PORTER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REGULAR MEETING
OCTOBER 7, 2003


The regular meeting of the Porter County Board of Commissioners convened at 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, October 7, 2003 in the Commissioners' Chambers of the Administration Center.

Those present: Commissioners David Burrus and John Evans and County Attorney Gwenn Rinkenberger.

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


APPROVAL OF CLAIMS

Com. Evans moved to approve the claims of October 7, 2003, Com. Burrus seconded, motion carried.


APPROVAL OF PAYROLL

Com. Evans moved to approve the payroll of September 22, 2003, and October 6, 2003, Com. Burrus seconded, motion carried.


APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Com. Evans moved to approve the minutes of August 5, 2003 and August 19, 2003, Com. Burrus seconded, motion carried.


APPOINTMENT TO BOARD OF FALLING WATERS CONSERVANCY DISTRICT-
Attorney David Hollenbeck

Atty. Hollenbeck, "It is my pleasure to be before you this morning on behalf of a newly formed unit of local government in Porter County, that being the Falling Waters Conservancy District. The Circuit Court entered its Order on September 5th, establishing the Conservancy District and one of your admittedly obscure statutory responsibilities is to make appointments to the Boards of Directors of Conservancy Districts, both the initial board once it is created and then occasionally I appear before you when there are vacancies that occur on boards. Your appointments are an interim nature, they occur until the annual meetings of these Conservancy Districts at which point the freeholders, or the land owners within the district elect their membership. In the case of Falling Waters, I think it is probably appropriate to analogize with what you did with the Natureworks Conservancy District at Aberdeen. It is a new development, a lot of raw land, not a lot of freeholders. We started out with a relatively small board in D-3, which is what the Circuit Court entered in this case. As the area grows and becomes an established community we expand the membership of the board and more people get involved in the actual governance of this. This Conservancy District will be the owner and operator of the infrastructure which is from the Plan Commission perspective, and was an important component of the approval of the development that there be a legal entity in place in the form of a Conservancy District who can be responsible for and own, operate and manage the infrastructure of the subdivision. As my letter to you indicated, the ground at this point in its preponderance is owned by the corporation that is developing it under Indiana law, the corporation is entitled to suggest to you people to serve on the Board of Directors. We have made those to you, one of whom is Mr. Tony Floramo, who is sitting on my right who is the principal investor and the principal developer of the subdivision and behind us is Mike Cap, who works extensively on the development of the subdivision and is very knowledgeable about those infrastructure issues. The third individual does own land out there and I believe does planning and does live out there and will be building some of the homes out there and that is Alex Kazmierczak. Those are three names we would propose to the Board for the initial membership. They all come with an extensive interest in and knowledge of the subdivision and I think they will be a good team to get the infrastructure constructed and operating so this area can flourish. I don't know if any of you have been out there. I had the pleasure of driving through the area and it is truly a nice piece of property. I will answer any questions you have but we ask for those appointments."

Com. Burrus, "John, do you have any comments or questions?"

Com. Evans, "No, I know you do a lot of these and you put them together and they always seem to work very well. I'd like to thank the individuals for volunteering their time because it is kind of a tedious task, especially at the onset to get this up and running."

Com. Evans moved to approve the appointment of Tony Floramo, Mike Cap, and Alex Kazmierczak to the Falling Waters Conservancy District,

Com. Burrus, "Before we vote I would like to comment on the success we have seen with the Conservancy approach as opposed to other alternatives possibly in the form of property owners' association and so forth. The Conservancy Districts do have taxing authority and therefore have the ability to be better funded, better long term substantial providers of that service, so that has a big plus in my mind. Also, I understand that you folks have a state of the art facility plan, particularly for your wastewater treatment. Does this include water distribution?"

Atty. Hollenbeck, "The purpose for which the district was created includes water for domestic purposes. As I recall, this District will be actively involved in drainage. We all know from the South Haven experience how important Twin Creeks was in getting the drainage problems under control. These guys will be able to do that from day one. We are even considering dabbling in some of the more obscure purposes, including some recreational type functions for a conservancy district. So this is going to be a good incubator for a lot of different novel purposes for which districts are created."

Com. Burrus, "I knew there was an array of potential purposes in a district."

Atty. Hollenbeck, "The only reason we left one off was flood control; flow augmentation. I am not sure what that means, the engineers tell me it has to do with the larger more rural Conservancy Districts in the southern part of the state that are more heavily into agricultural land and the building of dams and reservoirs, which is interesting. That is how Conservancy Districts got into the recreational component was a number of southern Indiana Conservancy Districts built dams which resulted in reservoirs that people wanted to maintain for purposes other than irrigation like fishing and boating. So that is not one of the purposes, you are not going to have the Falling Waters . . . ."

Com. Burrus, "I know you have some challenges out there, we have talked a number of times on this and this does offer a real positive approach to this issue."

Com. Burrus seconded, motion carried.


DISCUSSION ON COMMISSIONERS' PRELIMINARY PLAN FOR CEDIT TAX REVENUE

Com. Burrus, "As everyone knows, I believe, the Council has the authority to pass and implement the CEDIT tax and the Commissioners then in turn have the responsibility to develop the required plan that will determine how that revenue is utilized. John and I, and Larry, before he passed away have met on various occasions; we have solicited input already but we are also still going to be receiving more input from various department heads and even some of the folks of the community as to what thoughts might be appropriate for this tax money. One distinction I would like to draw is that in comparison to the municipalities, the reason the County is involved in the CEDIT tax at all is because the County needed the money. I think in some of the communities they are looking at it as a windfall and some of the intents for the expenditures may not be quite as critical or as necessary as what we feel ours is. With that in mind, we have this plan in preliminary format that is required to cover a period of two years. We broke it down for each year so far. The first year has fairly well utilized the entire revenue that is anticipated and I believe, John, it is $3.5 or $3.6 million for the County?"

Com. Evans, "Yes, $3.6 million."

Com. Burrus, "That is an estimated revenue. Then our work for the second year is in progress and that is not complete. There will be more work and more input sought. The reason why the first year became complete fairly quickly is because of the commitments that were made to the Council on substituting some funds and we will go into that in just a moment. For the first year, we have identified a total of ten projects where these funds could be distributed. We can discuss them as we go."

Com. Evans, "We have been criticized for not forming a committee to do this work for us. I think we have seen in other areas of government when committees get formed they sometimes take on a nature of their own and sometimes that is good and sometimes that is bad. The citizens of this county didn't elect a committee to make this decision; they elected the Commissioners and we are going to do it. We are glad to have whatever input people want to give us but we are going to make the decision. It is not going to be made by a committee. I just wanted to make sure that was out there."

Com. Burrus, "Let me emphasize John's comments. We are very, very open and receptive to input on this; however we will not defer our responsibilities to a committee."

Com. Evans, "Right. The first project we delineated was the improvement of county right of ways and we estimated this is going to be about a $1.4 million project and the source of the funds will be from EDIT monies only. It might be considered one of those areas where we are trying to pay back from the monies we loaned the Council at the end of last year to make ends meet because we gave them monies that were designated for that from our budget. Hopefully, this will repay that and put it back in where it belongs where it can be used on an ongoing basis."

Com. Burrus, "The second project is to strive in general terms, for capital improvements in each of the three Commissioners' districts. $100,000.00 each for a total of $300,000.00. This type of project, while we haven't got the specifics on it, is generally on an annual basis. We have either drainage projects or highway maintenance projects that may go beyond our normal budgeting resources. So this will be for district specific projects. Typical of what this could include is in the North District, $100,000.00 and we are looking towards land acquisition for additional land adjacent to the county highway garage up there for future expansion of that facility. In the South District we have $100,000.00 for the improvement or reconstruction of a legal drain that is needing some attention in Pleasant Township that currently does not have sufficient funding available. In Center District, we are looking at the $100,000.00 for road and drainage improvements throughout the district. We have discussed this at some detail and I think you will see there will be more directed towards the North County Highway facility, too."

Com. Evans, "The third project is the building maintenance of Porter County buildings. We were criticized heavily in the debate about the COIT tax in regard to there was no plan for county buildings. We build these beautiful structures and then they are supposed to sit here and not be maintained. That doesn't work. We found out we have to put money back into the buildings. We have to be attentive to their maintenance and we have to create a schedule for them to be taken care of. So if we set aside $175,000.00 and that will be on a yearly basis for building maintenance of Porter County buildings."

Com. Burrus, "The next project, we recognize and agree that our county park system is in need of additional dependable resources. Our proposal for the present time is to allocate $300,000.00 the first year and possibly a similar amount for future years to the Park Department. This will require a specific plan and we did receive some input from the Park Department indicating projects of various types they would like to see accomplished. As part of our document, we will have to have some input back from the Park Board as to what they intend to use this on. Our thinking had to do with possibly contributing to the Raise the Barn project. We understood that had something like a $700,000.00 estimate with about $200,000.00 on hand so that would be a $500,000.00 need remaining. We also understood that the project has the potential for generating income for the Park Board as well. That was one idea and we will leave that to the Park Board to decide what kind of projects they want to allocate this for."

Com. Evans, "The fifth area of projects is a mandate from the federal government in regard to what is called Rule 13. It is a funding mandate for federal storm water drainage management and education. We set aside $20,000.00 to get that project working."

Com. Burrus, "If I could expand on that slightly, this is a requirement that is going to grow over the next five years and this storm water management education is the first phase of a multi phase, I think it is a five phase requirement. The $20,000.00 figure represents a contribution or a share that Porter County will have to pay as a participant in a regional education program. This would be administered and conducted by NIRPC and they would then be able to meet the requirements we have for this education and training. Then this would be the first phase of a total of five phases. Our obligation will probably go up in subsequent years. Our next project is one that is very important to me and I don't know if you, John Whitcomb, agree to this or not but nevertheless it is a reality. We, as the County Commissioners, feel it is important that we support whatever reasonable organization is developed to promote public transportation in Porter County. Specifically we are interested in participating in the extension of rail service from Chicago through Lake County and then into Porter County to Valparaiso which is part of the regional transportation plan. We discussed this with the legislators last January or February and told them at that time we were interested in seeing that plan come to construction but we were not in a position to contribute anything to it. What our thought is, to start out with, and this may have to be adjusted, we want to put $100,000.00 into a non reverting fund that has the ability to accumulate resources and assets so that at some point in time when Porter County has to step to the plate and participate in any kind of study, engineering or otherwise, that we have some resources available for our share of regional transportation."

Com. Evans, "The seventh project we have outlined is the construction of a new North County Highway Garage. North County is the last of the districts to receive any construction of this type. It is also probably the busiest in terms of county highways and roadways. The need to get those roads plowed creates a need to have storage to put those vehicles inside and to keep them operating requires a shelter to work on them. So we have estimated the cost of that project to be about $650,000.00 and we plan to use about $300,000.00 as an EDIT contribution and the balance will come from our property disposal fund."

Com. Burrus, "The next project is the eighth one of ten. As you know, Larry Sheets was very active in initiating the extension of State Road 149 from Highway 130 down to Highway 30. He was also instrumental in acquiring a $3.5 million federal grant through Congressman Visclosky for all the engineering and property acquisition. In his absence, about a month ago, we authorized the continuing work on the engineering and to continue after a brief interruption, the property acquisition. The requirement that we have locally is a 10% contribution to anything that is spent and as a result of that we have proposed that the EDIT contribution be $300,000.00 that would reach the point where the right of way would be acquired and the engineering would be done. At that point, there will have to be in place a new effort for actual construction funding and they are looking at that process right now through the federal and state highway departments. At any rate, we wanted to see this first phase completed and this then will provide for the local share."

Com. Evans, "The ninth project is a drainage improvements project in South Porter County. It will involve the clearing and maintenance and improvement of a portion of Crooked Creek Drain. The total estimated cost is $110,000.00 and we are proposing $100,000.00 as an added contribution and a $10,000.00 contribution from the Porter County Drainage Board."

Com. Burrus, "The last project is scheduled or proposed for the first of the year of 2004 and is another requirement of the agreement that was reached with the Council and their dealings with the Porter County Sheriff. As it turns out, I believe the Sheriff was willing to loan the County Council $600,000.00 out of his federal government signing bonus money. Those of you may remember the original amount was $1.3 million. The $600,000.00 that the Sheriff loaned was intended for his training center and shooting range. The estimated cost of that would be $800,000.00. In order to make good on the re-payment of the loan the CEDIT contribution to that project would be the $600,000.00 that the Sheriff loaned. The source of funding for that project then would be the EDIT money plus any other federal funds that the Sheriff still has available. That concludes our proposal at this time for calendar year 2004. For 2005, we aren't quite as extensive but we do see some repetition from the previous year. Some of these projects are ongoing. I will begin with the first one again. That will be a similar project; one that we had for the first year. $1.4 million for improvement to county right of ways which is basically highway improvements and upgrades, similar to 2004."

Com. Evans, "The second one is a capital improvement to the three districts; Center, South and North and that will also be ongoing and that is a $300,000.00 commitment as it was the year before."

Com. Burrus, "The proposal for the third project for 2005 would be an expansion of our building maintenance effort, scheduled maintenance. These are things you plan for; you understand roofs last 20 years so if you've got one that has been on for 10 years then in about 10 more years it needs to be replaced. We propose on the second year to contribute $350,000.00 to that effort. I would point out that the county has somewhere in the vicinity of 75 to 100 million dollars worth of real estate improvements. It is a major, major investment and it also in turn requires a major maintenance responsibility. That is one of the things that has not occurred in the past 2 ½ years since we have been in such strict financial straits. We have taken care of what I call crisis maintenance. Anything that breaks we fix it but we are not doing preventive maintenance or scheduled maintenance. That has to be curtailed or we are going to have a snowfall ahead of us that we will never be able to digest. So therefore, for the next year of 2005 we are proposing $350,000.00 for building maintenance."

Com. Evans, "The second year of the plan for the Parks is another $300,000.00. Again, we will depend on the Parks to return to us with their planning and development construction schedule and which projects that want that to be earmarked."

Com. Burrus, "Fifth project proposed is a continuation of this Rule 13 Storm Water Management and this will be another $20,000.00 contribution for that year. That would be our cost for the NIRPC effort to meet that requirement."

Com. Evans, "The last one we have delineated for the second year of the ordinance would be the Regional Transportation Funding for the public transportation aspect, again for $100,000.00."

Com. Burrus, "That concludes our status report. We are working under the understanding that it is our responsibility. We also know we have a December 31st deadline. We have a fairly significant portion of this in draft format. There will be more work done on it and more updates later and we will still be receiving more input. With respect to the county's plan for CEDIT funds, this is our current status."

Com. Evans, "Just to emphasize what I said earlier, I would like to encourage anyone who has thoughts or ideas regarding expenditures for the CEDIT monies to please put them in writing and give them to us."

Com. Burrus, "Exactly right. With that taken care of we will move forward to Office Holders/Department Heads and I have Dave Sheibels first on the list."


OFFICE HOLDERS/DEPARTMENT HEADS

Transfer of funds, E-911
Dave Sheibels, Director

Mr. Sheibels, "I have one transfer this morning to transfer $15,000.00 for 911 surcharge fund 37, account 3730 Lease Purchase down to Fund 37, 3610 for Maintenance Agreements. We came up a little short at the end of this year due to there were some things that came out of warranty as a result of moving into the new building. That was hard to plan for and I have some contracts coming due at the end of the year, too. I will pick up some hardware and software support."

Com. Evans, "Are you going to use all of it?"

Mr. Sheibels, "Just about."

Com. Burrus, "What kind of maintenance are you looking at?"

Mr. Sheibels, "For example, the 75 kilovolt Mitsubishi UPS under ______ the power supply unit, it was acquired with the new building, came out of warranty. And as in prior years, we always supported through the surcharge fund our battery back up units at the old facility and just now got price quote on a continuing maintenance on that unit which is about $5,000.00. That kind of surprised us. We had some support increases for minor electronics which is our Motorola radio shop for radio consoles increased substantial this year. We had a server contract this year that increased unbeknownst to me for our 6000 IBM unit server and some telephone software support also increased at the end of the year."

Com. Evans moved to approve the transfer of $15,000 for E-911, Com. Burrus seconded, motion carried.


MR. READ'S COMMENTS ON COMMISSIONERS' PRELIMINARY CEDIT PLAN

Mr. Read, "I live at 1453 N. Tremont Road, Chesterton, Indiana. I just want to say I congratulate the Commissioners and I think I should include Larry in that in preparing a very fine preliminary budget. You have seemed to touch all of the requirements. I congratulate you for looking ahead. I particularly want to congratulate you for finally approving some funds for the county parks; something I have been working on for 40 years. I will be talking, and have been talking, to the Park Department frequently on how I would hope they spend the money, and give high priority to setting aside some money for future park acquisitions. We have to move fast because of large parcels are going fast. I also wanted to congratulate you on setting aside money for potential transportation. We all drive our cars now but hopefully in the future there will be additional options available. As an architect myself I certainly appreciate the maintenance problem on buildings. Glad to see you do that. On drainage, I would only ask certain caution and that is that you treat drainage not merely as a matter of moving water away, but take into consideration the entire water regime. Thank you very much."

CORRESPONDENCE

Veteran's Service Officer' monthly report for September 2003 is on file.
Weights and Measures monthly report for September 2003 is on file.
Clerk's monthly reports for June and August 2003 are on file.
Court Security monthly report for August 2003 is on file.

Acceptance of Morgan Bastin to Porter County Employee Benefit Health Plan

Com. Evans moved to approve the acceptance of Morgan Bastin as a late enrollee to the Porter County Employee Benefit Health Plan with coverage to be effective October 1, 2003, Com. Burrus seconded, motion carried.

Acceptance of Colie Ann Satka to Porter County Employee Benefit Health Plan

Com. Evans moved to approve the acceptance of Colie Ann Satka as a late enrollee to the Porter County Employee Benefit Health Plan with coverage to be effective October 1, 2003, Com. Burrus seconded, motion carried.

Approval of date change for Shack City

Com. Evans moved to approve the date for Shack City from September 26 to October 10. 2003 to be held on the Courthouse lawn beginning at 3:00 p.m., Com. Burrus seconded, motion carried.

Request to transfer funds-Commissioners' office

fund 132.30$10,000.00from acct 4210buildings
into acct 3610maintenance agreements


fund 01.30$ 3,000.00from acct 3977appraisers
into acct 3230postage

fund 01.30$10,000.00from acct 3440unemployment
into acct 3230postage

Com. Evans moved to approve the transfers listed above, Com. Burrus seconded, motion carried.

Request for transfer of funds-Highway

fund 02$7,800.00from acct 3730lease purchase
into acct 4540other equipment

fund 02$6,000.00from acct 3730lease purchase
into acct 3650vehicle repair

fund 26$2,600.00from acct 26.4210buildings
into acct 26.2261salt

Funds needed to cover expenses through the end of December 2003.

Com. Evans moved to approve the transfer of funds as listed above, Com. Burrus seconded, motion carried.

Request for Additional Appropriation--Highway

Fund 02$6,000.00acct 2362bituminous

Contribution to defray paving costs on 400 East.

Com. Evans, "This is an agreement that the Highway has with the sand mining company and they are making a matching share. It is a little late in the year to be doing it, but we are going to try to get it in."

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

Approval of toxicology contract with Great Lakes Laboratory

Com. Evans, "This lab does all the testing for probation, for Adult and Juvenile Probation, the Coroner's work; does the lab testing on various items for the Sheriff's Department. They have a myriad of responsibilities that they perform to different agencies. They were gracious enough in the years of the contract cutting costs to allow us to cut a contract that we already negotiated and really didn't have any legal ground to stand on and now they are being gracious enough to base their contract on the year's prior usage. That is what they have done for us all along; it is usually the previous years' usage is what they base their dollar amount on and then it goes accordingly the next year, they held it back to the level we had in 2001, I believe is the contract price we are paying now."

Com. Burrus, "I would like to add a comment to that and that is through the discussions you and I have had with them, they are probably the most responsive lab that is available. They are located in Michigan City and they often times offer expert testimony in court cases in our behalf at no additional charge."

Com. Evans, "And the prosecutor uses them extensively."

Com. Burrus, "We feel they are being a very substantial supplier of a contract in our area and they are doing their best to help the county out with their finances."

Com. Evans moved to approve the contract with Great Lakes Laboratory in the amount of $194,031.12 for the year 2004, Com. Burrus seconded, motion carried.

COMMISSIONERS' REPORT

All Districts:

Official Bond and Oath from Ohio Farmer's Insurance Company for David W. Schelling, the County Engineer.

Com. Evans moved to approve the bond for Highway Engineer David W. Schelling, Com. Burrus seconded, motion carried.

North District: Com. John Evans

1.Westchester Minor Subdivision #2210-D-1 road agreement, located on the
northwest corner of CR 1400 North and CR 300 East. Offer to contribute $750.00 per lot for a total of $750.00. Owner and subdivider is Steven D. Such.

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

Center District: (read by Com. Evans)

All right of way acquisitions for CR 300 West. The documents that are to be signed are the (1) basis of just compensation, (2) market estimate.

1.Owner Neal S. and Rita D. Molengraft, Trustees.
2.Owner Debora A. and David L. Clauss.
3.Owner Laura J. Scheller
4.Owner Robert D. and Wendy K. Pavy
5.Owner Vaughn Staab

Com. Evans moved to approve all five right of way acquisitions for CR 300 West, Com. Burrus seconded, motion carried.

6. Washington Minor Subdivision 2530-C-1 road agreement located on the east side of CR 400 East between CR 400 North and CR 500 North. Offer to contribute $750.00 per lot for a total of $750.00. Owners and subdividers are John D. Taylor and Louise J. Taylor.

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

South District: Com. David Burrus

1.Porter Minor Subdivision 1240-D-1 road agreement located on the north side of
CR 100 South between CR 200 West and CR 300 West. Offer to contribute $750.00 per lot for a total of $1,500.00. Owner and subdivider is Kandy J. Redbond.

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


RESOLUTION 03-14-COMMEMORATING LARRY D. SHEETS, PORTER COUNTY COMMISSIONER

Com. Burrus, "As everyone I'm sure knows, on September 27th, Commissioner Larry Sheets passed away. The flowers around the room here today are from the memorial we held for Larry last Friday. During that time, a number of fine comments were made about Larry, but primarily the significance or the value or the essence of what Larry Sheets was came home to everybody. He was a gentleman, he was a facilitator, he was a caring person who tried to respond to every concern and every issue regardless of whether it was large or small and this Board misses him very much. In recognition of Larry's service, we have prepared a resolution of his service and John will read it at this time."

RESOLUTION NO. 03-04
A RESOLUTION COMMEMORATING LARRY D. SHEETS,
PORTER COUNTY COMMISSIONER
_____

WHEREAS, Larry D. Sheets served as a Porter County Commissioner from 1982 through 1994; and from 1998 through September 27, 2003; and
WHEREAS, Larry D. Sheets dedicated his life to his family, friends and to public service; and
WHEREAS, Larry D. Sheets was a respected and dedicated public servant during his seventeen year tenure as a Porter County Commissioner; and
WHEREAS, Larry D. Sheets passed away September 27, 2003 while serving his seventeenth year as Porter County Commissioner; and
WHEREAS, Larry D. Sheets will be sincerely missed by his colleagues, friends and family members; and
WHEREAS, the Porter County Board of Commissioners wish to publicly commemorate Larry D. Sheets for his public service, friendship and the camaraderie he has shared with Porter County and its residents;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that LARRY D. SHEETS is hereby honored and commemorated as a dedicated public servant and friend to all those he touched during his seventeen year tenure as a Porter County Commissioner.
This Resolution adopted this 7th day of October, 2003.
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
PORTER COUNTY, INDIANA
s/David L. Burrus
s/John A. Evans

attest: s/Sandra K. Vuko, Auditor

Com. Evans, "I think everything that can be said has already been said. The memorial
service that was held for Larry was very moving and everyone that had any involvement in that, especially our staff, Gwenn, Linda and Vi, deserve to be thanked and congratulated. Lee Childress, who did the brochure, and played the piano and his wife Becky who sang. It couldn't have been a more fitting tribute to a very wonderful person who is going to be deeply missed."

Com. Burrus, "I have one final comment and that has to do with the good fortune that John and I have of being able to work the last two and a half years with Larry. During that period of time, the County has probably found itself deep into the worst financial problem that we have ever experienced; possibly the worst financial problem any county in Indiana has experienced. While we feel like we have bottomed out and we are on our way back up again, that process, at least the Commissioner's contribution to that process, was extremely enhanced by the working relationship that the three of us had. There was never a confrontation; there was never a difference of opinion that couldn't be resolved and I am convinced that Larry was a key player in the development of that atmosphere of cooperation and perseverance. I think we have been successful. I don't think we are completely healed yet, but nevertheless, we are on the right track. I think the Commissioners did play a role in that; we don't take credit for the whole thing of course, but nevertheless we did have a role. I think Larry was instrumental in that process. So, as John said, he is certainly going to be missed.
Now, do we have any other business? We do have a session coming up at 11:00, which is only five minutes away. We will have a short recess. This will be the Plan Commission business that will be conducted. We have a second reading on three rezoning issues. We have an ordinance regulating adult entertainment for first reading and anything else that may come before us at that time."

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

AFTERNOON SESSION, PLAN COMMISSION 11:00 A.M.
Robert Thompson, Plan Commission Director

Com. Burrus, "We will reconvene the Commissioners' meeting of October 7th, for the Plan Commission reports."

Rezone, Pedro Azevedo, R1 to C4 -- 2nd reading

Mr. Thompson, "We have three cases that are coming back for second reading. This is second reading on Plan Commission 03-Z-1 forwarded to the County Commissioners with a favorable recommendation of an 8-0 vote, also it is Plan Commission Resolution 03-11, Petitioner is Pedro Azevedo. He is requesting amendment from RR, Rural Residential to C4, General Business. At the last Commissioners' meeting this was requested to draft up written commitments that would show the options considering the backage road versus the frontage road. I believe Mr. Leeth has completed that."

Mr. Leeth, "Yes, I have, thank you and good morning. On page 4 under Section G I have added a new 5G to the written commitments which were presented first to the Plan Commission and then to you for first reading at your last meeting. The issue as I understood it following your first reading indicated a desire to have a backage road but I think it was expressed to you at that time there is a septic system on the neighboring property to the west which is also under the same ownership and when and if sanitary sewer is brought to the properties that would allow for the abandonment of that area of land and could facilitate a backage road. So, I guess what we would like to do is add in immediately proceeding the language of 5G as I drafted it, is a provision that says within a certain number of years, five years or whatever we agree upon, the overall or frontage road will be provided. Then in the alternative, in that five years, the sanitary sewer would be available and the backage road would be the one of choice at that point in time. The other terms of the written commitments are exactly as was submitted to the Plan Commission. There is some issues with regard to the quality construction, lighting and landscaping and other commitments that have been made by the owner as he presented it to the Plan Commission."

Com. Burrus, "Let me visit with you on the frontage/backage road issue one more time. The objective, in my view and Bob, I want to make sure I am consistent with you understanding here, too. The objective I think we should be shooting for is to have a provision that would provide access from the county road which is 600 West through this property somehow that would also then continue on in the form of a frontage road for any additional development that would occur to the east, that is what we are shooting for, I believe, is to able to have a frontage road access to the county road. Now whether it is in the front or back, personally doesn't make any difference to me but I think at some point it should be a dedicated right of way for that purpose. You are suggesting that the language of five years be inserted with the hope that by that time, the sanitary sewer would be available. What happens in five years if there is no sanitary sewer?"

Atty. Leeth, "Then the owner under this agreement is going to have to install either a frontage or backage road to be consistent with your overlay ordinance."

Mr. Thompson, "Todd mentioned that would only be for the rezoned parcel. That after the five years they must have the frontage road by the ordinances if that is what we are going by. Because anything that is rezoned (inaudible)………………, US 30 overlay is only taken newly zoned commercial property at that time, would be the only requirement that the frontage be existing portion of the commercial would not be in the requirement for the frontage road."

Atty. Leeth, "Let me address that issue. This is language that Bob has not seen so that is why he raised the question. In 5G that I provided to you it says, 'in the alternative the owner may establish a backage road to the rear of the existing structures on the land to the west which road must connect and provide access from the real estate' which is the four acres we are talking about rezoning to CR 600 West. I have addressed that issue in 5G."

Com. Burrus, "I think so, too. Again, I went back to the original objective of the frontage road issue."

Atty. Leeth, "If in five years the sanitary sewer isn't brought there and more than likely you are going to get a frontage road that doesn't connect to 600 West and only applies to this parcel or you will have a backage road that connects all the way over to 600 West."

Com. Burrus, "I think we are honing in on some details of the language here and from my perspective, the objective would be to make sure that at the end of five years we have a route that goes from 600 West to the east property line of the rezoned parcel."

Atty. Leeth, "And we can't do that through the common ownership property that is not the subject to this petition because of the existing location of the buildings and the septic system."

Com. Burrus, "So the common ownership is the difficulty?"

Atty. Leeth, "The other piece, the other four acres that is immediately on the corner. As you know that is the Wagner's Too Restaurant property and you can go through their parking lot and get out to 600 West."

Com. Burrus, "And your client has no interest in Wagner's Too, is that correct?"

Atty. Leeth, "He does own that."

Com. Burrus, "Oh, he does. So he could or could not commit to a route?"

Atty. Leeth, "Well, the route exists today but it is not the best route through the parking lot. We want to remove the traffic from the parking lot and the only way to do that is in the rear of that property and we can't do that because that is where the location of the septic system is. That is the practical limitations."

Com. Burrus, "So to get things in place now, at the end of five years, we have no sanitary sewer, therefore we cannot expect to see a route through there?"

Atty. Leeth, "I can't commit and the owner can't commit to you that there will be. There is the possibility with some survey work that we could do that but we can't commit to you because we don't know. It looks like the septic system would block any road. Certainly one that would be 60 foot wide according to your county specifications which is the requirement of the access road from under the 30 overlay. Failing that you would still have a frontage road."

Com. Burrus, "Then it gets back to our original concern and that is there will be a route somewhere for those two parcels whether it is frontage, backage or a combination and it will be dedicated at the end of five years."

Atty. Leeth, "On this four acres absolutely. I can't get you to 600."

Atty. Rinkenberger, "Are you worried about having a frontage road, two frontage roads? You're wanting this frontage road that we are talking about to go directly to that parcel?"

Com. Evans, "We don't want another road cut on 30."

Atty. Rinkenberger, "Right, but . . ."

Com. Burrus, "That is what I am trying to determine. Let's see the map. The top of the sheet is north. The parcel for rezoning is this piece on the east end and he is looking at a frontage road in this area. My concern is in addition to going down 30, he is going to have to have an outlet."

(Discussion regarding area on map was inaudible.)

Atty. Leeth, "The septic system, I don't know if it is here or over here. So, the problem is can we can get through here?"

Com. Evans, "Are we going to compound that by building a retention pond at the proposed spot?"

Atty. Leeth, "Well, this is very conceptual. We can move that around if we need to. If we put a backage road in, the retention would be in front. If we can get to this parcel because in order to do the 40 or 60 foot right of way, given the location of the septic system, nobody knows, when we get sanitary sewer here hopefully within that five year window and we will have the opportunity to abandon septic systems …… (inaudible).

Com. Burrus, "Your proposal is to insert that five year language in here? Do you want to state that for the record and then we can move on it."

Atty. Leeth, "Sure. My proposal is immediately proceeding the verbiage of 5G that we add the words, "within five years"."

Com. Evans, "Where is the closest sanitary sewer?"

Mr. Thompson, "I want to say Wheeler High School which is maybe half mile north. That was done with the conservancy district, they came down 625 to hook up to the high school."

Com. Burrus, "Do you have any idea that it hooks up to the elementary or middle school there?"

Atty. Leeth, "It is my understanding that it is not and our hope is that the school corporation is going to make that extension and that is why we think that will happen within a reasonable period of time."

Com. Evans moved to approve the rezone contingent upon the wording added to paragraph 5G, Com. Burrus seconded, motion carried.

Rezone-John Hannon, R1 to R3 -- 2nd reading

Mr. Thompson, "We have Plan Commission Resolution 03-09. Petitioner is John Hannon requesting an amendment from R1 Single Family Residential to R3 Multi Family Residential. This is 2nd reading. Recommended for approval by the Plan Commission with a 7-1 vote. Again, there are written commitments that are for this concerning the structural development."

Com. Evans, "Have the written commitments changed since the first reading?"

Mr. Thompson, "No they have not. I know the commitments are for 37 residential _____ constructed on rezone parcel, no more than 60 residential units will be built. Total parcel, which is the whole development and more recent development plans for a total parcel from Tower Road 250 West and one public road access from 100 North."

Mr. Hannon, "Karen Tallion pointed out when we were here last time and she said she was going to prepare paragraph 3 to say 'not more than one' public road access to 100 North, or 250 West with the idea being we may just do a cul-de-sac and not have a cut. That was language she inserted."

Com. Burrus, "At one time, you had more than one cut on one of those county roads."

Mr. Hannon, "That is correct. When we first came to the Plan Commission, we had two cuts shown on 250 West. The Plan Commission had concerns with that, so we are committing to no more than one cut on 250 West. We don't know if the cut will occur on 100 North. That is something we will work through."

Com. Evans, "Paragraph 3 now states that the total will include only one public access from Tower Road 250 West and one public road access from 100 North."

Mr. Hannon, "Yes, instead of 'only' it says 'not more than'. I brought the commitments. Those are the actual written . . those are signed by the owners."

Com. Evans, "I think it is a workable plan. I think we beat you up pretty bad the last time and I think you explained it very well."

Com. Evans moved to approve the rezone subject to having a signature page for the Commissioners to be added to the written commitments, retyping the ordinance and the change in paragraph 3 of the written commitments, Burrus seconded, motion carried.


Rezone, Steve Debold/Chester, Inc., PUD to RR -- 2nd reading

Mr. Thompson, "This is Plan Commission 03-Z-10 which is Plan Commission Resolution No. 03-10. Petitioner Steve Debold/Chester, Inc. requesting an amendment from PUD Planning and Development to RR, Rural Residential. This is 2nd reading. Plan Commission recommended approval with a vote of 8-0 and since this is 2nd reading, it was also requested at the first meeting that I have an ordinance prepared for repealing the original ordinance which is Ordinance No. 99-23 which is the ordinance for creating the PUD entitled Woodvine."

Com. Evans moved to approve case 03-10 on 2nd reading, Com. Burrus seconded, motion carried.

ORDINANCE REGULATING CONSTRUCTION, PLACEMENT & MODIFICATION OF ADULT ENTERTAINMENT BUSINESS---1st reading

Mr. Thompson, "This is Plan Commission 03-13. This is an amendment to the Porter County Code creating a chapter on adult entertainment businesses. This was heard at the Plan Commission at their September, 2003 meeting and was forwarded to the County Commissioners with a favorable recommendation for approval with an 8-0 vote. To explain this, a lot of research was done with the First Amendment issues so what this does is put in separation requirements from businesses; it does put them within an I-3 district. Allowable use, but it has separation requirements. Originally I had within the ordinance proposed at Plan Commission 1,000 foot separation requirement. Now the separation requirement is from the items that are defined in here such as schools, government buildings, churches, day care centers, and also a 1000 foot separation requirement from other adult entertainment businesses. The Plan Commission on this issue requested the separation go from 1,000 feet up to 1,500 feet. The other items we have in here as far as the adult entertainment business gets involved with site issues and design standards for the actual sites for lighting and the parking lot signage and other architectural aspects of the building such as no viewing from the outside and from a public place it cannot be viewed from the inside."

Com. Evans, "I think you have addressed this issue head on and had good advice. As you stated it is a First Amendment issue. We are not going to tell someone how they can and cannot make a living but we are not going to tell them they can impose on anyone else either. I think it has been given a lot of thought and it is something we need to follow through on."

Com. Evans moved to approve Ordinance No. 03-13 on first reading,

Com. Burrus, "Just a comment before I second that. Bob, you pointed out and kind of emphasized the fact that this has a location restriction issue as a zoning ordinance should. John Whitcomb showed me an article here a few moments ago about some other means of regulating adult entertainment facilities in terms of community standards. But that has to do with the kind of activity that goes on. This is a location restriction. That is an activity restriction. So I wanted to draw that distinction. From my point of view, it was being inappropriate to apply both of these. In other words, this would be a zoning ordinance if it goes through that would deal with location and if there was any need or desire to apply a community yardstick that could also go into effect. John, the article you gave me, was that from the city of Valparaiso?"

Mr. Whitcomb, "Yes, from Nancy Pekarek."

Com. Evans, "Would that particular type of ordinance come through the Plan Commission?"

Com. Burrus, "No, it would not. One thing would be a Plan ordinance and that would be some other reference but I don't personally see why it could not be applied as well. This would not be prohibited."

Mr. Thompson, "The community standard, it is addressed and I will explain where I got a lot of my research from. I spoke with the director of the planning department with the city of Hammond. They have been involved in a number of lawsuits involving these issues so Lily Schaeffer requested that I contact the city attorney's office and the planning department and I speak with the director there. That is where the separation requirements, he said, they do it in the city of Hammond, I was considering this to be a special exception at one point, he says do not do that because of the type of use. If you don't require a regular bookstore to have a special exception, he said, and if you have an adult bookstore go in for a special exception, you could be questioned on such issues as First Amendment rights for freedom of speech. The city of Mishawaka has an ordinance out and talking about community standards, a number of them do it with licensing of the businesses where they might go involved and say separation of the dancers, if it is at a gentleman's club, separation of the dancers from the patrons who are there, even as far as what the dancer's wear. I did not get involved in that because we do not license businesses and I do not know how to approach that. I am not sure if you wanted to get involved in such issues as licensing businesses like that. That is where a lot of the community standards do come from is with business licensing."

Com. Burrus, "Again, what I think we are dealing with here is a zoning issue, it's a zoning ordinance. We are not dealing with any standards issues, that is separate and distinct. That is the point I was trying to make. At this point the only thing we are going to deal with is the zoning issue."

Com. Evans restated his motion to approve Ordinance No. 03-13 on first reading, Com. Burrus seconded, motion carried.

Mr. Thompson, "I do have one question towards the Board, on how they want to handle the Plan Commission cases coming down to the Commissioners, with this one being at 11:00, with the meeting tomorrow night I have a number of rezoning cases and a number of other agenda items in the future that will be coming down in the future. Do you want me to start announcing these cases will be heard at 11:00 at the Commissioners' meeting?"

Com. Evans, "I would just as soon do it that way."

Com. Burrus, "I would prefer that, too. Such that if we extend a particularly long agenda with Plan Commission we can take a recess and come back at 1:00. Right now we have a void we would like to try to fill up if we can."

Com. Evans, "Please be advised we might be a few minutes late if our Commissioner meeting carries over past 11:00. It would be a much better use of our time."

Mr. Thompson, "Okay, now your second meeting in October, is there not going to be a quorum on that as of right now? Will you let me know on that because I had some cases I announced at the Plan Commission that will be coming down here if you want and I can send notification of the interested parties notifying them of the change of date and also the time change."

Com. Burrus, "Yes, set it for the first meeting in November."

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

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
PORTER COUNTY, INDIANA

David L. Burrus

John A. Evans


Attest: Sandra K. Vuko, Auditor