–

Commissioner Fanello: You did.

President Mosby: It’s just going to be an agenda item, right? Or do you want to do it before the meeting?

John Stoll: However you want to do it, I’m okay with it.

President Mosby: Don’t matter to me.

John Stoll: We can just set it up as an agenda item, if that works for you.

President Mosby: We’ll just, Tammy, we’ll just put it under action items, public hearing.

Commissioner Fanello: Did you make a motion for the public hearing, or a motion for the contract?

President Mosby: I made a motion for the contract to move along.

Commissioner Fanello: That’s what I just asked him, did we have a motion for the public hearing.

President Mosby: We don’t need a motion, it’s just going to be on the discussion items.

Commissioner Fanello: Okay.

President Mosby: So, we’ll just put it on for March 31^st, and it will be first up on the agenda, and we’ll just do it at 5:30.

John Stoll: Okay.

President Mosby: If you will, just go ahead and send the letters out, and anybody that wants to contact the office and ask what it’s about, can contact you or us.

John Stoll: Okay. I’ll get them sent out.

President Mosby: Okay.

Commissioner Fanello: If the neighbors have any questions before then, if they happen to call you, let them know that anyone of the Commissioners would be happy to sit down and talk with them.

President Mosby: If that happens, I’ll just go out there. It’s no problem.

John Stoll: I get the letters sent out.

President Mosby: Any other questions? Thank you, John.

John Stoll: That’s all I had.

President Mosby: Okay, thanks.

Madelyn Grayson: May we make a quick tape change?

President Mosby: Sure.

(Tape Changed)

Madelyn Grayson: Thank you.

President Mosby: County Garage, Dennis Hudnall. County Highway.

Dennis Hudnall: Good evening, Dennis Hudnall, County Highway. First of all I had spoke with Mr. Allen Brown of Pioneer Rail, well they call it Indiana Southwest and Pioneer Rail. Excuse me. Last week we discussed fixing three crossings; Allens Lane, or St. Joe, Boonville-New Harmony, and Mill Road railroad crossings. His proposal is that we, meaning the Commissioners, okay an expense of $6,000 per crossing to buy concrete panels versus paving over them. So, we probably need to make a decision whether we want to spend the money. They are going to furnish all the labor and everything, but they want us to pay for the panels. Now, there is a 50' right-of-way from the center of the tracks each side. So, there is two scenarios, if you decide to buy the panels, all we have to do is get them delivered out, and they will furnish the material. The other scenario is I pave right over the railroad tracks. They meld them down after they’re repaired.

President Mosby: I like the one paving over them. I do. I like the one of paving right over them.

Dennis Hudnall: And that’s what we have done in the past, pave over them, and then they run the engine across them to free up the rail. They’re looking for between $7,000 and $8,000 per crossing. I spoke with John Stoll, and I think John spoke with Mr. Brown this week, and John and I agree that it would probably be more than that. It would be on the high end probably at $10,000 a crossing.

John Stoll: I was going to say, the last estimate that Mr. Brown gave me was $185 per foot for the pre-cast panels. So, if we needed, I think I figured around 35' ballpark for a crossing, that would be about $6,500 for the panels. That was a price that he had given me late last year. So, I don’t know if there have been any cost increases on those items since then.

Dennis Hudnall: He also added that there would be a delivery charge for the concrete panels. So, that would be added to the $6,500.

Commissioner Crouch: You’re in favor of not doing the concrete, David?

President Mosby: I don’t see why the Vanderburgh County residents should be held responsible for railroad tracks. That bugs me. Why, you know, Pioneer Railroad cannot be, you know, liable for their tracks is what I’m saying. I mean, this is four tracks that we know of. How many other tracks will we end up fixing–

Commissioner Crouch: With other–

President Mosby: Well, with other railroads, or this company itself. I mean, I can see us opening, this could be a nightmare. We’re going to set a precedent I’m afraid.

Commissioner Crouch: I’m not sure I disagree with you.

President Mosby: I mean, I don’t know what other solution there is. I know these tracks are pitiful. I mean–

Dennis Hudnall: We’ve temporarily, right now, patched them to where they’re cross able, but it’s not going to last long. So, we need to either pave them, or do something. I’m getting a lot of complaints on them right now.

President Mosby: I mean, that’s the thing. I feel sorry for the public. The taxpayer that has to drive over them, it’s going to tear their car up. Why there’s not someway of holding Pioneer liable. Kevin, is there anything that we can do legal wise?

Kevin Winternheimer: Yeah, there is a process out there to get them to repair them. The, what you run into typically is after you go through it, they will patch. It may be not be the repair you like, but if it sort of does the job minimally, that’s all you can make them do. Other than that, it’s up to the goodwill of the railroad as to how good a crossing they are actually going to make. I don’t think you could make them do the concrete crossing, but you could make them patch it. That’s about all you’re going to get, if you’re not willing to do more.

Dennis Hudnall: Well, they haven’t responded to the request to patch them. That’s why I went ahead and sent our crews out to do that. All three of them that I reviewed were in such bad shape that somebody’s vehicle is going to get damaged pretty bad. So, we’ve got them cross able right now, but you’re looking at probably a month, or a month and a half, that’s all that’s going to last, and I’m going to have to go do it again. So, in the past we’ve paved over them. It’s, the longevity of the crossing is probably three or four years, versus concrete panels you’re looking at ten years maybe. But, we still do all the approaches on the...we still have an expense to do part of them anyway.

Commissioner Crouch: I’m in agreement with President Mosby.

Commissioner Fanello: Just for the record, so am I. We’re all in agreement.

President Mosby: Well, I mean, I don’t know what else to do outside of, and I think we hold their feet to the fire. If we have to file whatever, you know, whatever the procedure is, I say we go ahead and file it.

Dennis Hudnall: Well, they wanted a decision, it doesn’t make any difference, if you buy the panels, they put the panels in. If you don’t buy the panels, we’re going to pave over them. So, it’s just a matter of getting a decision before you to see what avenue we would take. In the past we’ve paved them. It saves quite a bit of money.

President Mosby: Now do we pave them, or do they?

Dennis Hudnall: Well, we pave the approaches to them, but to get them smooth we’ll just pave the approach and over the railroad tracks, and to the other approach also. So, we still have a little expense that we’re helping out the railroad, but for our residents in the county it’s a heck of a lot better than having them throw some patch in there, and it’s still, you know, it will tear their cars up. Like Kevin said, they’re only responsible to do minimum level of repairs on them.

Commissioner Crouch: Just out of curiosity, Kevin, if they would damage their car, who’s liable for that?

Kevin Winternheimer: In my opinion, the railroad is. They are supposed to maintain them.

Commissioner Crouch: Of course, most of the residents that are crossing them don’t realize that. They hold us responsible.

President Mosby: Exactly. Everybody thinks it’s the county’s responsibility. That’s what we’re going through at the Garage right now. What did you say they got, or John one said they have 50',

Dennis Hudnall: Madelyn had sent me some minutes from the past discussions on these, and I was reading, and it stated in there that the railroad was responsible for 50' from the center line of the railroad. We’re responsible for the approaches after that.

President Mosby: Okay. Call them back and tell them we had discussion. I guess, pave over them.

Dennis Hudnall: Okay. I agree with that too.

President Mosby: Let them cut it, and then if there is anyway, if they come back out, I say we file suit against them for some type of a permanent fix, rather than us keep expending taxpayer money to take care of their right-of-way.

Dennis Hudnall: Okay. I’ll give them a call. The second item is a few weeks ago we accepted bids on a flush truck, which we’re going to need to meet the requirements of Indiana EPA. I reviewed the specs on them that we submitted to the bidders. Phil Lawrence had sent these out. The only one that responded to it was Deeds Equipment. They sent us two bids; one for a new flush truck, and one for an alternate used flush truck. After reviewing the specs on it, the used one does not meet the specs, because it’s got a smaller engine, less PSI when flushing out these culverts and things of that nature. So, my recommendation is to buy the new flush truck, and our budget will support that. It’s going to be a piece of equipment that we’re going to be required to use extensively from now on. Because we are going to have to clean out all the drain boxes, and things of that nature. So, my recommendation is the new flush truck.

Commissioner Fanello: What’s the cost on that?

Dennis Hudnall: It’s $92,890.

Commissioner Crouch: And that will flush out drains?

Dennis Hudnall: What it does, we, any driveway culverts, or anything of that nature, we flush them out after they get clogged up. It’s a high pressure hose, basically, that goes up into the pipes. Then it also has a vacuum on it that will vacuum out the drain boxes. Which is going to be an Indiana requirement, state requirement that we do.

Commissioner Crouch: So, if we approve this, then can you go to 7322 Greenbriar?

Dennis Hudnall: It’s going to be used extensively, because it’s, we’re getting a lot of calls on them. We’ve been renting this piece of equipment, I really don’t know how long, but the minimum rental on it is four hours, and it’s $600. So, if I use it one day, that’s $1,200. I think the break even point on paying for this piece of equipment is something like a year and four months, it’s paid for.

Commissioner Fanello: I’ll make a motion that we direct the Highway Superintendent to proceed purchasing the flush truck.

Commissioner Crouch: Second, and you will be in contact with the County Surveyor regarding that problem at 7322 Greenbriar? Are you aware? Did you get copied on that?

Dennis Hudnall: No, I don’t think so.

Commissioner Fanello: We have, we can get you a copy. Each Commissioner got a copy.

Dennis Hudnall: Did it come by e-mail?

Commissioner Fanello: No, it was, I think–

Dennis Hudnall: My e-mail’s been down because they’ve been working on our computers out there. So, if you could get me a copy of that, I would be glad to take care of it. The only other thing I had is to ask you if you received my report, and do you have any questions on that.

President Mosby: I don’t have any questions.

Dennis Hudnall: Okay.

President Mosby: Any other questions? Thank you, Dennis.

Dennis Hudnall: Have a good evening.

President Mosby: County Attorney.

Kevin Winternheimer: No report tonight.

President Mosby: Superintendent of County Buildings.

Tammy McKinney: I’ve got a couple of items. This afternoon Will Fosse brought to me a notice to proceed for the rebidding, or the re-roofing project. Once Midland Engineering receives that we will be proceeding with the re-roofing project, hopefully, should be up and going by the end of the month. Second thing, I think I put a copy at everyone’s desk of the contract with Lichtenberger Construction for the remodeling of the bathrooms at the Old Courthouse. The Foundation did approve my request for the $16,000. So, Will went ahead and drew up this contract. Kevin has given his okay, and now I just need yours.

Commissioner Fanello: Lichtenberger was the low bid on this project?

Tammy McKinney: Right.

Commissioner Fanello: I guess, we could approve it contingent on receiving the money from the Old Courthouse Foundation, because we still have to receive that in.

Tammy McKinney: Right, and I talked to Suzanne on Friday on how I’ll go about putting that in the General, and then blue claiming it, and all that.

Commissioner Fanello: Motion.

Commissioner Crouch: Second.

President Mosby: So ordered.

Tammy McKinney: That’s all I have.

Commissioner Crouch: Tammy, we got a letter about, a complaint from someone about polling places and smoking. Is that, did you get a copy of that, or were you aware of that?

Tammy McKinney: Uh-uh.

Commissioner Fanello: I just saw it today. I think it just came, I don’t think she did get a copy. I think it just came to each Commissioner.

Commissioner Crouch: Some citizens have had some concerns about smoking at a polling place, and wanted us...they wanted the Election Board to take action regarding that. Then the Election Board referred them to us, because we’re the Commissioners. So, I don’t know if that issue had come up in the past, or do we need to put, do we need to ask the Clerk to put a no smoking sign in the inspectors–

Tammy McKinney: Was it at a particular polling place or all of them, or?

Commissioner Crouch: I think it was one particular polling place.

President Mosby: I was going to say, a lot of them don’t let them smoke inside, or the inspector will instruct them to walk outside the door.

Commissioner Crouch: Could we draft a letter maybe to the Commissioners, or to the Clerk asking that she put some kind of notice in the election supplies?

Tammy McKinney: Yeah.

Commissioner Crouch: So that–

President Mosby: If it happens in this upcoming election, we have nothing to do with it.

Commissioner Crouch: Right.

Tammy McKinney: Right, if it happens at the School Board, but as far as the May. If you can get me a copy of that, I’ll look into it.

Commissioner Crouch: Okay.

President Mosby: Any other questions? Seeing none.

President Mosby: Burdette Park.

Gary Hohman: I’m Gary Hohman, Burdette Park. All we have before you tonight is our work report. Any questions regarding it or any other business, I would be glad to answer any questions that you might have.

President Mosby: I don’t have any. Any questions?

Gary Hohman: Thank you.

President Mosby: Thank you, Gary.

President Mosby: Soil and Water, Mike.

Mike Wathen: Mike Wathen, Soil and Water Conservation District. In addition to my normal weekly report, one item that I wanted to touch base with you on is the Carpentier Creek Pavilion Subdivision. I met out there today with Mr. Owens and Morley and Associates, and it now is in compliance. It will be tomorrow before I can get the official letters out. I didn’t have time by the time I got back to the office today. I’ve met with Mr. Owens several times, and I think he understands the importance of keeping the maintenance of the project up. He’s done a good job of getting it into compliance to this point. It is going to be a challenge though. There’s a lot of area out there to cover, and there’s a lot of fill going in there. So, but it is in compliance as of right now, and I will get the appropriate letters out tomorrow. If this cold don’t kill me. Does anybody have any questions?

President Mosby: I don’t.

Commissioner Crouch: I think that’s an example of a lot of people working together to address an issue. Mr. Padget’s here. Do you have anything to say?

Fred Padget: If you can give me a couple of minutes.

President Mosby: Okay.

Fred Padget: I’m Fred Padget with the Westside Improvement Association. I just wanted to take a couple of minutes and talk about this development a little bit. One of the main things I wanted to do tonight was express my appreciation for the Soil and Water Conservation District. I think it’s been handled very professionally. It’s technically competent. A lot of it’s due to Mike. He’s very knowledgeable of the regs and the local ordinances. He’s a pretty much by-the-book kind of guy, and I think that’s the right way to do it. I think he tries to be fair. I think the Soil and Water Conservation District, and Mike in particular, did an excellent job on this, and I wanted to express that to the Commission. We’re glad the development’s back in compliance. We appreciate the developer’s effort in getting it back in compliance. I think Soil and Water Conservation District was instrumental in making it happen. It took a lot of effort from the developer to do that also, and we understand that. The compliance is really only at this point in time. That area out there, as we’ve talked about before, and as you well know, is an environmentally sensitive area. It’s a major drainage area, and it has a lot of floodway. It will present the developer many more challenges during the balance of the project, and it will require much maintenance of areas that are currently disturbed, and much attention to the future work. By getting back into compliance, the developer has shown and proven that it can be in compliance. We hope that it will continue to remain in compliance, and will monitor that project to assure compliance, and that it becomes a real asset to this area of the country. But, again, we appreciate what the Soil and Water Conservation District did, and we also appreciate the efforts that the developer put into it.

President Mosby: Are there any questions of Mr. Padget? Mr. Owens, did you want to say anything?

Dennis Owens: Yes, I would also like to say that I think that they, Mike Wathen, did do a really good job. Fred’s right, we do have a lot of challenges, but we think we’re up to them. I’m happy that it turned out this way. We’ll continue to do our best to stay in compliance, and work with the Westside Improvement Association, and to achieve an end that we can all be proud of. Thank you.

President Mosby: Thank you, Mr. Owens. Any other questions or comments? Thank you, Mike, appreciate what you did.

President Mosby: Ozone.

Commissioner Fanello: We don’t have any, I have one thing. Joanne e-mailed me, to let me know that there is a meeting tomorrow, but it does not have the time in this e-mail. He said that each of the Commissioners received something on this meeting with IDEM, but I didn’t receive anything on it. Not that I can remember anyway, but she is going to attend the meeting, but she was hoping that one Commissioner could be there, if it was possible.

Commissioner Crouch: Do we know where or when?

Commissioner Fanello: I don’t have it in the e-mail. I can try and look back through my stuff, but I don’t remember getting anything on the meeting.

Commissioner Crouch: I know there’s a meeting with DNR tomorrow.

Commissioner Fanello: Right.

President Mosby: That’s at 10:00 down here in 318. (Inaudible)

Commissioner Fanello: I guess, we could have Patty or Tammy, in the morning, call her and find out, but if anyone...I cannot attend tomorrow, but she is going to attend, but she was hoping a Commissioner could go too.

Commissioner Crouch: (Inaudible. Mike not on.)

Commissioner Fanello: You don’t know a time?

Commissioner Crouch: Okay.

President Mosby: Can you try to find out. I’m going to try to go to DNR.

Commissioner Fanello: Other than that, I would make a motion that we accept the Ozone Officer’s Report.

Commissioner Crouch: Second.

President Mosby: A motion and a second. So ordered.

Commissioner Fanello: Motion to accept Consent Items

Commissioner Crouch: Second.

President Mosby: A motion and a second. So ordered.

VANDERBURGH COUNTY

REZONING BOARD

MARCH 17, 2003

The Vanderburgh County Rezoning Board met in session during their regular Commission meeting on March 17, 2003 at 6:50 p.m in Room 307 of the Civic Center Complex with President David Mosby presiding.

President Mosby: We will, this shouldn’t take very long at all really. We’re going to move right in to the rezoning agenda. Do I have a motion to approve the minutes of the previous meeting?

Commissioner Fanello: So moved.

Commissioner Crouch: Second.

President Mosby: So ordered.

President Mosby: First readings, VC-9-2003, petitioner, Pete McCullough, 2750 Allens Lane, Evansville, Indiana, change from C-4 to C-2 with use and development. VC-10-2003, petitioner, Fred Puckett, 6318 Peacock Lane, change request from agricultural to C-2. Do I have a motion to accept first readings?

Commissioner Fanello: So moved.

Commissioner Crouch: Second.

President Mosby: I have a motion and a second. So ordered.

President Mosby: Final reading. That’s right we don’t do second readings. Final reading, VC-7-2002*, petitioner, Inyx Waste Services, Incorporated, 12900 Warrick County Line Road, request change from Ag to M-2.

Commissioner Fanello: That’s supposed to be Onyx, for the record.

President Mosby: That’s what I thought, Onyx. I had never heard of Inyx. I thought maybe you were new.

Rick Klass: Hi, I’m Rick Klass. I’m the controller for Onyx Waste, currently located at 8136 Baumgart Road. We really have no information to add other than what you’ve received in your reports. We would like to highlight a few things, however. First the approved comprehensive plan calls for an area immediately adjacent to 164 for M zoning. That area, I don’t know if you’re familiar, we currently have a transfer station that we are looking to, just north of that transfer station we have acquired some additional property. The County Engineer, John Stoll, has raised the issue of road width, and entrance to the property off of County Line Road. Our plans are to, all trucks will enter in through the transfer station and cross into the area for parking. We will not have to have another road entrance further up for any trucks other than personal vehicles for employees to come to work. The third, I think the Planning Commission has said that in the last ten years of operation, that site as a waste hauling facility has not had one single citizen complaint. I’d like to say proudly that I don’t think any other waste hauling facility in the state of Indiana can make that claim. In the efforts to do this rezoning that we have sent out letters to people that live in the neighborhood. We had an open house for three hours, we had residents, or a person there at the facility to answer any questions. The only response we had, and the only question we had was the tenant farmer wanted to know if he would be able to farm for another year. So, nobody else has shown any interest or concern at this point. We’ve also sent letters and asked anybody to call Area Plan or ourselves if they had any concerns, and we have, at this point, not received any calls. Again, our plan is to possibly move our Baumgart Road facility, which is office and garage facility and storage out to that location. That’s really all we have in mind.

President Mosby: Any questions? Anybody in the audience that would like to speak? Seeing none. The chair would entertain a motion.

Commissioner Fanello: Motion to approve VC-7-2002*, Ag to M-2.

Commissioner Crouch: I will second. Do we not get to hear from former Commissioner Mourdock?

Commissioner Fanello: I’m sure he wants to come forward, don’t you?

President Mosby: I was going to say, I thought he was chomping at the bit back there. I kept watching him.

Richard Mourdock: I just wanted to prove that I could sit through a meeting without saying a word.

Madelyn Grayson: Could you please come to the microphone, sir?

President Mosby: Yes.

Richard Mourdock: I should have known.

President Mosby: I guess, that means the former Commissioner does not want to speak with us. So, we have a roll call vote. Commissioner Crouch?

Commissioner Crouch: Yes.

President Mosby: Commissioner Fanello?

Commissioner Fanello: Yes.

President Mosby: Commissioner Mosby? Aye. There being three ayes, no nays, VC-7-2002* is hereby declared adopted.

Rick Klass: Thank you very much.

President Mosby: Thank you.

Madelyn Grayson: Sir, can you spell last name for the record

Rick Klass: K-l-a-s-s.

President Mosby: Is there any other business to come before the Board?

Commissioner Crouch: Motion to adjourn.