PORTER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REGULAR MEETING
JULY 15, 2003


The regular meeting of the Porter County Board of Commissioners convened at 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, July 15, 2003 in the Commissioners' Chambers of the Administration Center.

Those present were Commissioners David Burrus and John Evans.

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


APPROVAL OF PAYROLL

Com. Evans moved to approve the payroll of July 14, 2003, Com. Burrus seconded, motion carried.


APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Com. Evans moved to approve the minutes of May 6, 2003, Com. Burrus seconded, motion carried.


DRUG FREE COMMUNITY FUNDS-
Sharon Cawood, Director of Porter County Substance Abuse Council
Fred Litner, Chairperson

Ms. Cawood, "I am the director of Porter County Substance Abuse Council. We have been coming before you for fourteen years. You have the allocations for this year's Drug Free Community Fund dollars. These dollars are not taxpayers dollars, they are dollars the state fines DUI offenders in Porter County only. Fred Litner is the chairperson of our coalition this year and he will speak to you about that aspect."

Mr. Litner, "As you can see from the list, we had quite a number of proposals in the area of prevention and education. I won't go through the entire list. The total requests were $33,241.65; in the area of Treatment and Prevention the total request was $50,900.00; and in the area of Justice, the total request was $35,904.85. The Substance Abuse Council office was $26,543.72. Total was $222,217.72. The total funding we have available is $146,590.22. So the need obviously still exceeds the money we have available and we have been diligent in making decisions on allocations."

Com. Burrus, "These numbers you have given us by category are requests, is that correct? So from those, you will have to pare them down so you can balance your $146,000.00 budget?"

Ms. Cawood, "We have pared it down, we have the awards. We had requests of $222,000.00 and the people we have awarded the grants to so that total is $146,000.00. We have done that."

Com. Evans, "I think it is great all the work you do and I notice the newspapers, the last few days, all the notoriety that the weekend drinking is causing and I think hopefully these programs will help us."

Com. Burrus, "If we are looking at funding from drug offense issues or substance abuse issues of $146,000.00, how can we relate this to the number of offenses, is there some amount of money per offense that this adds up to?"

Ms. Cawood, "We get $200.00 and then we keep 75% of that and send the other 25% to Indianapolis. So I guess you would have to do the math to see what we are getting. We are actually averaging about 80 and 100 drunk drivers a month in Porter County. So that is where these dollars are coming from."

Com. Burrus, "So by doing the math, I don't have it in my head, but there is a significant number of offenses that have occurred."

Ms. Cawood, "Yes. And it seems to have escalated this year."

Mr. Litner, "It also includes the drunk felony convictions fines and fees for that. . . . (Inaudible).

Ms. Cawood, "Mike ____________, our drunk driving chairperson is here with us today and that is why we have sort of upped the patrols because we've seen the dollars were going up, the offenses were going up, arrests were going up over the weekends so we thought we needed to address that."

Com. Burrus, "How does this amount compare with previous years?"

Ms. Cawood, "Last year we had $113,000.00 to give out so you can see the dollars have come up."

Com. Evans, "Are there provisions for those people that are judged to pay the amount and then do you have a collection problem in that regard?"

Ms. Cawood, "It is on their court costs. So it is court ordered--the judges order that and they pay it at the Clerk's office."

Com. Burrus, "Well, I think there is good news and bad news. I think the number one thing is we have a source of revenue that helps fund some of these programs and certainly reinforces the point that we do have some social problems in our community that we can't ignore, unfortunately, but we do have some good programs with good efforts."

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


RESOLUTION NO. 03-03 COMMENDING VETERANS OF PORTER COUNTY-

Com. Burrus, "We have a request from the Porter County Fair Board to help them in recognition this year at the Fair of the veterans has become an annual event. The request is for a resolution to be passed by this Board. The proposed resolution in No. 03-03."

RESOLUTION NO. 03-03
COMMENDING ALL PORTER COUNTY VETERANS
WHEREAS, the Porter County Board of Commissioners has determined that all veterans
from Porter County, Indiana shall be commended for their service to our country; and
WHEREAS, the Porter County Board of Commissioners desires to extend appreciation to all those individuals who served their country in time of peace and war by serving in the military so that others can enjoy the freedoms we currently have; and
WHEREAS, the Porter County Board of Commissioners recognizes that the veterans of the Viet Nam war in particular risked their lives to ensure our liberties and freedoms; and
WHEREAS, the Porter County Board of Commissioners understands that the generation of veterans of the Viet Nam war are rapidly passing on and should be commended for their loyalty and services to the United State of America;
THEREFORE BE IT AND IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the Porter County Board of Commissioners; that:
The Porter County Board of Commissioners commends all veterans and notably the Viet Nam War veterans for the sacrifices they have endured and the loyalty they have shown to their county and fellow man;
Further, the Porter County Board of Commissioners commends all those individuals who served our country so we can enjoy the freedom and liberties which we currently enjoy; and
Further, the Porter County Board of Commissioners extends its heartfelt sympathy and respect for the thousands of veterans who lost their lives serving our country;
FURTHER WE RESOLVE AND HEREBY HONORABLY COMMEND all who fought for our country.
Date this 23rd day of July, 2003.
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
PORTER COUNTY, INDIANA
s/David L. Burrus
s/John A. Evans
Larry D. Sheets

Com. Burrus, "I would like to make the comment that every year the Fair has taken on a program to honor veterans in general and each year they single out one war for special recognition. I believe last year was the Korean War, but nevertheless it is being identified for special recognition on a rotating basis."

Com. Evans moved to approve Resolution 03-03, Com. Burrus seconded, motion carried.


DELINQUENT PERSONAL PROPERTY TAXES UPDATE

Com. Burrus, "I want to make a comment for the benefit of the press in particular. Some time
ago we had been dealing with the topic of delinquent personal property taxes. Our intention was to have that roster of delinquent tax payers available today. Because of the schedule of the tax payments coming in just recently, the Treasurer has been receiving payments on some of those delinquent taxes and he will have a current list of personal property delinquents available for public inspection at our next meeting and it will be on the website. We are taking advantage of the opportunity on these tax bills coming in to update that list and hopefully that will be soon. That is the status on that. Moving ahead to the Office Holders and Department Heads, we have Dave Schelling from the Highway Department."


OFFICE HOLDERS/DEPARTMENT HEADS

Mr. Schelling, "We have had some lack of action on the developer's part over the years in Bridlewood Subdivision. There is a pre-cast conspan bridge out there that needed to have concrete wing walls placed on each end. The developer put landscape timber up without any County approval. This has been going on for probably eight years or something like that. We had an agreement with Cambridge Development Corporation, Bob Rossman, for him to put these wing walls in 1996. We would not accept that road which is Hunt Club Drive or Bridlewood Lane into our highway system until that work has been done and after we inspect it for any other deficiencies. This has really been at a standstill. The people out there deserve county maintenance of the roads but we are not going to do that until we take the roads over properly. To date, that hasn't been done. I have a little map that shows Bridlewood Subdivision. The roads in blue are the ones that we've accepted and are maintaining. The orange roads are the ones that have not been accepted. I want to point out that at the north end of Hunt Club Drive there is Stonegate Lane so actually there are three roads that have not been accepted for maintenance. The yellow highlighted land is land owned by Cambridge Development Corporation or Rossman Properties, Inc. There are five lots and then the additional property north of Salt Creek. We don't have a performance guarantee on this work because of the agreement in 1996 eliminated that need but unfortunately he has never proceeded and produced what he agreed to do back in that old agreement. Maybe the County could place a moratorium on any driveway permits or access to lots 15, 25, 26, 29, 30 and also the acreage to the north and out lot C until the developer produces."

Com. Burrus, "Your comment about the substantial portion of these streets not having been taken over for maintenance, this includes no snow plow service provided, correct? And apparently from this drawing there is probably somewhere in the neighborhood of a dozen lots that are affected by that?"

Mr. Schelling, "Yes, it might be a little bit less than that, but one is really too many."

Com. Burrus, "It sounds like what you are talking about here is a housekeeping item that certainly needs to be addressed. I think it is a case where one or two developers that don't necessarily represent all the developers tend to ignore and try to skirt some of the existing requirements we have to insure the quality of long term improvements. The concern I have on something like this, is that once this developer is released from their responsibility then the county has to assume responsibility for this maintenance and often times when it is not done properly then the taxpayers end up having to pay for improvements that should have been part of the original development. I understand your point. John, do you want to comment?"

Com. Evans, "Are these roads, Stonegate, Hunt Club, and Bridlewood, are they finished paved?"

Mr. Schelling, "They are paved, but Hunt Club Drive has been constructed so long ago that it does need additional work on it. There's some deformation near the conspan unit which I highlighted in black towards the north end."

Com. Evans, "Are the wing walls supposed to go there?"

Mr. Schelling, "Yes. So as a minimum there is going to have to be some cracks sealing on Hunt Club Drive in addition to a sign at Stonegate Lane."

Com. Evans, "Any other place where wing walls are supposed to be installed and they aren't?"

Mr. Schelling, "No. Just on both sides, there are four wing walls all together."

Com. Evans, "What about the drainage? Is the drainage ___________ through the rest of the street?"

Mr. Schelling, "Yes. That is in pretty good shape. There was a long time problem with Bill Tanke's property, but the drainage from Tanke's property that went onto the property naturally has finally has been resolved after years of discussions with the developers. That is at the north end of Bridlewood Lane."

Com. Evans, "These lots that you have highlighted in yellow are for sale at this time?"

Mr. Schelling, "I would assume so. They are owned by Rossman Properties Incorporated. Some of that is also Cambridge Development Corp."

Com. Evans, "And this agreement dates back to 1996? Then I think he has had ample time to complete the project or at least give you a time schedule. I agree we should post a moratorium on any future sales."

Com. Burrus, "We can recommend that to the Plan Commission and it will be their action. You mentioned that the drainage seemed to be okay. Could you highlight again the deficiencies; the wingwalls on the bridge, or the structure issue and pavement surface in some areas?"

Mr. Schelling, "Yes, there are areas that will need to be repaired, especially near the conspan unit which is a small concrete bridge. There the soil washed out from behind it because it was never properly constructed."

Com. Burrus, "I think it would be appropriate for us to have a very detailed, not necessarily lengthy, but a detailed list of deficiencies that need to be corrected before we are prepared to accept and move to any kind of imposition we put on this thing. If it turns out in the vote that we go forward and recommend the Plan Commission do this, I would expect to see some response from the developer but he is going to need to know specifically what he needs to correct. A specific list would be appropriate."

Com. Evans moved to send a recommendation to the Plan Commission that a moratorium be imposed on any driveway building permits on the undeveloped portion of Bridlewood Subdivision and that we place in our right of way signs advising the general public that the roads have not been accepted by the County, Com. Burrus seconded, motion carried.

Update on obligation of government entity inventory of capital assets
Sandy Vuko, Auditor and Michael Nielson

Com. Burrus, "This is for the acquisition cost for each. Porter County is not current with how much we have."

Ms. Vuko, "I think three years ago we had some sort of . . ."

Mr. Nielson, "Three years ago I did some consulting with a very small contract with Jim Murphy that took a look at what is a capital asset and what isn't. A lot of governments have not really gotten to that point and what is very common now is on equipment for the sake of an example. Not accounting the financial reporting for everything but establishing a dual capitalization threshold. In many cases, it is $5,000.00. I know the city of Hammond went to $10,000.00."

Com. Burrus, "That can be established by the entity, right?"

Mr. Nielson, "Yes, that is a management decision."

Com. Burrus, "One of the things that I personally would like to see if we could clear up, is to be able to comply to the extent that the State Board of Accounts is satisfied that we have responded to their notations. As Sandy pointed out, that has to do with being able to document accurately your value when it comes to possible loaning, borrowing, bonding or whatever. Those are the two motives I think are important to us. Now what has to be done or how extensive a problem is we will address here."

Mr. Nielson, "Sandy and I have met recently a couple times and the proposal I have put on the table was meant to address the general infrastructure of the county. I know that within the county is somewhere around 300 bridges and a couple hundred miles of county roads and there is traffic signals and street lighting and rights of way and all of that was, in general, optional accounting reporting in the past but what is called governmental accounting standards board statement no. 34. That is changed and that has to be accounted for. A couple years ago I spent about 12 weeks in Indianapolis helping INDOT with their accounting for general infrastructure. It was massive, 12 thousand miles of road and 5,000 bridges and what not. Basically, what Sandy and I talked about was I would like to help the county prepare that themselves as opposed to having someone come in and measure streets and count bridges and what not. With INDOT, they had all the information, it was just a matter of working with their engineers with their accounting department and putting together a record that met the requirements of the SB-34. During that whole process we met with the state Board of Accounts every other week because ultimately it goes to their desk for their concurrence. I met many times in the past with Mary Jo Blickenstaff of the State Board of Accounts here and she is aware of the type of work I do. Again, what I want to do is facilitate the process and as part of that I would provide a review of SB 34 and review necessary templates. With mentioning the cost, most of that is past history and is hard to ascertain so what INDOT did and the city of Valparaiso and Hammond and many others have done, is establish a replacement cost. What would it cost to build a mile of road today? What would it cost to build this building and then just index that back to an estimated date of acquisition or construction and that becomes your historical cost. Can't account for assets on a basis of replacement cost; it has to be deflated to an estimate of what you think you paid for it historically. That is an accounting principal, if you will. Assets are booked on a basis of cost."

Com. Burrus, "These assets, are they the responsibility of various department heads? I suspect the number would be relatively small compared to all the county departments. In other words, I would imagine the Highway Department would be a large player, probably this office would be a large player. How many people are we having to get involved to be able to respond to this?"

Mr. Nielson, "That is a good question. Generally, it is Highway. It is within a municipality, it is the public works folks, the engineer of the municipality, Planning could be helpful in terms of the land and getting the handle on rights of way and estimated values. I did quite a bit of work with Will County a couple years ago in Illinois. Basically, I worked with the Highway folks; there were 2 or 3 people there that were very knowledgeable in terms of roads and bridges and they ended up putting together the inventory and with my help, the historical cost and the depreciation schedule. On the land with Will County we ended up working with the Assessor. Perhaps that would be the case here where the Assessor would have some input."

Com. Burrus, "It is fortunate our County Engineer Dave Schelling is here this morning. Dave, with the conversation you have heard so far, we have our bi-annual bridge inspection . . "

Mr. Schelling, "We have it every two years. We have 126 bridges."

Com. Burrus, "So we have the inventory and the status, the locations, we have all kinds of documentation other than possibly value."

Mr. Nielson, "If I could just real quickly; what INDOT did, they had 5,711 bridges. To come up with costs for accounting purposes they took about 30 current bridge projects over the last couple years and were able to document that it was kind of a cross section of the entire state. They averaged those 30 bridge projects using the unit of measure of a square foot of bridge deck surface. The number came to $114.15 per square foot replacement cost. That one number was applied to all 5,700 bridges and then indexed back or deflated to the date of construction or re-construction of the bridge. Now the work I did three years ago I took a look at the inventory Porter County has and pretty much, unless I miss something, that's your inventory. It is a photo of every bridge, the date of construction, it has square foot of deck, and maybe it could be as simple as using INDOT's number because it is representative of the entire state. That number would be applied to those 126 bridges and I think the inventory that I looked at had 300 bridges but that must have been every bridge within the county."

Mr. Schelling, "It might be small structures, too. And large culverts."

Mr. Nielson, "But if it is 126 bridges, you would set that up as an inventory would apply a replacement cost and then index back to the inventory that I saw had a date of construction. So you just index or deflate using federal highway price trends. This is all perfectly appropriate and mentioned in the actual accounting statement as SB 34."

Com. Evans, "That number plugs in for bridges four lanes, or two lanes?"

Mr. Nielson, "The number is per square foot. So you would have the total square footage so you are covered there. On roads though, what Will County did was on a basis of laying mile of road construction because they had four, three and two lane and there is a difference in terms of their replacement costs so to get around it they just used lay miles. 280 miles of road translated to about 580 lane miles and that is appropriate. The unit of measure is the county's decision. All this would be run by the State Board of Accounts as the work proceeds."

Com. Burrus "What is our status right now with respect to any agreement we have, Sandy?"

Ms. Vuko, "Nothing. We haven't done anything yet."

Com. Burrus, "And the request that you had last month was to do a portion here, but it was only going to be a portion of the issue, right?"

Mr. Nielson, "Right. What I addressed in the proposal was to help the county with its general infrastructure, meaning roads, bridges, rights of way. We did not address buildings or equipment or vehicles."

Com. Burrus, "Would it be possible to have a proposal that would include those items that were left out?"

Mr. Nielson, "What I would like to do is get started on the general infrastructure and as part of that, take a look at what might be available in terms of the general fixed assets, buildings, vehicles, equipment. There is another issue, too, Commissioner, in that the county really should talk a look into writing a fixed asset policy. Nothing verbose, maybe a couple three pages and I can help with that. With that you would define perimeters, meaning a fixed asset for an accounting of natural reporting purposes is anything at or above $5,000.00. The real issue here is to, and this is mentioned numerous times in SB 34. The focus is major capital assets, not personal computers, not two way radios, strictly where is the money. That is what is going to be accounted for and that is what is going to be depreciated. What I find with a policy, the real trick, is to take those items that are minor but sensitive. The items below $5,000.00. Say at the Sheriff's Department there are weapons, two way radios, they have computers in some of the squad cars. Just call those controllable items and shift the property control of items below $5,000.00 to the department because that is really where control is going to happen. I am working with a couple municipalities over in Illinois and most of the work I have done is strictly in light of the general infrastructure because no one has accounted for that and now they have to. In a couple cases now the buildings and equipment are an issue. So in one case, it is a smaller municipality, they went to a $10,000.00 threshold. Which means they are going to do their own equipment inventory because the whole thing is going to be about 2 pages. How many items are at or above $10,000.00. On their buildings they are going to take their insurable value replacement cost and index it back to when the building was built. Again, we talked to the Auditor's about this. On their vehicles, they have a list of vehicles. Fleet has that, there is no reason to do an inventory. In some cases they don't have historical costs, so they will take the current replacement cost on a crown victoria and index back a couple years. The Bureau of Labor Statistics has those cost indexes readily available. Again, I would like to help the County with the general infrastructure and then take a look at what you have in terms of information on buildings, equipment, and vehicles and then provide a second proposal to help there. My hope would be that the second half would be a fee that is similar to the one that is already on the table if not less. We might be pleasantly surprised when the information is there."

Com. Burrus, "If we went with that approach, of the two proposals, would that then provide the total package of what we are looking for?"

Mr. Nielson, "Yes. Again, my role is that of a facilitator and a resource to help the County do this. That is the way to save a lot of time and effort and money, meaning as with INDOT, they did it internally because they had very talented people; they had lots of information and it was just a matter of putting it together. That is what I would like to help with here. Also, the State Board of Accounts, and I spoke to all 300 auditors last summer at their annual conference on this. The State Board of Accounts is their interest in seeing a policy on the table and secondly, they are interested in the prospective side. It is not that this has to be done again and again, but it has to be updated."

Com. Burrus, "Once this is done initially, then it is a dynamic situation and has to be added to or deleted from, whenever a change occurs."

Mr. Nielson, "And by doing it internally, many governments are putting the general infrastructure inventory, and the building inventory right in Excel or Access; some very simple data base. The only concern is the county financial reporting in depreciation. This is not necessarily rocket science. To depreciate a fixed asset is a couple of very simple formulas. You can do it in Excel, thereby saving money there and also then on the prospective side, you take the 2003 report, make a copy of it and rename it 2004, then go into the copy with the additions and retirements and recalculate the depreciation."

Com. Burrus, "That is the mechanics of it and I think we can work that part out but the thing I am concerned about is your comment of being a facilitator and our concern being having the necessary follow up to make sure the information and participation from our people was completed."

Com. Evans, "The State Board of Accounts charges you, Sandy, with this report?"

Ms. Vuko, "Yes, and you."

Com. Burrus, "Like you said, it is a footnote on the report, I don't think it is a critical issue to the extent that we need to show progress on it is what I am saying. The thing we want to do is make sure we can address their concerns and since it is a relatively new requirement, I think we are heading in the right direction."

Com. Evans, "Are we charged with having completed this year or just having this portion completed?"

Ms. Vuko, "I don't know, we are supposed to have our exit conference next week and they will explain it to us exactly where we should have been by now."

Mr. Nielson, "There really is a couple pieces to this. There is a financial reporting piece and that should be happening right now meaning the financial statements will look completely different. The County has another couple of years or so to do the general infrastructure on the equipment and buildings. The assumption has been that they have been accounted for. It is just now they have to be depreciated. Many, many governments basically said we are doing the reporting model and the depreciation; we are doing it all at once, we don't want to drag this out for years."

Com. Burrus, "What kind of a time table are we looking at, can this be completed in six months, or a year?"

Mr. Nielson, "Well, on this we would probably be looking at doing it between now and the first part of next year. It is a process meaning I will sit down with the Highway folks and we will talk about very specific things like an inventory of bridges, roads, and that is not prepared the next day. A resource that I would provide all of the templates we need; all the cost indexes we need, and on and on."

Com. Burrus, "Could we look at the completion of the entire package of within a year?"

Mr. Nielson, "Yes."

Com. Burrus, "So going back to your proposal from last time, Sandy, and that is to address the agreement that is proposed for the first phase."

Com. Evans, "In the dollar amount of . . . ?"

Ms. Vuko, "$9,800.00."

Com. Evans, "And did we determine where that would be paid from?"

Ms. Vuko, "No, we didn't."

Com. Burrus, "I think we thought about one of the Commissioners' funds, probably the CCD being a capital issue. I think it has a lot of merit and we need to get started on this if you are comfortable with the arrangement that is being proposed. John, do you have any concerns?"

Com. Evans, "No, but has Gwenn reviewed the contract?"

Ms. Vuko, "Yes, I gave it to her."

Com. Burrus, "We could approve it subject to her approval . . . did she make any comments at all?"

Ms. Vuko, "No, she didn't."

Com. Burrus, "She will be back next meeting. Let us take a vote on it and make it subject to final review from the attorney."

Ms. Vuko, "Did you want to ask the Highway Department while they are here?"

Com. Burrus, "David, what we are talking about here is a relatively new issue and I don't know if you are familiar with it but do you have any comments, questions, or concerns of where we are headed?"

Mr. Schelling, "They commented on the bridges and we have about 783 miles of roads we maintain."

Com. Burrus, "I am feeling comfortable with the record keeping and the statistics you folks have out there and I think it would be in a format to make this go very quickly."

Mr. Nielson, "That is what happened to INDOT. They had information enough to fill this room, it was just a matter of reformatting and basically account for dollars is what happens."

Com. Evans moved to approve the contract contingent on the county attorney's review upon her return, Com. Burrus seconded, motion carried.

Com. Burrus, "As you proceed on this, keep in mind the anticipated deadline of a year from
now on the whole package to have that wrapped up."


IBM SERVICE AGREEMENT REVIEW, DATA PROCESSING AS 400'S

Com. Evans, "This is a review of that IBM Service Agreement that we talked about on the AS 400, for the machines called the Eligible Machines which carry the IBM Software it refers to."

Com. Burrus, "It was for a three year service agreement and Sharon had discussed it with us."

Com. Evans, "This is the same one she has done for years with them."

Com. Burrus, "She has eliminated some as well. This is a residual contract."

Com. Evans, "It appears as if it runs from July 4th of this year through July 3, 2006."

Com. Evans moved to approve the contract with IBM for service contingent upon the county attorney's review, Com. Burrus seconded, motion carried.


COMMISSIONERS' REPORTS

Center District: Larry Sheets (read by Com. Evans)

1. INDOT LPA Claim Voucher #1 for $150,520.00, for the CR 300 West Project, Land,
Improvements and Damages. Companion Claim Voucher #1 is for $18,815.00. These claim vouchers are to reimburse the County for the Knoblock right of way purchase.

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

Com. Burrus, "Dave, you have attached a letter regarding a storm sewer inspection on Rolling Meadows subdivision. If you would briefly comment."

Mr. Schelling, "Rolling Meadows Subdivision had some drainage issues and in conjunction with that there is an additional 30" pipe that was taken from the intersection of Angelica Court and Lagura Drive. That pipe was extended to the detention pond. There have been some issues with the joint of the plastic pipe that was used. It was not installed properly and there has been a joint failure that has been repaired but there is conditional joints that are in question and that need to be inspected and repaired. That work was done in the summer of 2001; we have a two year guarantee so this summer that guarantee will expire so we need to make sure that the developer is informed of that and the contractor so that the County's interest is protected."

Com. Burrus, "The reason I think it is important we mention this is the fact that we had just dealt with another subdivision, Bridlewood, and it has an ongoing deficiency. This one, Rolling Meadows, was a similar situation where the storm sewer was inadequately designed and through Commissioner Sheets there was a cooperative effort to try to solve the problem after the fact. The cooperative effort though, is this 30" storm sewer that now appears to be not 100% correct. I think we have given David Schelling this direction privately is to proceed with anything that is necessary to insure we have a satisfactory product before we release the developer or his contractors. This is another instance where the County is no longer going to be accepting anything less than good quality work on developmental projects. Enough said on that, and David if you would follow through on that and make sure we get satisfaction on that I would appreciate it."

CORRESPONDENCE

Court Security Activity Report for June 2003 is on file.
Treasurer's Monthly Report for June 2003 is on file.
Veteran's Service Officer Monthly Report for June 2003 is in file.
Building Dept. Monthly Report for June 2003 is on file.

Request to approve bond for Roger Kleist, Coroner

Com. Evans moved to approve the Official Bond for Roger Kleist, Coroner, in the amount of $8,500.00, Com. Burrus seconded, motion carried.

Request by American Red Cross for blood drives on Sept. 12, 2003 and Nov. 7, 2003

Com. Evans moved to approve the American Red Cross blood drives on September 12, 2003
and November 7, 2003 from 8:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. at the Administration Center, Com. Burrus seconded, motion carried.

Request for additional appropriation-Highway Dept.

Fund 02$15,000.00account 3560vehicle repair

Needed to cover repair costs on equipment.

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


Stop signs at Greenfield Creek and Meadow Glen Subdivision

Com. Evans, "Jack Jarnecke, the Highway Superintendent, asked us at our last meeting, with regard to two stop signs at Greenfield Creek Subdivision and Meadow Glen Subdivision and we asked him to confer with the Porter County Sheriff's Department. Sgt. Kuehl did a survey of both intersections at the request of Jack and the report returned by him to us indicates that based on the survey information that he concurs that no four-way stop signs are needed at this time. He does mention there is a minor speeding problem and that the information in regard to that speeding problem is being forwarded to the patrol division. I think we should concur with their findings."

Com. Burrus, "I think probably the engineering concept that you don't use stop signs for speed control is accurate. However, in the past month we have had numerous calls and complaints from residents indicating there is a general trend towards speeding on the majority of county roads. The term they are using is people blowing off stop signs, running stop signs without even slowing down in many instances. If we concur with this report, I would strongly recommend and request that the Sheriff's Department, through their patrol division, would initiate an aggressive and active campaign towards enforcing existing traffic control signs and traffic speed limits."

Com. Evans, "I concur. We should mention that these subdivisions, the people that are performing these offenses are people that live there so they should take a little pride in their own neighborhoods."

Com. Burrus, "I don't know if we need to take a vote on that."

Com. Evans, "I don't think there is any action required."


Valparaiso's annexation of property by the Porter County Airport

Com. Evans, "I have a comment about Valparaiso's annexation of the property east of town and I would just like to indicate that the Porter County Municipal Airport is not going to look kindly on any implied curfew that could be extended to that property. I think Dave, you wrote an article for the paper last weekend and it pretty safely described our position in regard to that property. I certainly hope that the city of Valparaiso Plan Commission takes the needs of the Porter County Airport and the whole county into consideration when they make this plan."

Com. Burrus, "I would like to second what John said. Our concern is not with the annexation, that is not the issue, it is with the zoning that occurs once the annexation has been completed. Our concern is that residential zoning and airport approach patterns historically, are not compatible. We recognize that the Porter County Airport is a significant contributor to any kind of economic development packages that might be put together for enticing industry and business to Porter County. We think it would be counter productive to do anything locally in terms of zoning that would hinder and hamper normal and expected airport operations. We understand the action was taken last night in terms of annexation; we respect that; the City Council made reference to the issue of control. If the annexation follows through as anticipated, they will have the control and we would expect them to exercise, through their Plan Commission, acceptable and proper zoning."

John Whitcomb, "One thing I don't understand, I read that article in the paper about the airport. Where is all this funding or input of finances, where's that coming from and where's it going? I got the article right here. The airport has become an economic engine for our region. Now explain that to me. They still get funds from the tax payers, don't they?"

Com. Burrus, "That is correct but what I was referring to was that almost any industry, and you can look at the new bakery out here, you can look at JetCorp. and a number of small industries that have located in the Valparaiso area, and considering North County, the Ameriplex in Portage and so forth. When these companies sit down with local authorities and say now we are thinking about coming here but we have five other choices, what can you offer us? One of the things on their check list is do you have good transportation assets? That has the form of rail, highway, and air. The airport is one of their items of interest when they decide to locate, that is what I meant by that."

Mr. Whitcomb, "And that is for their benefit, not for the taxpayers' benefit?"

Com. Burrus, "Well, if you include employment of hundreds of people that is part of our benefit, I would say it is payback."


Electronic voting comments by citizen John Whitcomb

Mr. Whitcomb, "I have heard that all my life and I don't believe it. First of all, electronic voting. You people are going to have to make up your mind to pretty quick. Are you going to spend that $1.2 million to get the minimum amount of electronic equipment to vote or are you going to save some money and go to paper ballots where they can be recounted and they are more reliable as to honesty."

Com. Evans, "I think the $1.2 million refers to the handicap access where each precinct, as I understand is the federal mandate is that we must provide the handicap access in each precinct. That part is going to be reimbursed. Beyond that, it is our decision what we do."

Mr. Whitcomb, "I've got the law here and I read it many times. Paper ballots are just fine for


handicapped people. They can manage the handicap to vote on paper ballots. It has been done for years and it says in here that it shall not be infringed upon. Three places in this law it says paper ballots will not be infringed upon so don't give me that argument. Read this law."

Com. Evans, "That is the part that is going to be reimbursed as I understand it, if we go to electronic, that is the only part that will be reimbursed."

Mr. Whitcomb, "I was talking with Dale Brewer and she seems to think one or two machine at each precinct and possibly some of the ones up north, the bigger ones. The bigger ones I want to relate to you people, only have 1,100 to 1,200 people. Which I don't think is that big that paper ballots can't handle. She thought one machine at each precinct would be sufficient. And that comes to $1.2 million."

Com. Evans, "That's the handicap machines she is talking about, right?"

Mr. Whitcomb, "Its for anybody that can use them. There is not that many handicap people voting here. I mean handicap to the point where they need help. If they need help to mark the ballot they'll need help to punch that button on that machine. You see what I am saying? If they are truly handicapped. I don't call a person who goes in with a ankle or a foot even completely amputated, don't call them really handicapped, cause what, they can't vote on a paper ballot or a machine? I don't know what the government says on that. In this law they didn't mention it, it just says handicapped. It's probably just the legislature and the Congress who is handicapped. I hope you can give me an answer on that pretty soon. You better be able to. I'll leave this with a question that is bothering me. How are you going to pay for it? How are you going to pay for that $1.2 million even if it is for handicapped people?"

Com. Burrus, "Did you hear what John (Evans) just said?"

Com. Evans, "That is the part that is going to be reimbursed, the handicap portion. Other than that, it is unfunded, mandated for whatever changes are made. Our position is we will have to listen to the board when they come with their recommendation, the Election Board."

Mr. Whitcomb, "The federal government will naturally hang out that old tariff every time, but I still there is something the county as to come up with some money."

Com. Evans, "Yes, the rest of it, anything that is not handicapped is not . . ."

Mr. Whitcomb, "Even with the handicapped, you have to come up with something like $200,000.00. But I will read it again."

Com. Evans, "The Election Board needs to address it, make a recommendation then we will decide on their recommendation."

Comments on Animal Shelter raising prices by citizen John Whitcomb

Mr. Whitcomb, "Yes. I left some information for you people, did you read it, I hope? If not, better take time to read it. Here's an article on the animal shelter and I was here when Ms. Ogle brought up her proposal to increase our rates and it sounds like a good idea if she can actually put some money in the general fund. I live right out there and when I first moved out there 30 years ago we were inundated with cats and dogs because people would come to that animal shelter and if they were closed, and I am sure some people went there because they were closed, and they would set their animals out there and turn them loose. We had a hell of a time. Had more cats and dogs running around than we had farm animals. Finally, by the shelter not charging for taking in an animal, it dissipated. Very seldom do we ever find any strays around. Now with this increase she is imposing, the fee to accept an animal, they have to pay a fee to get rid of it and I think it is $40.00. Nobody is going to pay that, or not too many people are, let me put it that way. They are going to dump them off here or all throughout the county. I think you better . . ."

Com. Burrus, "John, that is the same logic you have about disposal of trash. If you charge a fee to dispose of trash, people are going to dump along county roads. But we can't do the disposal free either, so there is fine line there and you might have a point that the amount of the fee has to be taken into consideration but these services are not able to be done without some kind of support."

Comments on fireworks in the county by citizen John Whitcomb

Mr. Whitcomb, "Also, the Animal Shelter, doesn't it get tax money from the property taxes? If they can instigate these fees, I think she said they will be self sufficient, which sounds really good but there might be something else. All right, the next one: fireworks. A noise ordinance, I looked up in the county ordinances and you had a noise ordinance, it is about barking dogs. This 4th of July, across the street where I live, in Heritage Valley, those people go ape, meaning wild, 3 weeks before the 4th of July and they are still celebrating it yet. Last Sunday up until 10:00 they were shooting off fireworks. That wasn't the worst part. I don't go to bed till after that, I am sure some of my neighbors did, but I don't, or my wife, so it doesn't bother us that much. Except when some of those rocket things come tumbling down on our roof we get a little concerned, not only for the roof but I've got four big pine trees that are over a hundred years old in front of my house and they catch fire real easy. I would urge you people to license the setting off of fireworks. Now I know that our stupid legislature says its against the law; you can't do that; you can buy them here but you can't set them off here. People are supposedly supposed to sign a paper to that effect. It doesn't seem to deter anybody. Across the street at Heritage Valley, I am sure those people did the last one, through their homeowner's organization. Did they have a permit? I don't know. If the county would issue permits, it would be a source of income. There you go people, that is what you are looking for, a source of income."

Com. Burrus, "The cost of enforcing those kinds of new ordinances would far and away exceed any revenue gained from it."

Permission to repair and replace serviceman's roster at courthouse, citizen John Whitcomb

Mr. Whitcomb, "For the sake of brevity, I'll let that pass. Years ago there used to be serviceman's roster on the Courthouse lawn. Everybody, when it was originally set up, anyone who went to the service from Porter County was supposed to be on that list. It was for World War 2. It came down, I am not sure for what reason. A few of my friends have checked around and say it is over in the old jail, what is left of it. I assume the County Commissioners haven't any reason to keep it or restore it, right?"

Com. Burrus, "There are no plans right now but I think if there was a plan to restore it, it would be supported by the community and we would go along with that."

Mr. Whitcomb, "I belong to VFW and the last few months we have been talking about this very thing. I was instructed to ask if you didn't have any plans of restoring it or keeping it intact, if you would give it to us, the veterans of this community, the VFW or the American Legion. The people at the American Legion I was talking to said they have no place to put it at their place and the VFW out on Roosevelt Road have a lot of room and we would be glad to take it and we would be asking for community support. So if you people don't want it, would you consider having us restore it and putting it back on the court house lawn?"

Com. Evans, "I would rather see that done than giving it to the one VFW. I belong to the VFW in Porter and I belong to the American Legion in Chesterton. There is one in Hebron and another one in Kouts. I think if it is a county roster, it belongs on county property."

Mr. Whitcomb, "I am glad to hear you say that because that is how we feel about it and we would like to do that. You don't have to make up your mind, but if you give me a little encouragement, I will take this back to our membership and we will go from there."

Com. Burrus, "I think based on John's comment and my feelings that it would be very appropriate to follow up on that. The next step would be to come up with some kind of proposal that we could discuss here. How is it going to be displayed? Come up with a design for it on how you want to do it and then you could use that for a target for any fund-raising and we could agree on a particular site where it will be appropriate. Approach it from the idea of presenting a proposal here that we can respond to."

Mr. Whitcomb, "Yes, we were planning on doing that. I am certainly glad to hear you say you would like it on the courthouse lawn again."

Com. Burrus, "It was very attractive, I thought. Thank you and on your last item, lets follow through on that. We do have an afternoon session with two first readings of rezone issues."

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


AFTERNOON SESSION-PLAN COMMISSION
Bob Thompson, Director
Todd Leeth, Attorney

Rezone RR to R1-Rick Hornat owner, 1st reading

Com. Burrus, "We have two rezones to consider. The first one is a petition presented by Rick Hornat to go from RR to R1."

Mr. Thompson, "This is Plan Commission resolution 03-7. Petitioner Rick Hornat requesting an amendment from RR, Rural Residential to R1, Single Family Residential. This was before the Plan Commission at their June 11th meeting and forwarded to the County Commissioners with a favorable recommendation by a 5-0 vote."

Mr. Leeth, "I am here on behalf of Rick Hornat, the petitioner in this matter. As Mr. Thompson indicated, we are seeking a zone change to R1 to allow for a single family subdivision on a 30 acre parcel that is on the east side of Sturdy Road. I have provided you a map that shows the orientation for that parcel. It is north of Division Road, there is a 10 acre parcel along and at the corner of Sturdy and Division labeled Dr. Pithadia owns that parcel. As I indicated to the Plan Commission there is a significant portion of the surrounding area that is already zoned R1. Immediately north of this, is what we would typically call a minor subdivision, but technically it was platted as a major subdivision with 4 lots there. On the west side of Sturdy Road is Meadow Glen Subdivision and throughout the other areas there is R1 as well. Immediately to the east is the Aldi warehouse. The warehouse, the trucking portion of that building faces east and Highway 49 so we think that is well shielded from the use of this property as a subdivision as well. The drainage maybe a key concern and that is under the purview of the Plan Commission as you know we have had some discussions with Dr. Pithadia to have him dedicate some land on his property and we would utilize and build on his land for a detention pond that would serve both his property and this property. That is in negotiations. I can't represent to you that is a finalized agreement but that is what our hopes are. The Plan Commission held a hearing, there were no remonstrators who appeared after notice. They made a favorable recommendation to you. Mr. Hornat joins me this afternoon and would be happy to answer any questions you might have."

Com. Burrus, "Is there anyone here in the audience that would be speaking against the rezone? Okay, hearing none, I will close the public portion of the hearing and continue on. Is there anyone else for this other than Mr. Hornat? John, I assume you are in favor of this."

John (unidentified man in audience) "I am, and it is coming to the point where the county has asked if these are (inaudible)."

Com. Burrus, "I will close the hearing portion now. John, do you want to ask any questions?"

Com. Evans, "How many homes do you propose?"

Mr. Leeth, "There are approximately 30 homes, depending on how the drainage goes."

Com. Burrus, "That is under the requested zoning, right?"

Mr. Leeth, "That would be correct."

Com. Burrus, "What would the comparison be if you were developing this under the Rural Residential?

Mr. Leeth, "20-22."

Com. Burrus, "So you are looking at an increase of about 10 lots. Will these served by any city utilities?"

Mr. Leeth's answer was inaudible.

Com. Burrus, "And you are in negotiation with respect to the retention possibility? In the event that the negotiations with the parcel on the corner do not bear prudent, is there any provisions available to maintain retention capability on site?"

Mr. Leeth, "Certainly. We would have to dedicate some land and that lot count would go down because of that."

Com. Evans, "It looks like it fits within the scope of what is out there now."

Com. Burrus, "I would have thought that it would have gone the other way, to rezone as industrial as opposed to residential being next to the Aldi property. It does appear that Sturdy Road is becoming a residential corridor down there."

Com. Evans moved to approve on first reading, Com. Burrus seconded, motion carried.

Rezone R1 to C4, Terry Hartley, owner
1st reading

Mr. Thompson, "This is Plan Commission Resolution 03-5. Petitioner Terry Hartley requesting an amendment from R1 Single Family to C4 General Business on a parcel. This was to the Plan Commission May 14 and continued to June 11 and forwarded to the County Commissioners on an unfavorable recommendation by 5-0 vote."

Com. Burrus, "Anyone here going to speak on behalf of this petition?"

Bill Vaughn, "I am with First National Bank of Valparaiso and the reason we are here instead of the Hartley's is as you can see from those documents, 1st National Bank purchased the property around the end of June and this request was in from an offer to purchase that they had on a property prior. We understand it was a roofing company that was going to buy it. When they found out it wouldn't be rezoned, they backed out of the offer to purchase and we had a back up offer on the property. They accepted our back up offer and we closed on the property. I talked with Mr. Thompson, and they said if there was a substantial change in what was going to take place that the request could be looked at differently. We feel that the bank going in and building a branch office on that parcel is a substantial change from what the initial request was. That is what we have here."

Com. Evans, "On this drawing, is it both of these parcels?"

Mr. Vaughn, "This is the Hartley property and we bought both parcels."

Com. Evans, "On the northeast corner?"

Mr. Vaughn, "Yes."

Com. Burrus, "The parcel in questions, with respect to this rezoning is Parcel C only?"

Mr. Vaughn, "Correct."

Com. Burrus, "And your current zoning on parcel B is C4? Does it have two zonings?"

Mr. Vaughn, "Correct. I am unclear about how much of this back piece. . . somebody told me one time it is the back 130 feet. I don't know if you have anything exactly on that."

Mr. Thompson, "It is the corner along 130 and 149 is where the C4 zoning is. It did have some dimensions, but it went off bearing and I didn't feel it was at right angles so I made this one where the actual zoning was to the parcel."

Com. Burrus, "From a procedural point of view we have heard from the petitioner. Are you folks by any chance opposed to this proposal?"

Lady in audience, "No. We spoke opposed 2 times before but we are just here to hear it today."

Com. Burrus, "We will assume there are no other folks against it and we will close the public hearing portion."

Com. Evans, "Bill, is it the bank's intention just to build a bank branch there solely for no other outlets or out lots or anything?"

Mr. Vaughn, "No, it will just be the bank branch. We would only be building on the parcel C, the only we bought parcel B was for the accessability and the view and things like that so we wouldn't get locked in the future on that."

Com. Evans, "So it is just on parcel C. The C4 is at the north end of this parcel?"

Mr. Vaughn, "It would be the south end. My understanding is that something like this is already zoned C4, it is just the back 130 or 140 feet somewhere in that vicinity. I have not been able to find out why that was initially."

Com. Evans, "Maybe you folks can help me. Your objection was initially to the roofing company that was wanting to make a storage yard?"

Lady in audience, "Yes. (Inaudible.)

Com. Burrus, "One of the things we would be concerned about is if this were rezoned to make it all C4 then of course anything under C4 would be allowed. I think in our conversation, the bank application would be more favorable."

Com. Evans, "I think it changes things and I think you agree because you are not opposed to it but if we draw a compromise and instead of a C4 permitted use would be C1 and the bank would be able to build there but it would limit those avenues that would be objectionable. It wouldn't have outside storage or those kinds of things in C1 but the bank would obviously be able to be established there but it would protect if you decide in the future you don't want this site the other uses would not be permitted without the new owners coming back here."

Com. Burrus, "You folks understand what we are saying?"

Lady, "I think you are saying they can't put the storage up, like put up ugly buildings between us."

Com. Burrus, "With C4 zoning, anything in that classification can be built, from a storage yard to a roofing company but if we only went to C1, it would allow a bank but it would not allow construction companies. So it would be a zoning classification in the middle that would accommodate their needs but it would not allow the others. I think we are prepared to entertain that if that would be acceptable to you."

Mr. Vaughn, "Absolutely. All our intentions are to make it somewhat consistent."



Com. Evans, "That would tie the whole parcel in. I agree it needs to have the same uniform zone. It looks like it has been the same size."

Com. Burrus, "Since this requires action taken on something that has not been requested, do we need to take any retro fit to our application here or is our action going to be sufficient, Bob?"

Mr. Thompson, "I would change the ordinance as far as that goes just to show it is a reflection of the C1 vs. the C4. As far as going the Plan Commission, I don't think that is necessary."

Com. Evans moved to amend the request from C4 to C1 and approve it on first reading, Com. Burrus seconded, motion carried.


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


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


BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
PORTER COUNTY, INDIANA

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

Attest: Sandra K. Vuko, Auditor