PORTER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REGULAR MEETING
TUESDAY, JUNE 4, 2002

The regular meeting of the Porter County Board of Commissioners convened at 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, June 4, 2002 in the Commissioners' Chambers of the Administration Center.

Those present: Commissioners David Burrus, Larry Sheets, John Evans and Attorney Gwenn Rinkenberger.

President David Burrus called the meeting to order with the Pledge of Allegiance.

APPROVAL OF PAYROLL

Com Evans moved to approve the payroll of June 3, 2002, Com. Sheets seconded, motion carried.


APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Com. Sheets moved to approve the minutes from May 8, 2002, Com. Evans seconded, motion carried.


NEW JAIL SITE PLANTINGS/DRAINAGE PLANS
David Pilz, Valparaiso City Engineer

Mr. Pilz, "Gentlemen, my name is Dave Pilz and I am the City Engineer for the City of Valparaiso. I think I have kept the Commissioners pretty much informed as to what we are trying to do in the Stimson watershed looking for alternative means of handling drainage issues. As a part of that effort what we have done, ‘we' being the City for the Redevelopment Commission and the Storm Water Management Board, we have applied for two Lake Michigan coastal program grants. Each of the grants would be in the amount of $100,000.00 with a $25,000.00 local match. The Redevelopment Commission has committed to make the local match, assuming we do receive the grants. One of the grants is for a demonstration project and the site we have tentatively selected is the new jail site. What we are proposing to do there, is to use some of the new innovative methods using native plants, native grasses, terraces, things that are not the conventional means of handling water to demonstrate we can significantly reduce not only the quantity of the water going to the detention basin that you have already constructed, but also impact the quality. Very basically, what is being proposed and shown in concept on this plan, the blue area is the proposed jail, State Road 49 is off here to the west, the frontage road comes in here and circles around the jail site. What we would propose to do is supplement your existing drainage system which is shown here in the dark blue lines, which are basically sewers that capture the water coming off of the parking lots, the grass areas, and right now it conveys it directly to the detention basin. What we would do is capture that water to try to angle it on to the particular sites involved and deal with it before it has to be conveyed to the detention basin. Right now the runoff from the front parking lot is captured against the curbing on this side of the parking lot and comes down here to an inlet and then is conveyed by sewers. We would propose to partially block the inlet, eliminate some of the back of the curve, so that the water could sheet rain into this depressed area in the front which would be planted with the native grasses. That would then promote infiltration of that water, instead of being concentrated, it would be more of a sheet effect as it flows through the vegetation, would be captured, infiltration would be promoted, transportation would be promoted, and less water would theoretically reach the inlet and be conveyed away. This is configured as the impression already so it is kind of naturally made, we would probably raise this inlet maybe three inches so we wouldn't have more of a tendency to capture the water in that area and give it time to infiltrate. The same thing would be done in this area, this would be lengthened, and along the vegetated swale, is exactly the same concept. On the south end of the site, we would also have a perforated drain under it to provide more storage capacity which could then infiltrate into the soil. Around the back, there is a proposed emergency access road that would be proposed to be done with the geolocks, which allows the water to infiltrate through that. It is not a fully used road, more for emergency purposes, so rather than having it shove water 100%, we would be allowing some of that infiltrate through the sites. In the back, would be done what is called a terrace, where what water does come through here, would be captured in a flat area and then allowed to slowly, through the native grasses, to infiltrate, be cleansed, in order to go into the ground. We feel that with some of these efforts, we can substantially reduce the quantity of the water that goes into the detention basin and also significantly impact the water quality by cleaning it up, taking away some of the nasty elements that naturally come off the parking lot from the cars. The water that comes off the roof, there are these checkerboard areas here and those are called rain gardens. The concept of the rain garden is again, a shallow area where the water from a section of the roof would be taken to that area and temporarily stored and there would be plants specific to the presence of water to be planted in that area and to promote infiltration. In some of these areas, we would use the concept of rain store, where we would excavate down and in the past, we have put gravel in there to kind of act like a dry well. These are actual cubes that are fabricated that you stack up down there like a Styrofoam type of thing. They have a much larger volume water holding capacity which then holds it until it can infiltrate it away into the soil. The soil on this site after you get down a foot or so, is perfectly suited for infiltration. The only kind of limiting factor is the presence of the ground water on the site and those types of things could be addressed if we get into the actual engineering phases. These areas around the buildings would be sized to handle a two inch rain coming off the roof so that is a substantial rain; so theoretically, none of that rain coming off the roof, unless it exceeds a two inch rain, would get into your drain systems. That is a tremendous amount of water to capture right there. This is still an "if" project. As I said, we applied for a grant to try and do this work and show and demonstrate it will work. We hope that if we are successful in doing it, we can demonstrate success then and these types of concepts can be used elsewhere, not only in this watershed but in various other watersheds throughout the community. Our consultant thinks very strongly, that if we would have this knowledge already, then we can go back and re-design this project, they can probably eliminate a substantial portion of this large contention basin that you were forced to provide. Those types of things result in cost savings to you, the developer, there is more land available that can be developed. We are enthusiastic about it, and what I am requesting from you today, is a tentative approval, subject to your review of the final plans. I did appear at the Technical Advisory Committee meeting last Friday and they approved the concept, again subject to their review of the final engineering design and plans assuming we get to that point. I will be happy to try and answer any questions."

Com. Burrus, "First, from the Drainage Board point of view, the Stimson Drain has been a concern of ours for a number of years. The Stimson Drain runs from this parcel behind the Expo Center south toward the held waters of Salt Creek and the project here, the new jail, the Expo Center, the Pratt Industries, have all increased the input of water into the Stimson Drain. Therefore, the concern of the proposal is down stream. The Drainage Board has seen a presentation of this concept and they are interested in seeing some kind of a demonstration project and I think that is what Mr. Pilz is talking about here. We are looking at a brand new building that has just been finished and I know the architects and engineers involved with this building will soon be gone and this will be a county owned project. My own opinion is, subject to some input from the Sheriff since it is going to be his facility, and with further discussions with this Board, we might consider it. Conceptually, I think it is a good idea, but I would want to open the doors to other affected parties for input."

Com. Sheets, "I have attended the stake holder meetings on the Stimson Drain, so this is a good test. The part I like about it is, we haven't placed the detention basins that if this system doesn't work as well as they expect or not at all, then those systems are in place and there is no harm. It is a good opportunity to try and solve it. Some of those things are being used in Harrison-West, and you don't even notice what it is there for. You think it is just the settings, but it is actually doing a super job. I like the concept."

Mr. Pilz, "Two things I didn't mention; one is maintenance. We are actually moving areas proposed for turf, that were already planted in turf, the natural blue grass, and that will have to be mowed every week. The native plants area will be mowed one time a year so that should result in a small cost savings because there is less area to have to be mowed on a regular basis. Not only will this be a demonstration project, but education is a big component of this because we are going to have to change the mind set of people who drive to buildings and sites and they are used to the typical turf grass, the blue grass, that is manicured and cut to the edge, that does absolutely nothing for water quality or quantity. So, we are going to have to help with this mind set that these types of native grasses, plants and flowers, are in fact, acceptable and beautiful once you get used to them."

Com. Evans, "The curb you are talking about cutting out, is that already in place?"

Mr. Pilz, "Yes."

Com. Evans, "Shouldn't that have been done originally rather than try to come back and put it in? Like cutting the curbs, doing these things after it is already installed, seems like a waste of money."

Mr. Pilz, "While it would have been nice to have that done early on, unfortunately the grant was not available until April, and we had to get it filed by the end of April, and your work was basically done by then. So this is kind of a retro fit type of thing we would probably be doing on other sites also, perhaps Jet-cor in the future or something at the Fairgrounds. I don't think it is lost because your system is in place, if this doesn't function, then your system can handle it and provide the emergency back up so there will be no damages done. Yes, it would have been nice to do it from scratch, but we weren't ready at that time and the money wasn't available. The grant money will allow us to do the engineering to do the work."

Com. Evans, "I would like to get our engineers on board as quickly as possible to protect our interests."

Com. Burrus, "That is a good point. We are seeing this for the first time today and I think it's the first time the Sheriff's people have seen it. If we could have an opportunity to have the staff go through this a little bit so we can have some support."

Atty. Rinkenberger, "I am concerned, speaking as the Building Corp. attorney and not the County Attorney, with the fact that the design and our project managers and our architects at this stage of the project, did not get input from Dave Schelling, but from our Porter County Jail Building Corp. members. Before we do something that would affect our drainage out there, I think it would be wise to get input from our experts. It should be presented to Skillman. I am not able to present this to Skillman, but I could arrange for you to."

Com. Burrus, "I think the point of it all is, we need to have a few more people aware of what is going on."

Com. Evans, "One other thing, the $25,000.00 match, where does that come from?"

Mr. Pilz, "That is from the city Redevelopment Commission."

Com. Sheets, "To shift gears for a minute, the cross over on 49 should be started pretty soon."

Mr. Pilz, "It has started. In fact, there is asphalt already placed out there."

Com. Burrus, "So I guess your request is something we can follow up on with our staff here and if you want to keep communication with us, but I would echo what Gwenn says about dealing with the architectural staff."


APPROVAL OF CLAIMS

Com. Evans moved to approve the claims of June 4, 2002, Com. Sheets seconded, motion carried.



ORDINANCE NO. 02-10, ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH NON-REVERTING FUND FOR RECEIPT OF PROCEEDS FROM DISPOSAL OF PROPERTY — 2ND READING

Com. Burrus, "We have an ordinance for second reading to establish a non-reverting fund for the receipt of proceeds from disposal of property. This is intended to establish a fund, partially at the request of the auditor, to identify funds that are generated through the sale of property to be focused toward the maintenance of remaining property. We feel this would be an appropriate use for these funds. We have included in this ordinance the fact that the County Council would have to authorize the appropriation of these funds but the intent is to try and supplement the maintenance funds for our buildings that we are having some shortfalls on due to the budget constraints. Any discussion?"

Com. Evans, "Besides the jail building, the other property we are talking about is the parcel of ground in Portage."

Com. Burrus, "Generally speaking, what we are trying to do is address any future sale of property that would be consistent with what I just described, and that it is to supplement the maintenance budget."

ORDINANCE NO. 02-10
PORTER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
AN ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH A NON-REVERTING FUND
FOR THE RECEIPT OF PROCEEDS FROM DISPOSAL
OF PROPERTY PURSUANT TO I.C. 36-1-11 et seq.
________________________________________________________________________

WHEREAS, the Porter County Board of Commissioners adopted the Porter County Municipal Code on Tuesday, December 2, 1997 pursuant to Ordinance No. 97-38; and
WHEREAS, the Porter County Board of Commissioners have deemed it necessary to pass a new ordinance for inclusion in the Porter County Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, I.C. 36-1-3-2 grants the Board of County Commissioners all the powers that they need for the effective operation of government as to local affairs; and
WHEREAS, I.C. 36-1-3-6 states that if there is no constitutional or statutory provision requiring a specific manner for exercising a power, the Board of County Commissioners may adopt an ordinance prescribing a specific manner for exercising a power; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to I.C. 36-1-4-6; I.C. 36-2-2-2; I.C. 36-2-3.5-4(6); .I.C. 36-2-2-24; and I.C. 36-1-11 et seq. a government entity to wit: the Executive Branch of Government is authorized to dispose of its interest in property; and
WHEREAS, the Executive Branch of Government is the Porter County Board of Commissioners; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to state law, Home Rule Authority, and I.C. 36-1-11 et seq., a transfer or exchange of real property may be made pursuant to mutually agreeable terms and conditions; and
WHEREAS, mutually agreed upon terms and conditions for the disposal of property may be evidenced by the inclusion of terminology in a contract, and\or the inclusion of terminology as a condition of sale through the adoption of substantially identical resolutions; and
WHEREAS, a reasonable term or condition that may be placed upon the disposal of property by the Porter County Board of Commissioners is that any proceeds which remain after deduction for costs of sale (including costs of advertising, appraisals, and auctioneer costs) and deduction for payment of taxes, be deposited in a special fund and utilized exclusively for the construction, renovation and structural maintenance of other county buildings; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary to create a special fund to deposit proceeds from the disposal of property pursuant to I.C. 36-1-11 et seq. when a term or condition of the sale is that proceeds from the disposal of the property be utilized for the construction, renovation, and\or structural maintenance of other county buildings; and
WHEREAS, Porter County is currently in a period of financial crisis; and
WHEREAS, the Porter County Board of Commissioners have the statutory authority to maintain, renovate and construct county buildings; and
WHEREAS, the Porter County Board of Commissioners has determined that it is in the best interest of county government that money derived through the disposal of property pursuant to this ordinance be deposited in said special fund to be utilized for the construction, renovation, and\or structural maintenance of other county buildings;

NOW THEREFORE AND IT IS HEREBY ORDAINED that:
1.Title 3, Revenue and Finance in the Porter County Municipal Code is hereby amended through the addition of Chapter 3.30 entitled, Property Disposal Fund;
2.That Section 3.30.010 is added to the Porter County Municipal Code to read as follows:
3.10.010 Fund Established

The Porter County Board of Commissioners does determine that a need exists for the creation of a fund for the receipt of proceeds from the disposal of property whereby all money received pursuant to this ordinance and pursuant to I.C. 36-1-11 et seq. be deposited into said special fund. Said fund shall be utilized for the deposit of proceeds from the disposal of property pursuant to I.C. 36-1-11 et seq. when a condition or term of the sale is that the proceeds be deposited in this special fund, and shall be utilized solely for the construction, renovation and\or structural maintenance of other county buildings.

Said fund is hereby entitled the Property Disposal Fund, and shall be subject to appropriation by the Porter County Council.

3.That Section 3.30.020 Use of Revenues, is added to the Porter County
Municipal Code to read as follows:

3.30.020 Use of Revenues

The proceeds received and deposited in the Property Disposal Fund can only be used for the specific purposes set forth in this ordinance. The funds received and deposited in the Property Disposal Fund will be expended for the construction, renovation, and\or structural maintenance of other county buildings located in Porter County, Indiana. The expenditures made from the fund will be expenditures made at the discretion of the Porter County Board of Commissioners.

4.That Section 3.30.030 Termination of Funds-Transfer of Funds is added to
the Porter County Municipal Code to read as follows:

3.30.030 Termination of Funds-transfer of funds

The Property Disposal Fund shall remain in existence and remain perpetual in its terms until amended or terminated by subsequent ordinance enacted by the Board of Commissioners; and if when a subsequent ordinance is passed to terminate the life of the fund, the fund balance existing, and if not otherwise provided for by ordinance, if any at that time, shall be transferred to the County General Fund.

This ordinance passed and adopted the 4th day of June, 2002.

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
PORTER COUNTY, INDIANA
s\David L. Burrus
s\Larry D. Sheets
s\John A. Evans
Attest: s\Porter County Auditor





Com. Evans moved to approve Ordinance No.02-10 on second reading, Com. Sheets seconded, motion carried.

Com. Sheets, "The County owns property that is part of the North County Complex. The City of Portage has visited with John and me about the Redevelopment Committee purchasing some property on Highway 6, a portion of that we agreed upon the appraisers. The appraisals have been made, letters come to us from the mayor that gives the cost. The reason we wanted property all the way up to Highway 6 was so that we could have a road that would access North County property. The agreement is that based on the appraisals, that the property would be sold to the City of Portage and that we would contribute the right of way, and they would build the road to standards."

Com. Evans, "Dave and I are going to jointly go out and walk the area to make sure it will be advantageous to both parties. We really have no reason for that parcel, unless we are going to be somebody's landlord. We still have a very sizable portion of land directly south of the parcel we are talking about. After Commissioner Burrus and I have a chance to visit the site again, we will enter into more talks with the City of Portage."

ORDINANCE 02-06, ESTABLISHING INMATE HEALTH CARE CO-PAYMENTS FOR DEPOSIT IN COUNTY MEDICAL CARE FOR INMATES FUND--1ST READING
Sheriff David Reynolds

Sheriff, "Currently we charge $10.00 and they just passed a state statute giving us the allowance to go up to $15.00 per co-pay for the inmates when they seek medical attention. So the statute indicates that we need to amend our ordinance, if we have them, and we do, to comply with state statute. So that is what we are doing."

Com. Burrus, "So currently the inmates have to pay $10.00 for any kind of medical attention they receive and now the state has recently increased that to $15.00 if we so choose to follow that?"

Com. Sheets, "Is that medical attention they would get at the jail or if they are transported to the hospital?"

Sheriff, "Yes."

Com. Evans moved to approve the ordinance on first reading to raise the inmate medical co-pay fee to $15.00 as allowed by state statute, Com. Sheets seconded, motion carried.


OFFICE HOLDERS\DEPARTMENT HEADS

Sheriff David Reynolds, request to increase the number of federal inmates housed

Sheriff, "We have discussed my intention of increasing the federal inmates that we can house from 40 to 80 and that is what I would like to do. I want to address our agreement and want you to give me the allowance to go up, at some period, to 80 inmates. I think with everything we are trying to do as far as our budget, there were some concerns raised at the last council meeting where this money is coming from and I don't think we formally amended our agreement. That is what I am doing now. That money will supplement the increase in staff costs that I am requesting and the operating costs at the new facility."

Com. Sheets, "You two gentlemen were not on board when we put the cap at 40. The reason for that at that time was our liability insurance was in question and in fact, I think it was increased some time ago. Since then, a couple things have transpired. First of all, our insurance company is working with your staff and we have about an 80 to 90 thousand dollar reduction in that cost so things are going in the right direction. The other thing, at the new jail with 186 cameras, you are also going to be taping there, and those are the areas that we were concerned about and we have taken great steps to improve that. My personal worries about liability increases are diminished. I don't have a problem with that, I am glad we have a cap. I understand why you are asking for them. I assume you are going in front of the Council the end of this month to talk about the jailers. We talked about the $40.00 a day portion being appropriated or set aside for those overhead costs. I would suggest to make sure you have those numbers before you go before the Council."

Sheriff, "That is some of the concerns we have all talked about. We were breaking that down and we don't have it done now, but will have it the next day of what we came up with as the actual breakdown of what it is going to actually cost to house an inmate in that jail. We compare the expenses versus the income. That is about all we can do. We don't know what the NIPSCO bill will be, but we have a couple different charts and scenarios on projected income. Obviously the more inmates you can house from a federal standpoint, the more revenue you can bring in. Which is a good thing."

Com. Evans, "First of all, we were on board when this was brought up. How many prisoners are you housing today, Dave?"

Sheriff, "We are kind of low now, we are around 217."

Com. Evans, "The jail is built to house about 450? There is ample room to take on the people if we have ample people to supervise them? But we are already going to increase the liability issues with this so I think it is a domino effect. If we go up in numbers, we have to go up in numbers across the board."

Sheriff, "Exactly. It is a catch-22. That is kind of an unfair number because we have been averaging about 240 prisoners, it goes up and down. But, we go over there with 240 with the staff we've got, it is a different lay out and different operating procedure, it just requires more manpower due to the way it is set up. It's not so much the 80, it's just in what we have that is a liability. As far as the requirement of the new staff, I think this is not new, we have been talking about it all along. Once we have the proper staff, hopefully we won't get to 450, but some day there is going to be a lot of prisoners in there, but I don't think that should be consistent with the inmates coming in. What you talked about a year ago is what I am faced with right now, moving in that facility with inadequate staff, that is liability."

Com. Evans, "There was a question, Dave, in regard to how quick the government was going to pay for the prisoners, in other words, will you get a check on a monthly basis, or what is the normal time?"

Sheriff, "In Porter County it is two weeks, really the turn around has been 1 week to 2 weeks. That is going to be part of what I am going to address with you. We have contacted all the counties that are currently under this program, Lake County, St. Joe., and Allen County. St. Joe has 153 federal inmates. They're generating over $2 million a year. Their turn around is a little high. It is 3 weeks. Even 3 weeks we can live with. It is very consistent. They told us right up front, one thing about this program, once you send them the bill, they will turn right around and send you the check back. We have one federal prisoner right now, for various reasons we have him there, and the turn around is 1 week. We send them the bill and they send us the money. But those are legitimate concerns we have addressed."

Com. Burrus, "As the community comes together to provide this facility, we know that it has some excess capacity and as we look at the opportunity to house additional federal prisoners, it should be pointed out that in the event that our needs increase to the point where we need to displace the federal prisoners, that can be done, and that is not a problem. We are not locking into this number so it is a not to exceed number and can be adjusted downward for our needs."

Sheriff, "This is our agreement, between you three and me. The federal agreement is for 40, and that is the maximum, and we can go over 80, but I would have to come back and talk to you. We are going to try and do this and we have been talking to the Marshals almost on a daily basis trying to figure out how we are going to do this and when we are going to do this. Obviously, they are concerned about out staffing concerns. Our concerns are their concerns. We are going to do this pretty much piece meal, where we are not even going to bring in 40 the first day, we will bring in so many and get used to the whole system of transporting them, and so it is going to be over a period of time. I can't tell you what, but it will be when we are all comfortable with bringing in the additional inmates. It won't be too burdensome for our staff."

Com. Burrus, "There has been a couple discussions both privately and in the Council meetings regarding the costs. The Commissioners have three categories of costs related to the jail. One is the facility cost itself with respect to maintenance and the operation of utilities. Another one is the insurance costs that go along with it and finally, personnel benefits costs. Those items that come out of our budget that would be appropriate. You mentioned you have yours fairly well worked out? I have everything except our insurance costs broken out. We can prepare those and provide those to the Council. As we analyze and total those costs in order to determine what those are on a per prisoner basis, we have to divide those by the 450 bed capacity. If we have empty cells, we have no revenue. If we have Porter County prisoners, we have no revenue, but if we have federal or state, we do have revenue. Looking at the budget situation we are faced with and the idea the Council has indicated we were to hold the current budget as we go forward in the next year, I would like to point out that our current budget with respect to that facility is looking at the six month operational costs, not including a full year. As we approach the budget process and try to address the needs for that facility, the shortage of revenue is evident to me. From the need to be able to fund the operating costs as we see it, this would be an advantage. So with that point of view, I am for one, in favor of your request."

Com. Sheets, "I would like to point out that there are three prisoners helping move the Auditor's office personnel. I certainly appreciate that since we are short staffed in housekeeping and Terry has his arm in a sling but he is supervising them."

Com. Evans moved to approve amending the amount of federal prisoners to be housed at the jail from 40 to 80, Com. Sheets seconded, motion carried.


JACKIE GRAY RESIGNATION FROM MEMORIAL OPERA HOUSE

Ms. Gray, "I am here today to talk about what I talked to you about in department meetings. The time has come for me to pursue new directions in my life and I am resigning as Facility Director of the Memorial Opera House. My last day will be June 28th and I want to, above all, commend the Porter County Commissioners, the Council, both current and past, and the community at large who have helped with the Opera House getting it renovated and back together, bought tickets, donated money, volunteered time. It is such a great asset to our area and I think the multiplier affect it brings not only to Valparaiso, but to Porter County, bringing dollars in, is just at the tip of the ice berg of what it can be and hopefully it will continue to go on and on. I have been approached by a number of people both locally and out of the area, about job opportunities. At this time, I haven't decided on anything firm. The only firm plan I am making is that I am going to take some time off this summer after June 28th and as I stated in my letter to you, what I would like to offer, if I am able after that point, that if I can be a resource for anything to do with the Opera House or anything with your microphones, or anything that I could help out with, please do not hesitate to call on me. I am very, very passionate about the success of the Opera House. Not only today, but in the future and I would hope that if there is any way at all that I can help out, please let me know."

Com. Burrus, "Jackie, I would like to thank you publically. We had a private conversation yesterday, and certainly we are disappointed to see you go after 5 ½ years of service to the County in that facility and I think the community as a whole has benefitted from that service. I also understand your need for new challenges as you described them to me and I respect that. My comment to you is a hearty thank you and good luck in your new endeavors."

Com. Sheets, "You have come a long way with the remodeling and the utilization of the building has been come along a great way. You are moving forward to being self sustaining and I hope that does not get hampered by your leaving. I don't know how we are going to try and replace you. I would like to express my thanks to you publically, we appreciate everything and good luck."

Com. Evans, "I would like to echo the thoughts of my fellow Commissioners. Thank you for helping bring this county out of a cultural deficit. Hopefully it can continue to survive without you. I want to thank you very much for all you've done."

Mr. Gray, "I have no doubt things will survive. Things always go on when things change and as Dave and I talked about yesterday, everything always changes and change is usually for the good even though there is some ebb and flow involved. That is how I look at my personal life and that is how I look at what will happen to the Opera House. Once again, please don't hesitate to call on me if I can be a resource for any information. Thank you."

Karen Martin, new jail costs

Ms. Martin, "I just wanted to address a couple things. I am a little concerned, not so much about the idea about revenue for the new jail, but the fact that we don't even know the cost yet and it could be the cost could outweigh what the revenue or the benefits are. Initially, within this plan, the Porter County Advisory Committee suggested that we only open two-thirds of the jail, 300 maximum initially. Also, if I am not wrong, Mr. Sheets stated specifically, that he would only build a 300 bed jail on a large site and then build additional later. His statement is specifically the population figures don't show the need for a jail larger than 300 beds. Also Mr. Sheets stated that by building more than the County needs, around 200 now, the temptation will be to rent out the cells to counties experiencing overcrowding. We are going to have those prisoners with an ‘attitude' and it concerns me that we are not looking at the total cost but we are approving the revenue aspect of it. I understand you are just giving him permission to exceed the 40 to 80, but we haven't even moved in there yet so we have no idea what the costs are. I personally, as a county taxpayer, do not like to be paying for federal prisoners. That's all."

Com. Burrus, "The cost figures that the Commissioners are involved with specifically are fixed costs. We are going to have to pay regardless of the occupancy of the jail. From our perspective, it is going to be there regardless if we take in 40, 80 or none. Operational costs you are requesting from Dave Reynolds is valid and I think those are the ones that could ebb and flow with the population."

Ms. Martin, "Do you not feel that the maintenance costs and the overhead costs of NIPSCO would increase by 1/3 instead of decreasing if we do not have that many open? You are saying you are going to have fixed numbers when it is open or not and I don't see that as a true issue because of the fact that you are opening all of it instead of part of it. So in all actuality, you said you're not opening it for maintenance aspects as well as NIPSCO."

Com. Burrus, "I think I would take exception to part of that. The first would be that we are going to insure the whole building, we are going to have heat in the whole building, even if it is not occupied. Our water consumption is going to be based on large scale meter rate that has a lot of range within the rate structure. So I would say if you closed down one wing of that jail, that we would probably be seeing some cost savings in personnel, but as far as the ones that the Commissioners look at, I don't see a significant reduction."

Com. Sheets, "What you said earlier, originally what I was talking about 300 -350 beds but with a conversation with the judges, we have enough to fill it now if you go to 450. Judge Harper and Judge Webber have both made those comments to us. When we were at 350 beds, and were going to have a wing designed so we can add on, at a public meeting with PROUD, we talked about that financially it was the best way to go with 450. So that is the reason I went with the change that I did."

Ms. Martin, "What is your preference with not renting out to those people with an attitude?"

Com. Sheets, "What I was talking about the attitude of the prisoners we would be getting was the liability and at the time I was making those comments, I was not aware that the booking would be taped and that we would have 186 cameras, and we have a better surveillance now."

Ms. Martin, "I understand the difference between our prisoners which show 90% haven't been addressed or gone to court yet and the individuals that are convicted felons, you are talking night and day here."

Com. Sheets, "The federal prisoners we will be housing are those who are waiting for trial for the most part."

Ms. Martin, "What percentage?"

Com. Sheets, "I don't know. The US Marshals were here about a year or two ago and I don't remember exactly what it was."

Com. Evans, "I believe all the prisoners we are going to house are awaiting trial. I don't think we are housing anybody on a long term basis. That was my interpretation of the federal prisoners that we are housing them for federal court in Hammond and they will be transported back and forth. It is not going to be federal penitentiary for prisoners."

Ms. Martin, "I understand that. But is it a recitisism rate or because of a first occurrence?"

Com. Evans, "I don't know. It is probably our proximity to Hammond Federal Court."

Ms. Martin, "Those are my concerns so you know where the Council is coming from. Because of the fact we need to look at all these considering the fact we have no money in the Council. I understand the revenue is important and we need to make sure those costs are covered effectively are only my concern and to make sure all those numbers are there."

Com. Evans, "We understand your concern, but by not allowing him to raise it we are handcuffing him in the amount of revenue he can raise."

Ms. Martin, "I understand. But you realize it is like 6 of this and half a dozen of the other due to the fact that when you have more people there then you have to add additional employees and you have to have additional costs. So in my mind, when we get those numbers, I don't want you to tie up the Council's hands saying you have to allow him 80 prisoners and that was your concern or your action because of the fact until we can see those numbers as to what it is going to cost the County, it may not be to the benefit of the taxpayers. My concern is that if the Council does not go ahead with it, please understand our action also because of the numbers."

Com. Burrus, "Having worked up the preliminary numbers for the Commissioners' portion of the expenses, I feel relatively comfortable to say that probably our portion of the cost we could assume 1/3 to no more than ½ of the $40.00 per day."

Ms. Martin, "You are talking about maintenance, NIPSCO, and benefits for the employees?"

Com. Burrus, "The three categories we feel would be appropriate for us to consider as part of our cost would be facility orientated costs that would be utilities, maintenance contracts, custodial costs, and so forth. The second would be the insurance package which includes both building insurance and liability insurance, and the third one would be the benefit package for the Sheriff's employees."

Ms. Martin, "Now is NIPSCO and water included in the maintenance costs?"

Com. Burrus, "They would be in the operational costs of utilities, yes."

Ms. Martin, "That was in your first package?"

Com. Burrus, "Yes. Under facility would be utilities, maintenance, custodial, snow removal, lawn care."

Ms. Martin, "So you are saying approximately $20.00."

Com. Burrus, "I am saying it should not exceed that. Right now I can tell you that the facility portion of that, the first category, is approximately $7.75 per day per prisoner. The personnel issue, I am waiting to see what resolves between the Council and the Sheriff. But I am going to be plugging in the figures and it will be roughly between $8,000.00 and $10,000.00 per employee per year for PERF, FICA and health insurance."

Ms. Martin, "I just wanted to know and that is why I am asking. Communication has to be there."

Com. Evans, "We should reiterate that his figures are based on 450 beds."

Com. Burrus, "You have to do it that way. You take the total cost and divide it by the 450 beds because a portion of that cost is going to be towards Porter County prisoners, a portion will be for unoccupied cells, a portion for revenue producing cells."

Ms. Martin, "So, lets say at this point of time we only have 217 prisoners and we only have a total of 80 that come in from the federal, so we only have 297, so even though the cost would be enhanced more because we only have 300, you are still relying on the 450 which would mean that it is really not actually 1/3 higher than the numbers you are giving us."

Com. Burrus, "What I am saying is that for those unoccupied cells, after you have run those two together, that we still have to provide for these fixed costs whether they are occupied or not. As soon as I get the breakdown from insurance, I will give you a call and will share this with you."

Ms. Martin, "Okay, thank you."

John Whitcomb, "I would like to make a comment while we are on this subject. Myself and most of the people I talked to regarding this jail feel like they have been deceived. What it is turning out to be is nothing like it was proposed at the start of the hearings that Ms. Martin and Pat Bankston and that committee they were on. Myself and Ms. Hefner attended every one of those meetings. You sure wouldn't now recognize what they were talking about back then. I know the Commissioners aren't the same as they were back then, but that doesn't make that much difference to the public and the taxpayers. Now you proposing a factory for that jail. You are going to make a profit making facility out of it."

Com. Burrus, "John, at the time those hearings and discussions were held that you are talking about, Porter County was in a totally different financial picture than it is right now. I don't make any excuses for the changes I have been involved in. The reason is we have bills to pay and we don't have the money. One way or another we are going to do the job. I don't want to argue with you, but at the same time I think there has been some significant other factors that brought these changes about."

Mr. Whitcomb, "What you say is if we spend more money, we will save money. I don't go along with that factor."

Com. Burrus, "I am not suggesting spending any more at all. I am suggesting we look at additional revenue, that's all I am saying."

Mr. Whitcomb, "Well, as Mrs. Martin pointed out, the original jail was supposed to be built at 350 beds."

Com. Burrus, "Commissioner Evans and I are playing the hand that was dealt to us. That jail was under construction at 450 beds when we came on board. Our job is to get it done, get it completed under budget and on time and to make it operational. That is a pretty daunting task right now with our financial problems."

Ms. Martin, "With reference to that, it was initially requested by the committee that it be built for 450 beds so that we could grow into it in a 20 year period. It is on page 6 where it states specifically that the judges and the rest of the committee have agreed with the notion that the ideal scenario would have Porter County build a jail housing an initial population of 250 to 300 and increasing around 5% per year to be full in the year 2020. So in all actuality, it was supposed to be built at 450 but we weren't supposed to be opening at 450, we were only supposed to be opening at 300 and increase the population 5% each year after that."

Mr. Whitcomb, "I remember that very well, Ms. Martin. I am trying to convey that and not doing a very good job of it, but yes, I remember that. I know you John and Dave, were both dealt this hand but like I say, spending more money to save money? You cannot explain that to the citizens."

Com. Burrus, "Tell me where we are spending more money today?"

Mr. Whitcomb, "You are going to hire more jailers."

Com. Burrus, "I am not talking that subject at all. That is between Sheriff Reynolds and the Council."

Mr. Whitcomb, "Regardless of what you people approve or not has got to be done or else you say, the jail won't be safe and it won't be open, it won't be to top operating capacity. I better say this, too. You are talking about the attitude of the federal prisoners, do you think they are going to be happier after they are sentenced or are they happier before they are sentenced. I don't think that makes a whole lot of difference or much sense either. My comment is the taxpayer and myself, we have been deceived on this."

Com. Burrus, "I respect you opinion on that but I disagree. Lets move on."

Marge Hefner, "These federal prisoners, after they have been to court, will they come back to the prison here or will they be sent somewhere else?"

Com. Sheets, "If they are sentenced to prison, they will go someplace else."

Com. Evans, "They will probably come back here to await sentencing and once they are sentenced, and part of their sentence will include incarceration somewhere else. John, you are taking your numbers at today's population, the Sheriff said 217 and add 80 we are still below 300. If we were to open at 300, we would still be opening under the original deal."

Mr. Whitcomb, "My point is, this shouldn't have come to this. It should have gone along with the original findings of the committee that was formed to instruct the Commissioners and the Council on how much of a jail to build."

Com. Evans, "You are probably correct but as Commissioner Burrus said, things have changed from then."

Mr. Whitcomb, "I did sign the paper for a new jail, now I am sorry I did."


COMMISSIONERS' REPORTS

North District: John Evans

1. Performance Letter of Credit #365 for $35,000.00 for Coventry Subdivision will expire
on June 15, 2002. Deficiencies remain and that letter needs to be extended. The developer has not extended this guarantee and recommend filing a claim.

Com. Evans moved to approve, Com. Sheets seconded, motion carried.

2. Road Agreement for Jackson Minor Subdivision 2518-D-1, located on the north side of CR 1000 North between CR 400 East and CR 475 East. Offer to contribute $750.00/lot for a total of $750.00. Owners and subdividers are William Scott and Debra A. Jones.

Com. Evans moved to approve, Com. Sheets seconded, motion carried.

3. INDOT has started land acquisition for the US 6 Project in South Haven on the SW corner of Eagle Creek Rd. and US 6. Porter County has a lot in this area. INDOT is offering $2,800.00 for a small strip of land, 140 feet by 14.06 feet (1968 square feet). Gwenn has the offer and necessary documents. Recommend approval.

Com. Evans moved to approve, Com. Sheets seconded, motion carried.

4. Calumet Trail Change Order #1 for a reduction of $156,200.00. This is a change order that was discussed with INDOT and Superior Construction prior to the notice to proceed being issued. This eliminated the gazebo and temporary fence and added the Bike Path Protection item. Recommend approval.

Com. Evans moved to approve, Com. Sheets seconded, motion carried.

5. Calumet Trail Change Order #2 for a reduction of $174,422.00. This change order eliminated the concrete pavement, contraction joint and concrete pavement items. The contraction joint material is being paid for due to the special size. Recommend approval.

Com. Evans moved to approve, Com. Sheets seconded, motion carried.

6. Calumet Trail Change Order #3 for excavation, Type X in the amount of $23,070.58. This compensates the contractor for removing slag that has solidified. This is per INDOT specifications. This was stopped and the remaining material was left in place. It made no sense to remove this hard material and replace it with size 53 aggregates. Recommend approval. (Note the net change for these three change orders is a reduction of $307,551.42.)

Com. Evans moved to approve, Com. Sheets seconded, motion carried.

7. Claim Voucher #3 for construction inspection of Calumet Trail, from 4-21-02 through 5-18-02, in the net amount of $11,464.18. Recommend approval.

Com. Evans moved to approve, Com. Sheets seconded, motion carried.

Center District: Larry Sheets

1. Claim Vouchers #23 & #24 for CR 300 West for soil investigation for a gross total
of $56,470.70. Two claim forms are used due to funding differences. Claim Voucher #23 is for a net amount $15,136.40 at 80% federal funds, and Claim Voucher #24 is for $28,162.65 at 75% federal funds. Recommend approval.

Com. Sheets moved to approve, Com. Evans seconded, motion carried.

2. LPA Claim Voucher #25 for CR 300 West for design in the net amount of $19,804.13. Recommend approval. (This is for re-submittal of several claims that have previously been submitted but for some reason, INDOT did not pay)

Com. Sheets moved to approve, Com. Evans seconded, motion carried

3. Companion LPA Claim Voucher #7 for CR 300 West, in the net amount of $9,902.09. This the federal share reimbursement of 12.5%. This is to share the local cost with INDOT. Recommend approval.

Com. Sheets moved to approve, Com. Evans seconded, motion carried

4. Companion LPA Claim Voucher #7 for CR 300 West, in the net amount of $9,902.09. This the federal share reimbursement of 12.5%. This is to share the local cost with INDOT. Recommend approval.

Com. Sheets moved to approve, Com. Evans seconded, motion carried

South District: David Burrus

1. Road Agreement for Porter Minor Subdivision 1149-A-1, located on CR 250 West
between CR 450 South and CR 550 South. Offer to contribute $750.00/lot for a total of $3,000.00. Owners and subdividers are Donald Roeske, Carole Ann Pankau, and Flora Mae Roeske.

Com. Burrus moved to approve, Com. Evans seconded, motion carried.


CORRESPONDENCE

Weights and Measures monthly report for May is on file.
Clerk's monthly report for April is on file.
2001 Annual Report from Juvenile Court is on file.

Karen Przybysz acceptance as late enrollee

Com. Sheets moved to approve Karen Przybysz as late enrollee to the Porter County Employee Benefit Plan effective June 1, 2002, Com. Evans seconded, motion carried.

Right of way purchase in South Haven

Com. Sheets moved to approve to expand the Highway 6 right of way in Porter township in the amount of $2,800.00 in the South Haven area, Com. Evans seconded, motion carried.

Reappointment to Workforce Investment Board: Jim Jorgensen, Marge Whickcar

Com. Sheets moved to approve to reappoint Jim Jorgensen and Madge Whickcar to the Workforce Investment Board for three year terms, Com. Evans seconded, motion carried.

Reappointment of Mary Bradford to Porter County Public Library Board of Trustees

Com. Evans moved to reappoint Mary Bradford to the Porter County Board of Trustees for a four year term beginning July 1, 2002 through June 30, 2006, Com. Sheets seconded, motion carried.

Request for additional appropriation, Highway Department

fund 02$25,000.00acct. 360.191Stone-Dist.1
fund 02$50,000.00acct. 360.391Stone-Dist. 3
fund 02$75,000.00acct. 2362.191Bituminous-Dist. 1
fund 02$100,000.00acct. 2362.291Bituminous-Dist. 2
fund 02$50,000.00acct. 2362.391Bituminous-Dist. 3
(Additional funds needed for road construction.)

Com. Sheets moved to approve, Com. Evans seconded, motion carried.

Request for transfer of funds-Commissioners' office
Fund 01.30$18.00from acct 3973Change of venue
into acct 3976Co Prop Assessed Benefits
Fund 01.30$50.00from acct 3340Advertising
into acct 3410Official Bonds
Fund 01.30$100.00from acct 3710Equipment Rental
into acct 3630Equipment Repair

1.To pay drainage assessment.
2.To pay official bond for Center Twp. Assessor.
3.To pay for law mower repair.

Com. Sheets moved to approve, Com. Evans seconded, motion carried.

Request to send letter to Toll Road Director, Michael Puro

Com. Evans, "We were requested to write a letter to the Toll Road in regard to the request from the Jackson Township residents and we have done and I will read it for the record. This is written to Michael Puro, General Manager of the Indiana Toll Road.

Dear Mr. Puro:

By way of introduction, my name is John Evans and I am a Porter County Commissioner for the North District of Porter County, Indiana. It has recently been brought to my attention through a number of concerned citizens who reside in Jackson Township that the Indiana Toll Road is in the process of planning to relocate a toll plaza into the unincorporated Porter County area of Jackson Township. At our public meeting May 8, 2002, the Porter County Board of Commissioners were presented with several items of concern from Jackson Township residents. Upon listening to the concerns stated, the Porter County Board of Commissioners have formulated identical concerns regarding the relocation of a toll plaza into the unincorporated area of Porter County in Jackson Township. Specifically, the Porter County Board of Commissioners are concerned that they were not notified about the plan to relocate the toll plaza from Portage to the Jackson Township area prior to their reading about it in the newspaper and being advised by Jackson Township residents. The Porter County Board of Commissioners are requesting more information from the Indiana Toll Road prior to this project moving forward, as is the public.

I have conferred with our Porter County Engineering Department and we are requesting that upon receipt of this letter, you provide our office with any environmental impact studies that have been completed, including the impact on noise pollution; air quality control; and storm water run off compliance with the new IDEM standards. The Porter County Board of Commissioners are seeking verification that such studies have been completed and, under the Indiana Open Door Act, are requesting copies of the same.

In addition, the Porter County Board of Commissioners would like you to advise the Commissioners of your intentions regarding the relocation of this toll plaza by providing the above items and the current project plans for this project. We have at least seven major subdivisions and nine minor subdivisions that are within a half mile of the Toll Road through unincorporated Porter County. As such, there needs to be public participation, including legal notice and proper hearings, prior to proceeding on such a project.

Perhaps you should consider attending our next public meeting on Tuesday, June 18, 2002 to address our concerns. We look forward to hearing from you regarding the status of this project as well as to address the concerns raised above at your earliest convenience upon receipt of this letter.

Sincerely,
s\John A. Evans
Porter County Commissioner
JAE\vw

Com. Evans, "Copies were sent to the governor, state legislators, and United States senators."

Com. Sheets moved to recess until 1:30, Com. Evans seconded, motion carried

1:30 AFTERNOON SESSION-PLAN COMMISSION
Steve Nigro, Plan Commission
Rezone, Thomas Rigg-AG to I-1 Light Industrial – 1st reading

Mr. Nigro, "Good afternoon. This is a petition to rezone approximately 18 acres in Washington Township from Agricultural to I-1 which is light industrial. This was passed by a favorable vote of 8-0 before the Plan Commission."

Thomas Rigg, "The ground around it to the north is I-1 already and the rest of the ground is pretty much houses so there is not a whole lot left, and it is strictly farm on the other side of the road."

Com. Burrus, "Obviously we have no one here to speak against this. We will close the public part of the meeting."

Com. Sheets, "The back of this property is the airport, the north-south runway. It is going to be opening up some jobs, I like that. I think the Riggs' family owns all the property around there."

Com. Evans, "Anyone speak for or against it at the Plan Commission?"

Mr. Nigro, "No. It was just Mr. Rigg presenting his case."

Com. Burrus, "I can add one comment to it. My mother lives out there and I know that road really well. I think it is an appropriate use for that land with the adjacent zoning and the airport, it makes pretty good sense to me."

Com. Evans moved to approve the rezoning on first reading, Com. Sheets seconded, motion carried.

Com. Burrus, "Second reading will be at our June 18th meeting at the same time as today, 1:30 in the afternoon."

July 5th-paid holiday for Porter County Employees

Com. Burrus, "Before we recess, we have a recommendation regarding the Fourth of July holiday. Since it falls on a Thursday, we wanted to discuss making Friday, July 5th a day off with pay for the County employees. This is something we can do and would be a convenient and beneficial thing for the employees at a time when virtually all the other salary oriented perks have been frozen, so I would support this gesture."

Com. Evans moved to approve Friday, July 5th as a paid holiday for County employees, Com. Sheets seconded, motion carried.

Com. Evans moved to recess the meeting, Com. Sheets seconded, motion carried.

With no further business to discuss, the meeting was recessed.

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
PORTER COUNTY, INDIANA

David L. Burrus
Larry D. Sheets
John A. Evans

Attest: Sandra K. Vuko, Auditor