PORTER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 16, 2003
10:00 A.M.

The regular meeting of the Porter County Board of Commissioners convened at 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, December 16, 2003 in the Commissioners' Chambers of the Administration Center.

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

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

APPROVAL OF PAYROLL

Com. Evans moved to approve the payroll of December 15, 2003, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

APPROVAL OF CLAIMS

Com. Evans moved to approve the claims of December 16, 2003, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

GIS UPDATE, JOYCE WEST, SIDWELL CORP.

Com. Burrus, "This is from a request that we had put out to the supplier or the contractor who had begun the GIS in Porter County some four or five years ago. We are re-initiating that effort and today we have a representative from Sidwell Corp."

Ms. West, "Thank you. We have a presentation where we are going to be using a projector so you might want to move your chairs so you can get a good look. I have made a copy of the slides I will be presenting so if you want to make notes and follow along. Thank you very much for inviting us and we are glad to be with you here in Porter County. I am going to be making this presentation and talking about your GIS project with the hopes that you will be able to go forward. I will spend a little bit of time talking about the background of the GIS project here in Porter County, some of the uses and benefits that GIS can provide to the county and its citizens. We will do a brief everyday use of GIS demonstration for you and then I will close by making some comments about resuming your GIS project. I am Joyce West, I am a GIS Account Manager with the Sidwell Company. With me is Mr. Van O'Brien, he is a GIS Project Manager. Sidwell is the GIS provider here in Porter County. We are a company that has been in business since 1927, we have done over 150 countywide comprehensive mapping projects and in the last 20 years have done 98 GIS projects that are either completed or in progress so we are very pleased to also be working with Porter County. Back in 1998, the Porter County Commissioners, voted to do a GIS project here in Porter County. Prior to that there were several years that county staff and officials were very involved in looking at GIS and investigating this technology, educating themselves, talking with other counties and in fact, the two years prior to 1998, from about 1996 to 1998 there was a very intensive effort put forth here by county officials and staff to research and educate themselves about GIS. A GIS committee was formed, many people here participated; the Commissioners, the Auditor's office, Surveyor's office, Highway Engineers' office, Planning Department, the Emergency Management, E-911, many people came together to participate. There was a needs assessment done here at the county where departments were asked how would you use GIS, what are your needs, what can you tell us about the application you would like to use in a GIS system. There was community outreach that took place. Members here met with the towns and cities here to look at how data might be shared, how they might cooperate together in a GIS project. Then finally, a very thorough intensive evaluation was done of more than 30 companies that are GIS providers and through this effort we were very pleased to be selected as the provider here in Porter County. So in the year 1999 the GIS project actually began. We did a first order class 1 GPS control survey throughout Porter County and in that there are 72 permanent survey monuments placed throughout the county around the perimeter of the county and then in a grid throughout the county. That data was used to support the Spring 1999 aerial photography. We flew two different altitudes, we did a high altitude flight covering all of Porter County and then a lower altitude flight targeting the developed areas, the urbanized areas. From this information a digital elevation model was generated and what that is is a computer model of the terrain of the surface of Porter County which then is used to produce digital ortho photography. Countywide orthos were produced for Porter County and a pixel resolution of two foot urban areas have a pixel resolution of one half foot. Continuing some of the highlights, Sidwell did a lot of research here; we looked at documents, maps that might be useful in loading this or this complete parcel base of Porter County. I will mention it was determined here early on by people at Porter County what would serve the people best was an accurate high quality GIS project. The existing parcel maps had an unknown background, they were built without the use of ortho, and without the use of aerial photography and they weren't considered very reliable. Therefore, we have been building the cadastre from subdivision plats, legal descriptions of the properties and such that the county will end up with an accurate foundation. We define GIS data model all of the data was featurized and attributized so that one parcel knows what parcel it is, knows its number, knows adjacency, knows what's around it. This GIS data modeling makes this well beyond an automated map, it makes an intelligent data base where the data can be used for special analysis. We have done some permanent parcel numbering here in the county and this format is consistent with the more recently mandated permanent parcel numbering required of counties from the department of local government finance. We have provided subdivision index, various production reports, have provided a parcel control system data base and software, installed two work stations with GIS software and provided on site training and ongoing technical support. Now all of this was completed in year one of what is planned as a five year or a multiple year project. Unfortunately, the county ran into budget problems and was not able to continue funding so the project had to be suspended a few years ago. This was accomplished in year one. Some overall benefits GIS will provide Porter County are first it takes map data and integrates it with existing data bases that are here in Porter County. Tax roll data bases, assessment data bases, data that might be available in the Planning Department and zoning information perhaps, survey control point data, bridge or sign or road inventory and so on. That kind of data already exists here and the key in GIS is to link it up and integrate with a map. GIS will provide a unified source of information. It will become sort of the go to system as opposed to having to run from system to system to this data base to this file cabinet, to that map on the wall; it brings it all together and makes it most useful to the staff and citizens. It will eliminate duplicate efforts. I am sure right now mapping is done in multiple offices because you have no choice. In a manual paper map world, it is very difficult to not duplicate efforts. GIS will promote data sharing between people in a single office, from office to office, from the county to the towns and cities and to the citizens and beyond. It will facilitate data distribution. It is very easy to bring a map up on a computer screen, hit a button and get a print out. Right now if you want to get a picture of your parcel you are going to have to get the plat map book, wrestle it onto a copy machine, try to get a copy of that parcel. It is very difficult to distribute data this way. GIS will facilitate data distribution. Finally, GIS being an accurate complete consistent quality source of information will go a long way to support the decision making process that the Commissioners, the Council and all of the officials here at Porter County need. It will be the go-to source. Now I will show you a short demo of some of the everyday uses of GIS. I will turn it over to Van."

Mr. O'Brien, "I am going to show you a few things you can use for GIS. This is the township's worth of parcels from Allen County, Indiana. GIS has been over there for a couple years now. This particular computer program is called Ark-GIS. A couple things I want to touch on as I go through this; the first issue being intelligence and the second issue is going to be bringing data together and be able to use it in this environment. First of all, if we look at this visually in front of you, these are parcels and there is aerial photography behind it and you have probably seen this before if you have had to pull out the tax map at some time. What is special about it is GIS brings intelligence to the geography, it brings intelligence to the map. First of all there is spacial intelligence. The good thing about the GIS system and how it deals with spacial intelligence is that each one of these parcels knows where it exists in the real world. This is a representation of some chunk of space in the real world. This parcel here knows it is next to this one and for assessment purposes it knows how large it is and how many acres it consumes on the earth's surface which is an important thing to know for assessing taxes. This parcel might know it is 400 feet from this parcel, that is built into the GIS and it can be very useful for many things. The second kind of intelligence is attribute intelligence and this is where the strength of being able to bring all kinds of different data from different offices into the GIS. The information on that parcel (on screen) is provided here. First of all there is a permanent number but you have an owner, you have an address, you have a type of taxing request. What this does, with the geography you can bring in any kind of information that you have available about that chunk of space on the earth's surface into one place easily accessible. Once you start bringing all this data in you can start asking the GIS question, you can start wanting to find things because we don't have a mental rolodex with parcel numbers. We don't know 18 or 12 digit parcel numbers. We know things we can easily recognize like a phone number or address. So you can search for a name, it will look in the information that is available and try to find a name. You need to be able to find where that person lives, very quickly it will look it up and zooms to that parcel, there is the house. You can search addresses and phone numbers and all these things and really the idea of GIS is that it continues to grow. This is also the county's data. The county's data that you already have; nothing is being invented in mid-air that is being brought together to provide something useful for the county. Also, what GIS can do is give the user the ability to make maps, to create something visual you can provide for people as a visual aid. Maps tell stories, things that you know. Remember each one of these parcels has lots of information. Think about the world atlas. Every world atlas there is a map there, called total population by a country. This map you can picture China's is bright red then you go in Africa somewhere and it is white, all these countries are different colors. If you go to the legend, everything is shaded a different color. That map is telling you a story. It can be easily replicated in this environment. I am going to make a quick map, this is a taxing class map. Out here, in this pink area are all parcels that are designated as agricultural. There are some yellow ones that are commercial, industrial, residential. Then there are some that are purple that don't have any data connected with them. Another thing the GIS will do is look at your data that you have and will find and reveal if there is holes in it, if there is problems with the data that you have and it will reveal it in a visual way. This is telling me this parcel does not have a tax class assigned to it. So it is very helpful in strengthening and bringing more integrity to the data you have. Some other uses for GIS, law enforcement for example. There are these things called drug free zones, which are if anyone is caught possessing or dealing drugs within 1000 feet of a public park or school, the fines are much greater and the penalties are much greater. It gives you a question that if this person right here was caught selling drugs out of his home, one thing you could determine was how close was this person to the school. First of all, you need to find out where the schools are and highlight that in blue. The next thing you can with this program is you can draw 1000' buffer around the school and see if that person is actually within 1000'. This can be used for evidence and it has been used in convicting people because of its accuracy and the integrity of the whole thing. From there, sex offender notification. If a sex offender moves in there, you need to be able to notify the property owners around the sex offender. Again, we can draw a buffer around it. You need to quickly notify all these people there is a sex offender that has moved into the neighborhood. So finding all this information and tapping into the two kinds of intelligence we are dealing with here, first of all, spacial. What parcels are within this buffer, who needs to be notified, and two, after you have determined that, you can use the data and generate mailing labels and things like that. What we are looking at here is a list of all the property owners that need to be notified about the sex offender. This can be exported out of the Microsoft Word; GIS is open to be used with many different kinds of software programs so it is not just in its own thing. It is not designed to be like that, it is designed to integrate with your existing information system. But in this case, the binding force of it all is geography. I believe that is all I have to say about this."

Com. Burrus, "Do you have any application here for emergency response activity, like EMS or fire departments and so forth?"

Mr. O'Brien, "I don't have it loaded on here but absolutely."

Com. Burrus, "They do have a value there?"

Mr. O'Brien, "They do. A lot of places use center lines in order to find the quickest route. I know a lot of police vehicles in certain counties have it in the police car and they have used it and it tracks a map for them to get to a particular place. Then there is also Phase II stuff going on with the cell phone towers and being able to plot a location based upon a coordinate that comes in from a cell phone tower and it can be done very quickly. GIS can read what comes in with a phone call and plot it on the map then from there, its able to create a route for the emergency vehicles to go to. Any other questions?"

Com. Harper, "If this is being done does it involve all the parcels in all the cities in the whole county?"

Mr. O'Brien, "Absolutely."

Com. Harper, "Is that a component record?"

Mr. O'Brien, "Yes, . . ."

Com. Evans, "There is a marketing aspect of this maybe we ought to talk about."

Ms. West, "Okay. The data that is developed, converted and provided to the county is the county's; it is your data. It is not ours, we don't have any ownership of it if that is what you are asking."

Com. Harper, "I was assuming it was public record."

Atty. Rinkenberger, "There is a complicated response to that. We drafted an ordinance about four years ago that is recorded that addresses the manner in which it can be used without reimbursement that is costly to the project. In coming up with some of these duplications cost money so I think the state law states sets forth parameters under which people can access data and what they have to pay."

Com. Evans, "Sidwell is the marketing agent for this?"

Ms. West, "That is correct."

Mr. O'Brien, "GIS has the speed and ease that somebody can access the status of information."

Com. Harper, "What do you mean Sidwell is the marketing agent? In other words, if someone comes in here and wants to have information, they have to go through that firm or the county?"

Atty. Rinkenberger, "I know it is complicated and I haven't looked at it in four years. I know we have an ordinance, I am pretty sure we had an agreement that the county worked out with Sidwell that we did through Data Processing and the Auditor's office on some of the complicated issues."

Com. Harper, "I am not really concerned about that, but is seems to be that thing is going to fall off the ground with public record at some point, it doesn't concern me but I think it is a good idea."

Com. Evans, "I think the marketing aspect falls more to the realtor, or the developer that wants to use the information to do a topographical drawing to develop a subdivision or to use it to make a profit in his own right. We are not going to tell a taxpayer they can't use it, they are going to be entitled to any public record that might exist."

Ms. West, "My understanding of the marketing agreement is it was designed that such as the larger user, the special user, somebody who wanted a custom selection of data of what the GIS could offer, we would be the service provided to fill that request as opposed to any of the county staff having to become a service bureau of that sort. But the taxpayer that wants to take a look at their property, yes certainly. That is freely available here through the county offices."

Atty. Rinkenberger, "There was an impossibility if we didn't have the personnel or the ability to pay the employees or have the equipment to be able to reproduce the types of requests we might get. Otherwise, we would be paying our employees to do private work for NIPSCO which we couldn't afford to do so we came up with an alternative to provide the information but not have to pay our employees to get it for somebody else."

Com. Harper, "When I saw that my thought was somebody is going to come in and say I want all the names in this area for political reasons or something and try to get it run off, but it is public record."

Atty. Rinkenberger, "We have contracts in place to govern it."

Ms. West, "I understand you have an interest in resuming your GIS project. We are looking forward to resuming that with you and working with you. When you do so, Porter County will be joining the majority of counties in Indiana that either already have GIS or have GIS in progress. The latest figure I can come up with is about 71% of the counties here in Indiana either have already implemented GIS or are well on their way to do so. I will comment that Porter County is one of the last few large urbanized counties that do not have GIS in place yet so you will join good company once you get going again. You already have a very accurate foundation established as I pointed out earlier. You have that to build on. The work you have already done is still there, is still usable, is still valuable, you can go forward with it. You will be able to incorporate and take advantage of some of the advances that have taken place in the interim here. It used to be that map data was stored one way and data base some other way. Now, there is a GIS format that stores both together, there is the technology advancement. Some of the manual labor involved in constructing a GIS in doing digital orthos or in quality control have been automated so there are technical advances you'll benefit from. And the GIS software is now mature and very stable and the software we would recommend is from an industry leader such that you will be in the mainstream, you wont be don't a project that is marginal and you will be able to utilize what already has been done to go forward with it and build on that. Finally, GIS, it is the information tool that will support the work of county government, decision making processing easier and will allow you to provide even better service to your taxpayers. I encourage you and I thank you very much for this time."

Com. Burrus, "Thank you, Joyce, we appreciate your presentation as well."

Com. Evans, "I wanted to thank Joyce also for her willingness to come back out and get this project going again. It is not currently in our CEDIT funding for next year but the year after we have put it in at $300,000.00 level for each consecutive year after that. I would like to see it going sooner and I know you have expressed, and I appreciate your concern that your company is willing to work with us prior to some funding being in place and we appreciate that. I would also like to encourage any department heads or office holders that have the working knowledge and are going to be impacted by GIS to search all your corners and drawers and look for grants or any other means that we can help pay for this system. It is going to be a large benefit for the entire county and I thank you for coming."

AWARD OFFICE SUPPLY BIDS FOR 2004 (Postponed until later in the meeting)

Com. Burrus, "This next item has to do with the award of office supply bids for 2004. Sandy, we are anticipating your recommendation on that."

Ms. Vuko, "I have to go get Becky for this."

Com. Burrus, "We will go ahead with the next item and we will come back to this then. Following that, our next item will be a discussion regarding the Emergency Medical Services with Porter Memorial Hospital represented by Attorney Robert Welsh. Bob, if you care to join us up here and we will review the status of that agreement at this point."

APPROVAL OF EMS CONTRACT FOR EMS SERVICES
Robert Welsh, Attorney

Atty. Welsh, "The county and the hospital have, for a number of years, approximately since 1990 or 1991 had an arrangement whereby the hospital has undertaken to provide emergency medical services to the citizens of Porter County except for Portage Township, and that is by agreement with the township because they provide their own service. The rest of the county is within the service area and that includes advanced life support and basic life support services. The hospital at this time operates six fully equipped advanced life support vehicles that are on duty with crew 24 hours a day and are stationed in areas in the county calculated to be able to provide the best service to meet the needs of the population. In the past, there has been a payment made to the hospital by the county in order to assist the hospital providing the service because it is not self-sustaining of revenues that are produced by the providing service. In the past, that amount of money has grown to be close to a million dollars. At this time, the hospital is presenting to the Porter County Board of Commissioners an agreement for emergency medical services for the next eight years. During the term of that agreement, the annual amount that the county would pay to the hospital for providing that service will be reduced from the million dollars per year to $500,000.00 per year. In addition, there was, in the recent past, a $75,000.00 payment by the hospital to the county to help the county offset some of its expenses and that payment will likewise be diminished proportionately, in other words, by one half so it will be $37,500.00 per year. So the amount you pay us will decease by half a million a year during the 8 year term of this agreement, the amount that we pay you with respect to the prior $75,000.00 per year will likewise diminish by one half. That is the essence of that agreement. There is a lease attached to it as you know, you do have three buildings in the county; south county, central and north county and the lease is a take off of the one that has been used for many, many years, and we have the ability to use those buildings to house the ambulances and to initiate service from those points with those ambulances at nominal rent. As nominal as you can possibly be and this is a dollar."

Com. Burrus, "The figure of $37,500.00 that is proposed that the hospital will pay back to the county, would go into a fund reserved for ambulance related expenses, that would be either for building or ambulance maintenance, is that correct?"

Atty. Welsh, "Correct."

Com. Burrus, "Okay, so we are preserving that for those purposes. Any discussion?"

Com. Harper, "Was that $75,000.00?"

Atty. Welsh, "That by the way, the purpose that you use that for quite frankly is whatever you say you are going to use that for. The Board has already passed an ordinance in the past governing how that is used so we will pay it in and the grievance says you will use it pursuant to that ordinance but that was not something the hospital is doing, it is a policy determination that has been made by the Board of Commissioners exclusively for itself."

Com. Evans, "There hasn't been very many expenditures from that fund an I understand that there is some maintenance that needs to be done, so if you could have Gary Atherton or someone give us a list of those things that need to be taken care of. I understand a roof needs to go on the garage in south county and there are some other maintenance problems that need to be tended to that are our responsibility and we would certainly like to fill our responsibility. I would like to thank the hospital, Ron Winger, and you, Bob, for the cooperation in this contract. I mean, half a million dollars back to the county at a time we are in such critical financial straits, is really appreciated."

Atty. Welsh, "On behalf of Mr. Winger and the Board of Trustees, thank you very much, it has been a pleasure getting all of this worked out with you and with Gwenn and we are glad to be able to present it today."

Com. Harper, "How much is in that fund, John?"

Com. Evans, "$150,000.00 right now."

Atty. Rinkenberger, "$225,000.00 is supposed to be in the fund by January 1st of this year."

Atty. Welsh, "There is 75 under our prior agreement that is owing and will be paid and then in 2004 the $37,500.00 will kick in and I believe that is due in the month of November in each year of the contract."

Com. Evans moved to accept the contract with Porter Memorial Hospital EMS, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Atty. Welsh, "I have four copies of the contract and the lease which is attached to the contract as an exhibit "A", if you could sign those for me, I will take them to the hospital board meeting and get that approved and get fully signed copies back to you."

Atty. Rinkenberger, "I see a typo. You have the January 2003 fund 196 will have a balance of $225,000.00 and actually that should be as of January 2004 Fund 196 will have a balance of $225,000.00 on page four."

Atty. Welsh, "That is something I can take care of with the word processor. I will insert a new page with the correct date and as long as it is not on the signature page, it won't affect anything. I brought four of the agreement and the lease and you sign as many as you like. I will get that date corrected and get a signed copy back to you."

AWARD OFFICE SUPPLY BIDS FOR 2004 (continued from earlier in meeting)

Sandy Vuko, Auditor

Ms. Vuko, "The lowest bid I received was from McShane's."

Com. Burrus, "Do we have more than one category?"

Ms. Vuko, "Yes. A&E Boyce was for class 1 and 2."

Com. Burrus, "Okay, then for category 1 you are recommending McShane's."

Ms. Vuko, "Yes. For Class 3, we had three which was McShane's, Corporate Express, and Kramer & Leonard. McShane's was the lowest."

Com. Burrus, "Okay, for the Class 3 office supplies you are recommending McShane's."

Ms. Vuko, "Yes."

Com. Harper moved to accept McShane's for Class 3 office supplies for 2004, Com. Evans seconded, motion carried.

Ms. Vuko, "We had one that was A&E Boyce for Class 1. Recommend that."

Com. Harper moved to accept A&E Boyce for Class 1 office supplies, Com. Evans seconded, motion carried.

Com. Evans, "I would like to make a recommendation we do away with this process for next year. It is antiquated, it is outmoded, we need to be able to tell our department heads and office holders they have the authority and the right to buy office supplies at the most reasonably priced place and if they need to get three bids, get three bids. However they need to do it, we need to get rid of this."

Ms. Vuko, "What do we need to do to get rid of this way?"

Com. Evans, "I don't know; there are other counties that don't bid them at all."

Com. Burrus, "We can set this as an objective and we will discuss this between now and next time to figure out how the process should go. Thank you, Sandy."


OFFICE HOLDERS/DEPARTMENT HEADS

Dave Sheibels, E-911 Budget, first reading

Mr. Sheibels, "This year's budget is larger than last year's budget with the result of the consolidation of county dispatchers into the surcharge fund for the calendar year of 2004 we made that transition in September where 2003's budget appropriated the necessary funds and brought those dispatchers salaries and benefits over into the surcharge fund. This budget is a continuation of that program in the dispatchers coming into the surcharge fund. The total budget for this year includes 25 salaried personnel who including myself, would be $1,780,479.00 as compared to last year which was $1,113.436.00 which is a difference between last year and this year because of the dispatcher comes to $667,043.00. I believe we have already discussed the budget and concurred on many issues since August, nothing new. This is the same transition to the 144 Form as we have been discussing on our worksheets."

Com. Evans, "I thought we were going to have 29 instead of 25; there is only 25?"

Mr. Sheibels, "Correct."

Com. Harper, "How many dispatchers did you pick up from Public Safety?"

Mr. Sheibels, "21."

Com. Harper, "And that represents the bulk of that $667,000.00?"

Mr. Sheibels, "Correct."

Com. Evans moved to approve the E-911 surcharge fund 37, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Com. Evans moved to waive the rules and pass the surcharge without second reading, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Com. Evans moved to approve the E-911 surcharge fund 37 on 2nd reading, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Mr. Sheibels, "What I just handed out is draw number 7 of our Tiburon lease purchase project. We have completed the civil process system installation phase of the public safety Tiburon project over at the Porter County Sheriff's Department. This is the standard form which you have already approved on six prior occasions to allow the Bank of America to draw down $152,098.00 from our draw account on our three year loan to pay Tiburon for the completion of the civil process system phase of the entire project."

Com. Evans, "What is your balance after this payment?"

Mr. Sheibels, "We have one more draw to make of the automatic reporting system and the police record system is yet to be drawn and it will be another $132,098.00 for that draw which probably we won't have till later in the spring."

Com. Evans, "And your portion again, I'm sorry, the Sheriff had a portion of this and you had a portion of this, right?"

Mr. Sheibels, "Yes, I didn't bring that exact figure but approximately 1/3 of the entire Tiburon project is a dispatch project and that has been concluded already."

Com. Evans, "The Sheriff's portion has been paid in full?"

Mr. Sheibels, "No, the Sheriff's Department is still pending. The payments are a different issue than the draw, this is simply to draw money out of our account at the Bank of America and pay Tiburon for their completion of services."

Com. Evans moved to approve the draw, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.


Mr. Carmichael, "John alluded to purchasing supplies. I think it is way past time that we looked at a purchasing agent/personnel individual to handle these problems. We are paying for this currently and if there is a way we could combine the whole thing to have a more efficient operation, and maybe with some other cities and towns, whatever the case may be, or other agencies that use this purchasing thing. We probably have 70 budgets, maybe, I am guessing, that have some supplies that are being purchased individually. I think that has to change, we have to look at that and make that more efficient. I don't have any problems with your CEDIT plan, but one thing I want to caution you on is the state is currently going to be distributing on an estimated basis as you well know. What is happening in many of the counties will save Indiana, is a lower estimated and those counties hold back, are you aware of that?"

Com. Burrus, "I have heard some of those reports, yes."

Mr. Carmichael, "So what I am saying is we should keep a reserve here before we bring any appropriations before the County Council; we want to make sure that they are sufficient and that those numbers are accurate and that we don't overspend and wind up with a shortage in the next year."

Com. Evans, "We already scaled back once based on your Council's advice. We originally wrote the plan for $3.6 million, we scaled back to $3.2 million."

Mr. Carmichael, "Well, it would be 10% off one way or the other plus or minus."

Com. Burrus, "I think we also have a couple other opportunities to address what you are saying, Bill, and that is that several of the categories are funds that would be accumulated for future disbursement. We should probably have some cushion in there."

Mr. Carmichael, "If we promise some fund for some individual project then we are unable to fund that, they will be very disappointed. We have to let them know this is subjective and it is due to change one way or the other. Obviously, it would be nice if we had a surplus, but I think those state figures are a little bit exaggerated and, how dated or antiquated the program that they are treating us with the old program as opposed to the new program which starts in July."

Com. Evans, "I don't want to let you so slip too much on that first statement you made. Are you supporting the position of a purchasing agent, would you have your council body support that also?"

Mr. Carmichael, "Mike is sitting here and he can tell you that I supported that back in the early '80's. Since 1978. This is one of those things and I as an individual, believe it is necessary to get a handle on this because its a huge expenditure of funds and the auditor can tell you how much is being expended for individual supplies. We got a handle on it with Data Processing. Nobody purchases anything in Data Processing without the director's approval. Obviously, that comes before the County Council when the appropriations requests. We have a handle on that, we don't really have a handle on supplies."

Com. Burrus, "Thank you, Bill. Our next item on the agenda calls for a request from the Information Technology Department. Is Sharon Lippens here or a representative? Seeing none, we will go on to the next item of Commissioner Reports."

UNION TOWNSHIP TRUSTEE REGARDING POOR RELIEF FUNDS
Mike Kibler, trustee

Mr. Kibler, "The township does not have enough money in the Poor Relief Fund and I would like to borrow money under the process of IC 12-20-24."

Com. Burrus, "My understanding of the statute that you referenced there is you do have the statutory authority to come before this Board to request to borrow money on a short term basis inasmuch as you are able to show that the funds are necessary and by the accounting you have provided in this cover letter. The Commissioners have a couple of options we could take. We could define or determine the fund within county government that we feel would be appropriate for this and approve such a request. The other option would be that if there is no such fund that we are entitled to administer then we should deny it and refer it to the Auditor and the County Council. Is that the understanding of the attorney?"

Atty. Rinkenberger, "Yes it is."

Com. Burrus, "As for the Board members, do any of you feel we have a fund that would be appropriate for this purpose?"

Com. Evans, "I don't think so, I think it is a County Council matter."

Com. Harper, "I don't know how we can do without having a fund already set up ahead of time and we don't have one. This law provides that even the County Council doesn't; they have the authority to even have the Auditor borrow money for emergencies so I agree with John, it should go to the County Council because we don't have the fund set up."

Com. Evans, "I hate to set the precedent and that as soon as we do it we are going to open the floodgate for every township in this county."

Com. Harper, "Plus we don't have the funds, John."

Com. Burrus, "The statute has a provision to come before this Board but I think the Council would be the one to ultimately be the most appropriate to deal with that request since they administer most of the funds, in particular the general fund."

Com. Harper, "Plus, I think they have the right to borrow the money and we don't have the right to do that; it is the Council. If I am not mistaken, they are having an emergency meeting."

Com. Evans, "Yes, it is Thursday at 1:00."

Mr. Kibler, "I cannot be there Thursday at 1:00 but I wonder if . . ."

Com. Burrus, "Maybe you can get a representative."

Mr. Kibler, "Yes, maybe somebody can."

Com. Evans, "As I understand it, we, the Commissioners, are then to submit the request to the County Auditor and the Auditor shall carry the special meeting request to the County Council."

Com. Evans moved to deny the request and forward it to the County Council and the Auditor, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

ROBLE WOODS VACATION

Attorney Michael F. Yudt, II

Com. Burrus, "This item is a vacation request for Roble Woods which is next to Long Lake, is that correct?"

Atty. Yudt, "Yes. Here is a legal description for Parcel C. I represent the estate of Helen Spartan who has passed away and in the estate we are asking that the four parcels be vacated to allow the property to be joined and found that in marketing this property the big question in this area is if the septic system fails you have to put a new septic system in. The way it is completed right now, my clients can't get to their other parcels. The remaining part of what is dedicated, Field Drive, has been vacated in prior actions."

Com. Burrus, "This is in John Evans' district; so if you could for my sake and Com. Harper's sake, orient us a little bit more on where this parcel is located?"

Atty. Yudt, "The parcel is located to the west of Long Lake. If you were to take 600 to where it dead ends and turn north that is Long Lake Road. It is approximately ½ mile north of 600."

Com. Burrus, "I think this needs to be heard in the form of a public hearing. At this time, I would like to open the hearing and ask if there are any individuals who care to speak in opposition to this request."

Frances Myer, "We are property owners of 33 acres northwest of and abutting the proposed vacation. We would like to respectfully submit this opposition. We oppose this vacation because it restricts accessibility to 33 acres which only has two other viable access points. It restricts flexibility because it reduces the future use of this acreage that is the development. It restricts further use by the community of possible future use of this right of way as in NIPSCO, sewer, and water line use as we look to the future. This is exactly what he is talking about, septic, and I think there are a lot of homes in this small area close together and as we do look to the future, the problem will be some sewers go in there. We would like to develop our acreage eventually and we would like to have the access. This right of way could be used by all the neighbors especially homes that could eventually be built on our property. It reduces our property value because it reduces access and flexibility of use which naturally reduces the value of this land, land locking it for how it is to this point. My personal belief is that these access points or right of ways are planned for a reason, even if I was to see the determent to the future use of this acreage, the Planning Commission's charge is to protect future use, especially if it benefits a use by potentially greater community. Prior to purchasing these acres, the elderly owner was talked into permitting a vacation of a right of way that did not benefit her or the future use of the property. She did not oppose a vacation of this right of way and the northern half of our acreage was without right of way and although it was originally and correctly platted that way. We had to have NIPSCO lines come in from a much further distance because a platted right of way had been previously vacated. So I petition you as Porter County Board of Commissioners to refuse to vacate this right of way."

Com. Burrus, "Is there a response to those comments?"

Atty. Yudt, "Yes. The Commission has addressed this issue prior to when they vacated the parcels to the west back in 2001, the same objections were brought up and it was planned at that time there was a 60 foot right of way just to the west of it as well as a 50 foot right of way north of this vacation. Both of those access. . . (inaudible).

Com. Burrus, "Is there any one else to speak in opposition? Please state your name."

Joe Kovach, "I am the other side of the property at 59 Field Drive. I have a map from 9 to 16 and then the other 18 to 22. In plat addition, if it is vacated, I heard in the past they planned on maybe selling it off and put a home there. My worry is if there is a home that is allowed in the future, it is going to push off water onto us and there is no drainage to get a house back there. I understand they are worried about the septic but they are going to need a permanent drain there and there is no way to drain that unless you go on somebody's property or runs off on ours. So if it is vacated, just so we are not jeopardizing the future over the house or something like that."

Atty. Yudt, "At this point in time, it is not my client's intention to sell this off and build a house on it. It is up to the heirs what they want to do. And if building takes place out there it will have to be properly through the Plan Commission."

Mrs. Myer, "There has been two other vacations that I know of and people always say they are not going to use it for anything but of course there has been two houses built. There are 33 acres and we would eventually like to develop it and it would be to the advantage of the future community of homes that could be there paying taxes that when sewers and septic eventually will go in and NIPSCO lines, that they have access points that there is a place to drive in and out. I thought that was a very good point about the septic."

Com. Burrus, "Okay, if there are no other comments either for or against, at this time we will close the public portion of this discussion. Gentlemen, what is the board's opinion?"

Com. Harper, "This is why we today have so many. . ., what we are dealing with. Anybody can look at these maps and see we are dealing with lots someone laid out years ago of 400 square feet, or 450, and in they are all in that area and streets have been vacated. I think again and again, before this was brought up before them because otherwise, obviously the lots can't be used. It was obviously, probably made before there was zoning laws and they made 400 feet lots and they thought it was on the lake. Others streets lead into this that have been vacated so I do think our attorney mentioned we have to be careful if they are vacated, the land reverts to the abutting property owner on either side. We have to be careful, I know it is written that way, but I . . . "

Com. Evans, "Why don't we have Dave Schelling tell us his take on this?"

Mr. Schelling, "I agree with Com. Harper. When the property is vacated, it should be split between the adjoining property owners. From the Highway's standpoint, we don't need that right of way. It is primarily a 30 foot driveway toward the south and also toward the north part. Our minimum driveway for the road now is 16 feet so from that standpoint, it should be mentioned. I did have a concern about the driveway and the legal description on Parcel C, and the notice I got was incorrect. It has some lines missing from it."

Com. Burrus, "I believe that has been corrected."

Mr. Schelling, "Yes, I was just going to say I am happy with that."

Com. Evans, "The denial of the access you are claiming; the 50 foot that goes into your property right now, does it have a 50 foot access? Does that go directly into yours?"

Mrs. Myer, "Yes."

Com. Evans, "And the other access will be the "B" area?"

Mrs. Meyer, "No, the other access is to the west."

Com. Evans, "Those are the only two accesses to your property? Is there an access to the north out to another?"

Mrs. Meyer, "It's in a valley. Its not a viable access."

Com. Evans, "The last road we vacated out there, the property owner, you were here I remember, and the property owner agreed to build one house, is that correct?"

Mr. Lakesh, "I bought the property."

Com. Evans, "And that is all that has been built there?"

Mr. Lakesh, "Just one house. My worry is with mine, it is 1.8 acre and I have run off onto my property and I have drainage out to where the natural drains where the whole road of Field Drive was supposed to go through, it cuts right in front of mine. That all drains into that natural ditch drainage, probably 30 or 40 feet below the road banked by 2 acres. Well, mine drains into that, too. My worry is that lot if they did build a house there, there is no way you can get anywhere other than an R property. I am not opposed to the vacating, just putting a house and rebuilding and selling it as a vacant lot and build a home on it."

Com. Evans, "Whatever would be built there would have to go through the Plan Commission and that would be an item that would be taken into consideration by them."

Atty. Rinkenberger, "I gave each of you a sheet of paper that addresses three factors. If you should make a ruling you will have to take each of those three factors into consideration. Particularly if you plan to approve the petition, you will have to find that each of those three factors exists."

Com. Evans, "I will read the factors. Number one is the conditions in the platted area have changed so as to defeat the original purpose of the plat? I think that is obvious due to the fact the roads are vacated up to it. Number two, is it in the public's interest to vacate all or part of the plat? I guess that is up for debate. Number three is the value of that part of the land not owned by the petitioner who will not be diminished by the vacation."

Com. Harper moved to approve to vacate the property on the basis that . . .

Mrs. Meyer, "Without even having a road if we just wanted to sell a couple parcels in the corner there, right now we would have access and we wouldn't be able to do that as long as, once that is vacated, then we couldn't sub parcel it on either side."

Com. Burrus, "I believe that is the parcel that has the 30 foot wide access in the corner you are referring to?"

Mrs. Meyer, "Yes."

Com Burrus, "That is the one the County Engineer indicated would only be half? It is not sufficient for an access."

Mrs. Meyer, "You couldn't use it for a private access, a private road in for one or two houses?"

Com. Burrus, "It is totally right of way but it cannot be used privately unless it is owned privately. So it is kind of a catch 22 as I see it. That is probably not an option for access to your parcel right now."

Mrs. Meyer, "No, but it is feasible it could be used eventually if there is houses put on this acreage. It could be used for sewers to come in, they will be coming in eventually. Septic lines, things like that."

Com. Burrus, "Utilities are a possibility."

Mrs. Meyer, "And the future of the community, a lot more people, this house has been there with the same septic system exposed for a long time. There are other houses in the area that have smaller acreage, they don't even have acreage it is just lots. . . "

Com. Burrus, "I think this Board needs to conclude these deliberations now as much as we have already closed the public portion. Gentlemen, it is up to your discretion."

Com. Evans, "Did you finish your motion, Bob?"

Com. Harper, "No, I didn't."

Com. Harper moved to accept and grant the vacation,

Com. Harper, "This is based on the fact that no one wants to clear the conditions of the platted areas have changed so much as to defeat the original purposes of the plat, and too, I think it is in the public's interest because the county is never going to maintain those roads based on the length of those roads and so forth. It is just not in anyone's interest to keep them there and I feel the abutting and surrounding land won't be affected."

Com. Evans seconded,

Com. Evans, "I agree with everything that was said and could I add a caveat to that in that a utility easement be maintained, is that in our authority?"

Atty. Rinkenberger, "Well, if we vacate it, the owners would have to grant us easement back because once we vacate it, it goes down the center to each abutting property owner then we could ask them for the easement."

Com. Burrus, "We could retain an easement but I am not sure if it would be feasible. . ."

Com. Harper, "I think it is worthless, because these lots are postage stamp size."

Com. Evans, "Well, and the 50 foot right of way is immediately. . . "

Com. Burrus, "Most of the utilities prefer to have their lines immediately adjacent to the streets for access for maintenance. Backyard easements for utilities are very inconvenient for them."

Com. Evans withdrew his caveat and seconded the motion,

Com. Burrus, "Okay, the motion is to grant the request to vacate the property according to the generally accepted procedures being that it be divided down the middle to the two abutting property owners."

Motion carried.

Atty. Rinkenberger, "Does this have to be done by ordinance?"

Atty. Yudt, "I have a proposed ordinance for your review."

Com. Burrus, "Would it be proper then to address this ordinance at the next meeting after your review, Gwenn?"

Atty. Rinkenberger, "Yes and we have to check the legal description."


COMMISSIONERS' REPORTS

Com. Evans, "The first thing is an all district letter requesting the reappointment of the Porter County Highway Engineer for 2004."

Com. Evans moved to appoint David Schelling for the Porter County Highway Engineer for 2004, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Com. Evans moved to reappoint the Porter County Highway Supervisor, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.




North District: Com. Evans

1. Harvest Acres Subdivision Acceptance form and Maintenance Letter of Credit
#ILS- 200367 from Fifth Third Bank in the amount of $48,800.00. Located on corner of SR 149 and Dalke Road. Recommend approval.

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

2. Coventry Subdivision, Phase I, Acceptance form and Maintenance Letter of Credit from DeMotte State Bank in the amount of $100,000.00. Located on the south side of CR 700 North between McCool Road and SR 149. Recommend approval.

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

Center District: Com. Harper

1. Emerald Ridge Subdivision, Phase B, Acceptance form and Maintenance Letter of
Credit #2003-ILC-495, from Bank Calumet in the amount of $188,000.00. Located on the west side of CR 100 West between SR 2 and Division Road. Please note that this letter of credit is for 5 years due to a sewer backfill problem that has been repaired. Recommend approval.

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

2. Emerald Ridge Subdivision, Phase C, Acceptance form and Maintenance Letter of Credit #2003-ILC-496, from Bank Calumet in the amount of $123,000.00. Recommend approval.

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

3. Windsor Park Subdivision, Phase II, Acceptance form and Maintenance Letter of Credit #419 from DeMotte State Bank in the amount of $19,200.00. Located on the east side of Froberg Road and CR 400 North. Recommend approval.

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

4. Windsor Park Subdivision, Phase III, Acceptance form and Maintenance Letter of Credit #420 from DeMotte State Bank in the amount of $5,120.00. Recommend approval.

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

5. Windsor Park Subdivision, Phase IV, Acceptance form and Maintenance Letter of Credit #421 from DeMotte State Bank in the amount of $17,000.00. Recommend approval.

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

6. Windsor Park Subdivision, Phase V, Acceptance form and Maintenance
Letter of Credit #447 from DeMotte State Bank in the amount of $10,000.00. Recommend approval.

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

7. Road agreement for Washington Minor Subdivision 2232-D-4 containing 1 lot behind Woods of Leffew on the east side of CR 275 E north of Evans Avenue. One lot for $750.00. Toy Ann Feldsien is the owner. Recommend approval.

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

South District: Com. Burrus

1. Morgan Minor Subdivision #1739-C-1 Road Agreement, located on the
east side of Smoke Road south of Division Road. Offer to contribute $750.00/lot for a total of $3, 000.00. Owners and subdividers are Ken Zimny, Ginger Zimny, and Gina Tirinnanzi. Recommend approval.

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

2. Pleasant Crossing Subdivision Acceptance form, located on the west side of Baums Bridge Road between CR 600 South and CR 650 South, and the Maintenance Letter of Credit is a cashier's check from First National Bank in the amount of $28,200.00. Recommend approval. (recommended this be held in an escrow account for this two year period.)

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

3. Extension of Horizon Letter of Credit # 993134 in the amount of $10,000 until November 29, 2004 for Amanda's Farm Subdivision. Recommend approval.

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


OFFICE HOLDERS/DEPARTMENT HEADS (REVISITED)

Sean O'Meara, ITS, Enhanced Access Agreement

Com. Burrus, "Now we are going to go back to an item we had to skip over earlier under Office Holders/Department Heads category. The ITS Department represented by Sean O'Meara who is now here for the request of an approval of an enhanced access agreement."

Mr. O'Meara, "My apologies first off for the scheduling conflict we had today. I do not have a contract in front of me but I am well aware of it. The Enhanced Access contract is the contract that we supply most of the title companies that allow them access the information in Porter County. There is a need for a revised access agreement. Number 1, we have changed platforms on how we house this information and got them their access previously. Previously they were coming into a system we call the AS400 and that resulted in yearly maintenance contracts and leasing agreements. Since then, we have been able to put that off to basically a completely free system which allows them access in and all we have to do is make sure our hardware is kept up to date and all backups and stuff like that are in place. So, because of that there was a reduced amount of fee for their contract to get in."

Com. Evans, "Do we do this every year or are we doing it in a different format this year?"

Mr. O'Meara, "That is my understanding."

Com. Evans moved to accept the Enhanced Access Agreement, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Com. Evans, "Sean, I don't know if you are the one who can tell us about this, but there was a proposal about two years ago to enhance or correct the wiring in this building and the North County Annex and the Courthouse, the data wiring. The presentation we had this morning in regard to GIS would preclude those buildings from being accessed if we go to that type of system by that information, is that correct?"

Mr. O'Meara, "If I understand your question to me correctly, the data wiring comprised in this building, North County and the Courthouse, is of the outdated and obsolete type. It would not, according to my studies that I have conducted on the wiring in these buildings, it would not be able to handle the amount of information to carry over the wires to each office in these buildings. The wiring is too old and is not able to carry the amount of information that the GIS would need."

Com. Evans, "Beyond that, we saw earlier in this year when the assessors were trying to get from North County back to here and there is another component to that microwave connection, as I understand it, is the new Sheriff's Department is capable of accepting all the transfers, is that right?"

Mr. O'Meara, "There is basically two parts to that answer. The Sheriff's Department, since it is newly built, has the best wiring they can get in that building at the time. If the GIS information is housed in the Sheriff's Department, then they would be able to communicate and transfer all the data they needed without ever seeing any fax. The problem comes into where that data needs to come to either the North County Complex, the Courthouse or the Administration Center. It can get to the building itself through the microwave without a problem. The problem comes in once it gets into this building, the Courthouse or North County. It is essentially like taking a six lane highway and taking it down to a single lane; it is just not able to take as much traffic as the jail is able to take on so once that happens you are going to see an extremely slow response times. It will be longer to pull up the images; longer to access the data in these three buildings than the jail. The only way around that for the jail is to house the data there. But even housing the data at the jail still results in slower response times for the other three buildings."

Com. Evans, "We are going to need an estimate then for the cost of rewiring those three buildings."

Mr. O'Meara, "I would be more than happy to get that for you. Just off the top of my head it is going to be a pretty penny."

Com. Evans, "$80,000.00 is the last estimate we had."

Mr. O'Meara, "$80,000.00 is the last one I was aware of and that was close to four years ago, for all three buildings. It is my understanding the Courthouse poses an additional problem because of the way it is constructed, wires just aren't easily pulled through there."

Com. Evans, "And this building has a need for another access closet on one of the wings."

Mr. O'Meara, "Another access on the second floor would dramatically help us improve network performance and help us benefit the rewiring of all three buildings also."

Com. Burrus, "Thank you, Sean. We will try to get to the Plan Commission as soon as we can but we still have the correspondence."

CORRESPONDENCE

Court Security monthly report for November 2003 is on file.
Veteran's Service Officer monthly report for November 2003 is on file.
Building Department monthly report for November 2003 is on file.
Treasurer's monthly report for November 2003 is on file.

Approval of employment contract for Herb Douglas for Drainage Board attorney

Com. Burrus moved to approve the contract to retain Herb Douglas as the attorney for the Drainage Board for 2004 for the amount of $7,220.00, Com. Evans seconded, motion carried.

Approve bond for Holly Seibel, Memorial Opera House Director

Com. Burrus moved to approve the bond for Holly Seibel, Director of Memorial Opera House, in the amount of $8,500.00, Com. Evans seconded, motion carried.

Approve request for American Red Cross to conduct blood drive January 9, 2004

Com. Burrus, "They are requesting to hold a blood drive here in the Administration Building due to the blood supply in Northwest Indiana is almost at crisis low right now."

Com. Evans moved to approve the use of the Administration Center for the American Red Cross to hold a blood drive on Friday, January 9, 2004, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Request for Additional Appropriation-ITS Department

Fund 186$80,000.00Acct 10Enhances Access

(The monies need to be appropriated to pay services for equipment to provide access.)

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

Approve consultant agreement between Porter County Animal Welfare Board and Matthew Soliday

Com. Evans moved to approve Matthew Soliday as the attorney for the Porter County Welfare Board for 2004 in the amount of $3,720.00, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Approval of Code Enforcement Officer for Plan Commission/Plan Commission Budget

Com. Evans, "We have to do the budget before the end of the year. This is the result of the Council's consolidation of the funds that used to go to the Building Department and Plan Commission and is the first planned budget with 144's, etc. for your new funding mechanism, right?"

Mr. Thompson, "Right. This is part of the approval process in what we did with the ordinance for creating the Planning, Zoning and Building Fund and the budget is here for your approval. At the last meeting you requested myself to go back and look at the ideal code enforcement officer and go and speak with the City or Portage concerning this. I spoke with A. J. Monroe, City Planner, and he said they had a code enforcement officer in which they pay right around $23,000.00. At that, I did add the Code Enforcement Officer onto this proposed budget. I went ahead and put it at $25,000.00 realizing that with this position, it would have to be at the high end."

Com. Burrus, "Bob, with you being the Commissioner representative on the Plan Commission, do you have any comments?"

Com. Harper, "Just that I think we should include that."

Com. Burrus, "Are you recommending two positions or one, Bob?"

Mr. Thompson, "As far as this project goes, the main editions would be the inclusion of a full time building inspection not a full time code enforcement officer."

Com. Evans, "Do we need to petition the Council to lift the hiring freeze for that to occur?"

Mr. Thompson, "The Building Inspector position I am really not exactly sure. I know that was a full time position at one point. I don't know the history behind that to come right out and say go and ask them to lift the hiring freeze. As far as the code enforcement officer, that is creating a new position, I am sure I will probably have to go before the Council and create a job description and classify the job."

Com. Evans moved to approve the budget contingent on complying with the County Council's mandated request, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Com. Evans moved to waive the rules and adopt on first reading, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Com. Evans moved to approve the budget on second reading, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Withdraw petition of Brigadoon PUD per Mike Wheeler, petitioner

Mr. Thompson, "With respect to your agenda, there is the case of Brigadoon PUD that is scheduled before you. The petitioner, Mike Wheeler was present in my officer today around 9:30 and we talked quite awhile about the Brigadoon and he is requesting to withdraw his petition in front of the Board of Commissioners today. He did not have a letter as of 10 minutes to 10:00; he asked me if he needed a letter, and I wanted to get down here for the GIS presentation so I told him I would bring his request before the Board."

Com. Burrus, "I think it is important for the people who are here for Brigadoon. Is there any action required on our part with the intent to withdraw?"

Atty. Rinkenberger, "No, he can withdraw his petition without Board action."

Com. Harper, "So if he has to come back here, he has to go in front of the Plan Commission?"

Mr. Thompson, "Correct."

Com. Evans, "But it does eliminate the one year criteria?"

Mr. Thompson, "He can come back in three months as per our rules and procedures of withdrawal. It's a brand new public hearing once he withdraws, he has to go through the whole procedure from square one. That is his request to me."

Atty. Rinkenberger, "Can you get that in writing so we have it of record. The only thing I am concerned about is to have a clear record due to the petitioner's requests."

Mr. Thompson, "I can call him later and have that in writing."

Bill (in audience), "This seems to be a habit of this particular petitioner. Roughly a year ago last March or April at 11:00 in the morning, people got the notice he was going to withdraw. There's a lot of good people that came out here to I presume oppose his petition and also to offer their advice and so forth. I think it is unfair to these people that this particular individual is allowed to do this time and time again. If I had my druthers, since we got no official word, I wouldn't say Bob lies, I would say I don't think it is fair to the opposition and I would sincerely recommend you go ahead and hear the petition on its merits and either approve or disapprove. I think that would . ." (the rest of the statement was inaudible.)

Mr. Thompson, "I will mention some of the conversations with Mr. Wheeler in that intent was that he wanted to go back and study what the Plan Commission had said and look to see if he could work this in with a new proposal. He is aware that he could face denial and if he faces denial one of the things he did mention that he does not want to do is to go forward with a straight R1 subdivision with utilities out there. He would still like to be able to provide open space and what not and work into a plan that he feels that the Plan Commission could feel is acceptable and forward it to the County Commissioners. That is his reason for withdrawal."

Atty. Rinkenberger, "I have a problem with proceeding with public hearing on a petition by a petition who is not present and is seeking to have it withdrawn. I understand the concerns of these people and I don't blame them one bit but from a legal standpoint, I have a real problem with trying to proceed on a petition that is not before us."

Com. Burrus, "I think it is his privilege to withdraw if he cares to and that is part of the process. John, any comments?"

Com. Evans, "I am kind of dumbfounded; this is the third time this has come up."

Atty. Rinkenberger, "Is this the third time this has been withdrawn?"

Mr. Thompson, "No, it is the second time I believe it has been thrown at the Commissioners' level."

Com. Evans, "I agree with the attorney. I don't know how we could proceed if he is not present."

Com. Burrus, "With my interpretation of the law, he has the right to do that. As far as do we need board action to acknowledge the fact this will not be heard this afternoon?"

Atty. Rinkenberger, "Yes, it wouldn't hurt."

Com. Harper, "I think legally there is nothing we can do but allow this to be withdrawn. I heard in the statement from the Planner and that it is almost what I consider a veiled threat, like he doesn't want to come back and do R1. I would like to see it R1, and now that it has been withdrawn here its been at a hearing before the Valpo City Council and the city has been sued for annexation and it goes on and on. I don't think we have any legal choice but I also don't think we should sit here and be told by someone that if we don't do this, they are going to do that because that is the way this whole thing has gone from day one."

Com. Evans, "I agree with you, Bob."

Com. Evans moved to accept the withdrawal of Randy Wheeler for Brigadoon Subdivision by his notification to the Plan Commission, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Man in audience, "In fairness, he be allowed to withdraw then that motion could also include that he be required to re-notify all the people that he originally referred to by the Plan Commission first time around at the next hearing."

Mr. Thompson, "He has to go back to square one as far as any application now. If he comes in front of the Plan Commission for another PUD it will be advertised at TAC and at the Plan Commission it will be advertised with interested parties notified by certified mail."

Atty. Rinkenberger, "The whole process will start all over."

Man, "So he can't do what he wants to do."

Unidentified lady in audience, "I have been coming to these meetings for years and he keeps doing the same thing and we are left with absolutely no choices. As the public, don't we have any rights, any options, to do something to stop this, it is such an abuse. We are at the mercy of this one person and he keeps doing this at the last minute. We are taking time off of work, time off of things that need to be done, shouldn't he be responsible for something?"

Com. Burrus, "I know that you folks are being put upon to make meetings we schedule during our normal Commissioner meetings. It is not a convenient time. However, I think the process, even though it has been tedious and inconvenient, has seen a number of changes made in what is being proposed. Now have those things been favorable or not, are they adequate or not, that still remains to be seen but a process is underway that will hopefully address either all of your concerns or it will be ultimately denied, I have no idea. However, this is in constant evolution and with a project of this scope it is not altogether that unusual."

Com. Evans, "It is unfortunate, but it is his property and what he wants to do with it subject to his discretion, then the input from you comes in so when he gets to the point and pulls back, I don't know how we could do it."

Atty. Rinkenberger, "When you guys re-work your ordinances in the Plan Commission, you could have these fellows look at having some type of reasonable time constraints placed on withdrawal. You know, withdraw within 24 hours of the scheduled hearing and require them to give these people notice, something like that?"

Com. Harper, "And a year until they reapply."

Atty. Rinkenberger, "If they withdraw, a year to reapply. I think from a procedural aspect with the ordinances you could write something in to avoid this."

Com. Harper, "I don't know if this is possible, but we could have a Commissioners' meeting once in awhile in the evening when there are hot planning issues so the people wouldn't have to come during the date because that is tough. I know there are a lot more neighbors come and listen at night and I am sure Dave knows this from being at the Plan Commission meetings."

Atty. Rinkenberger, "One thing we want to do is type up withdrawal requirements before we start having night meetings because then they will just withdraw it at night."

Com. Burrus, "The comment is valid and the object we are working towards here is to see all of our planning and zoning ordinances be updated and reviewed and certainly this has a place in that review. At this time, having accepted the withdrawal we need to move forward."

CEDIT PLAN REVIEW AND DISCUSSION

Com. Burrus, "The last item I have on my agenda is a review of the status of the CEDIT Plan. There has been a draft in existence for several months. We have talked about several changes over the months and on that draft we have one or two more changes to offer. Also, Com. Harper has a draft he would like to discuss and I don't know how much similarity there is but we will review that as well. I will start out simply by highlighting the most recent changes to the draft. The objective of the changes that we want to report today are with trying to create a sum of money that could be dedicated towards economic development. The sum we are targeting for economic development, this is not understood to be anything finite at this point. We are looking at a sum of $150,000.00 per year. Our objective is to coordinate extensively with the existing economic development functions that exist in Portage, Chesterton, and Valparaiso and we will rely heavily on their input as to the best way to develop a spirit and an atmosphere of cooperation and in turn a satisfactory plan that would allow us to use this money to the maximum advantage with the idea of the four years that have proposed in this draft. We would generate $150,000.00 in the first year from two existing projects. The first project will be Project 2, which is the Capital Improvement category for the three Commissioner districts. Originally we had $100,000.00 per year earmarked for those projects, we reduced that to $75,000.00 per year, therefore generating a portion of the new amount required for economic development. In addition, we would take $75,000.00 away from Project 3 which is the scheduled maintenance program for Porter County. It will change from $175,000.00 to $150,000.00. Project 6, for the first year only, would be the regional transportation fund we had originally proposed at $200,000.00, we would propose to enter the first year at $175,000.00 and would generate $25,000.00 there toward the economic development. Lastly, on the first year only, on Project 8 which is the State Road 149 extension proposed most recently at $200,000.00 the first year, we would reduce that to $175,000.00 and that would generate another $25,000.00. The effect on the first year is that we would have six increments of $25,000.00 that would be scraped together to fund the economic development proposal. For the years of 2005, 2006 and 2007, we would propose the entire amount come from Project 1 where we had originally proposed the improvement to county right of ways at one point $4 million, we would reduce that down to $1.25 million. That would be the extent of our proposed changes at this time on that draft. Bob, I would be glad to turn it over to you and if you care to explain and review your thoughts."

Com. Harper, "First I said it at the first meeting and I will say it again. I know there was a lot of time spent on this and I realize this is a difficult project and I have some disagreements with at as you two know. I would just like to give you my views. I have prepared an alternate plan that I have available here. The major difference between my plan and your plan is that my plan is for two years and proposes no new building projects. The reasons that I do not feel that we should extend the plan for over two years are as follows:

(Commissioner Harper read the following prepared statement):

a.We have been in a financial crisis for at least the last 24 months and really no one knows exactly what our future finances will be. We should not be planning four (4) years in advance until we know what our future budgetary needs will be and where the money to pay them will come from.

b.One of the biggest uncertainties is the future cost of our employees health insurance plan. I have been told our cost for 2003 is in excess of $4,000,000.00 and this is expected to grow at 15 percent a year. We have not yet set aside enough for next years anticipated health care costs and one or more catastrophic claims could send this figure skyward.

c.We have cut county services and have severely restricted services to the largest population area in Porter County, namely Portage and North Porter County, in that many of the county offices in the North County Government Complex have either been closed or their hours severely restricted. We need to determine the cost of reestablishing the level of services to our largest population base and determine where this money is coming from.

d.We do not have enough history as to the amount of income we are going to receive from federal and state prisoners and exactly how much it is going to cost to operate the Porter County Jail. I believe the jail is going to put additional burdens on our budget in the following few years.

e.Our existing buildings are falling into a state of disrepair and are not presently adequately maintained. We need to maintain the property we have and determine a source of funding for this maintenance before we take on additional expenses.

In my opinion we should not extend our plan any further than the minimum that is required by law, which I understand to be two (2) years. Something Councilman Carmichael said today is interesting and that is if you put that money in there, people are going to start planning on that money in the future and if it is not available or if it is needed for something else, you are going to have that thrown back in your face. It is easy to say that we could change a four (4) year plan in the future as conditions and circumstances change, but as soon as we allocate money for the various departments, planning for the expenditure of the money will necessarily begin. It will be very difficult to go back to the department heads and ask them to rearrange their priorities if the money is not available because of some unforeseen financial problem. Therefore, I urge my fellow commissioners to reconsider and limit any plan to a period of two years. The second difference in my plan is that it does not call for funding any new buildings.

As far as I know, other than the building for the Park Department, there have been no projections done on what it would cost to maintain these proposed new buildings. In my opinion, given our present financial crunch, none of these buildings are critical. This body has said again and again to our employees that we should only be spending money that is absolutely necessary. They have been asked to pick up the workload of employees that could not be replaced, forgo adequate raises, work on outdated equipment and in some cases forfeit longevity pay that they were formerly entitled to. If we build the four (4) buildings it will be funded on the backs of our employees. The cost of the utilities, insurance and maintenance of the buildings will be the responsibility of the general fund. After we have a weathered our present financial crisis and have a better idea of our future finances it may be appropriate to address some or all of these buildings. However, at this time I think it is simply ludicrous to embark on a building spree when we cannot afford to maintain the buildings that we have! It wasn't very long ago that we were told this county was basically broke and we went to the taxpayers and told them that it was absolutely critical that we pass some sort of income tax. What has so drastically changed that would enable us to now use the income tax dollars to build more buildings which will further drain our coffers? This just does not make any sense to me. The four buildings that I have heard discussed since I became a commissioner are the building for the Park Department, the Hazmat building, the shooting range at the jail and the north county highway garage. I have made no secret of my support for our Park Department and I applaud them for what they have been able to do on a very limited budget. My plan calls for substantial monies for them to buy additional park land in the next two years, while it is still available, and leave construction of the new building at Sunset Hill Park for the future when our finances are not so critical. I have personally been told by the park manager that the yearly maintenance on the proposed park building, including hiring enough staff to man it, would be $250,000.00 a year. I commend him on his work in preparing the figures, because in my opinion, he is the only person so far that has taken the time to put together an estimate on what it would cost to maintain any building. However, we simply do not have that large amount of money in the budget at this time, and neither does the Park Department. Where is this money coming from if suddenly we have a building project at Sunset Hill Park? I submit to you that it is coming from the future paychecks of our existing county employees.

Another one of the projects planned is a shooting range to be built at the Porter County Jail. I believe that much misinformation has been put out to the general public about the money for that range, and I would like to give my views on the subject. First, I would say that I cannot find anyplace in the minutes of the meetings of either the Commissioners or County Council where the Sheriff's Department came to us and laid out a plan for this shooting range which included the proposed cost of the yearly utilities, insurance and maintenance of the facility. Who gave the approval for the county to incur these added costs? It appears to me that what happened was that, as a result of signing a contract with the federal government, there was some extra money available and the Sheriff's Department assumed that this extra money would and could be used for a shooting range. The idea was set forth that the shooting range, which is a new stand alone building, is something that the taxpayers of Porter County could get for nothing because it came from a money sent to us by the Federal Government and it became a project by default and took on a life of it's own. I'd like to take the time to put forth the results of my research into this whole issue. First, we embarked on a building project for the new jail with a price tag of roughly $40,000,000.00. We started with the assumption and it was approved under the assumption that it could be staffed with a limited number of guards based on the type of facility that was to be built. As a result, in the initial planning stages, it was thought that this jail would not require any significant extra manpower above the then level at the existing jail.

However, at some point in the planning stage of the building of this jail, those involved did a complete turnaround and started telling us how much extra personnel would be needed, and in fact, even though there has been a substantial increase in the number of jail employees, the Sheriff's Department is still requesting that they be given additional manpower. Further, I do not think that those involved with the planning ever got a good projection on what the costs would be for utilities, insurance, etc., at that facility before it was built. Simply stated, as time drew near to open the facility, it became apparent that based on the change in projections of manpower needed, that either the county was going to have to fork over great amounts of money, which they simply did not have or much of that jail could not be opened. That's the present situation we find ourselves in. A solution was reached wherein the Sheriff agreed to house federal and state prisoners. The reason that the jail was able to gain money from housing those federal and state prisoners is quite simple-- the taxpayers of Porter County agreed to assume the burden of paying for the $40,000,000.00 jail over the next few years through their real estate taxes retiring the bond. It seems to me that if the taxpayers are paying for the jail, the money paid by the federal government for housing the prisoners in a taxpayer funded building, is taxpayers' money. It does not belong to any one department. In addition, the federal government agreed to pay Porter County a bonus of $1,300,000.00 for signing the contract to handle the federal prisoners. Remember, this bonus, in addition to the monies gained from housing those prisoners would not be possible unless the taxpayers of Porter County were willing to pay for this facility. Somehow, in that contract between the federal government and the Porter County Jail, it became a requirement that the signing bonus of $1,300,000.00 be used in the construction of the jail. Frankly, I question whether that was a requirement of the federal government or whether the Sheriff's Department wanted that provision in the contract to ensure that they could use that money as they saw fit. Again, everyone has forgotten that this is taxpayers' money. Further, it seems to me that everyone has forgotten that we have to have the federal and state prisoners there, because those that planned the jail in the early planning stages miscalculated how much it was going to cost to run that jail. When the $1,300,000.00 was received from the federal government, it was placed in an account under the control of the commissioners. Remember, this is the account that everyone has been told must be used for the building project of the jail. To date, the following monies have been spent from that account:

a.$200,000.00 to pay for salaries at the jail, transferred on August 29, 2002.

b.$213,407.00 for a partial payment on a computer system for the jail and the Sheriff's Department which was transferred on September 13, 2002.

The Sheriff promised to pay $600,000.00 out of that money to that computer system, and by the way, if it was, there would only be $200,000.00 left but at some point in the whole process, that money was put on loan and there is a grant into the federal government right now trying to get that money. Apparently if the grant goes through, then the $400,000.00 will be paid for but still owed. If the grant doesn't go through, but I think it is going to go through, and I think this money should be held until we find out, and if it doesn't go through, that computer system hasn't been paid for yet. There is $400,000.00 still in the computer system.

c.$22,900.00 and $3,863.00 for fitness equipment for an exercise room for the Sheriff's Department, which was in addition to other money for fitness equipment for the exercise room which came out of the jail bond. This was paid to Magnum Fitness Systems on September 24, 2002.

d.Approximately $269,000.00 paid to Bloomington Ford for Crown Victoria squad cars, paid in August and October of 2003.

e.$600,000.00 transferred on June 5, 2003, which was transferred to the general fund because of the then existing financial crisis.

Further, as the Commissioners are well aware, not only is there ongoing litigation regarding the jail, but there also may be some serious structural defects in the jail building that need to be repaired. The jail may require a further outlay of money over and above the bond issue in the future and where is this money going to come from if the remaining $600,000.00 is gone?

Additionally, I expect in the coming year there are going to be increased demands on the part of the Sheriff's Department for additional personnel for the jail. We have already used some of the money from the Federal Government's signing bonus for personnel for the jail and the remaining money could be used to alleviate any future deficit if the need arise. If we let the jail pull any more out of our general fund, other than is absolutely necessary, we are again going to do it on the backs of our other employees in that they are not going to get the raises and benefits they deserve.

When I started this, I said I was uncertain why there was the provision in the contract requiring the signing bonus money be used for the jail. However, it is clear that a lot of the money has not been used for the jail, but has been used for other Sheriff's Department expenses as I've previously discussed. Once the Sheriff's Department wanted to use the money for other needs, it was as simple as them picking up the phone and amending the contract, which has been done, and I am attaching to this statement a copy of the Sheriff's Department memo indicating that they would pay for that computer system and a copy of a letter from the Department of Justice basically giving carte blanche on how this money is to be used. Note that the November 14, 2002 letter from the Department of Justice, Marshals Service says, "The end result of the federal dollars is at the desecration of the Sheriff and Porter County." I read the "and Porter County" to mean the Porter County Commissioners on behalf of the taxpayers of Porter County. Enough said on the Porter County Jail, the shooting range and the Federal signing bonus. One of the best aspects of both of the plans submitted, I believe, is the money set aside for preparing our planning and zoning ordinances. I believe this is one of the best expenditures we could make, which would not only help good economic growth but also do a service to the people that live in this county, to ensure that we will have zoning laws that will protect open space and preserve our rural character as well as provide quality of life for our citizens. I think we should consider, among other things:

A. A detailed study of planned unit developments, and an ordinance written to ensure that these planned unit developments would be used to encourage open space and green space, and not just allow developers to cram every possible house they can onto a small acreage.

B. Zoning laws which require new businesses to follow a set pattern of certain types of sidewalks and trees, etc.

C. Investigate widening sidewalks and landscaping in certain areas.

D. Establish minimum setbacks of industrial areas with buffer zones with vegetation to improve appearance.

E. Putting limits on advertising signs and signs on businesses to help improve the look of the countryside.

Again, I urge my colleagues not to go ahead with all of these previously discussed building projects. Last summer, I observed employees who work in the main Porter County courthouse take their own time and funds to weed and beautify the landscaping around the courthouse. They were told that there was not enough money in our budget to pay someone to keep up the grounds and they were trying to do their part. It is inconceivable to me that we can go from that status six months ago to now considering four new buildings. Let's get our financial house in order first and then consider buildings later. No matter where the funds come from for the buildings, the county still has to incur maintenance, insurance and utility costs on all of them. Thank you."

Com. Evans, "I agree with a good portion of that. My problem with the $600,000.00 for the Sheriff is that he didn't want to do that and the Council twisted his arm and he came to us, the Commissioners, and said if I do this will you stand up for me to get my money back. So now, what do we do, who is right? I agree that the money probably could be spent in other ways. The Hazmat Building is something that has been promised that I don't see how you can go back on that one. It becomes a matter of priorities or respect for your word. The citizens gave their word they would build a building in honor of their first Hazmat Director; that money has been languishing in an account for a long period of time. I know that you don't think it is all donations, and maybe it is not but the fact remains they need a place to function out of and they would take the Hazmat out of this building, they would EMA with them and maybe even Solid Waste and clear up more space in this building. The North County Garage isn't proposed for three, four years into the Plan. If you can get up there and see there are only two bays in that garage and that they barely have enough space to change oil, they have to rotate trucks in and out of there. Most of them are huddled under a windshield at times and then look at the county facilities in your district and in Commissioner Burrus' district and I am not going to say my district doesn't deserve as much as you already have so I am going to fight for that garage because that garage is needed. It is not until somewhere down the road. Maybe we should have Highway and the Sheriff, the Jail and the Parks all come in and give us a plan on their maintenance responsibilities and ideas on what it is going to cost to maintain those buildings. We would have a better handle on that to see what it is going to cost. I think we need to either come to an agreement with the Sheriff or he needs to propose some other way to get that money back. I don't know, it is to my way of thinking a contract as you said, between him and the federal government. Between the federal government and the jail and it is taxpayer money but it was directed for that purpose and it was his imitative and his insight that lead to acquiring those funds. My name, your name or Dave's name is not on that jail so what when on for the building of it and the bond issue to go before it is not anything that we could have done anything about. We have to take the reigns now and I don't have any problem in coming to many of the things you suggested but I think we need to get some agreement on those other items from those people involved."

Com. Burrus, "With respect to your comments, Bob, I would say there is a major area of agreement. There are a couple of areas where we have some discrepancies in our agreement. This would include the criticism that is made about the maintenance of the existing buildings when we have two areas in the existing plan that would address capital works of that nature. I am talking about the extent of those things that need to be addressed further. You also mentioned issues regarding the jail's operating expenses, any new building's operating expenses and the health insurance issue. All those certainly are valid concerns. However, I would question the legality of using CEDIT money for operating expenses or health insurance. I think that would be a questionable thing to try to get through. Looking at some of the proposals you had in terms of dollars, I see a great deal of similarity and I think that there are certainly more similarities than differences. I appreciate that and I think the situation we find ourselves in is possibly a little more discussion might be appropriate. John, how do you feel?"

Com. Evans, "I agree. I think we need to get those parties involved that can have some input in regard to the ongoing expenses in here and talk with them. I am not opposed to making a motion that we extend our approval of the Plan until next year."

Com. Burrus, "I would be willing to go with that as well. I would hate to see it languish month after month, nevertheless, we need to do some more fine tuning on it. I hope we could very soon after the first of the year have some individual workshop sessions so we can discuss this on a give and take basis and see if we might be able to reach a consensus."

Com. Evans moved to extend the approval of the CEDIT Plan until early 2004, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Com. Burrus, "We will be discussing this on an individual basis. Could we make a target date of the second meeting in January inasmuch as we will be having appointments and other issues to deal with at that first meeting."

APPROPRIATE FUNDS FROM BUILDING MAINTENANCE TO CCD FOR NORTH COUNTY PROJECTS

Com. Evans, "In the ongoing effort to keep the North County facility in Portage up and running, sometime ago we put in a boiler and we had some other projects with the doors. I instructed the maintenance supervisor to obtain some quotes in regard to painting and carpeting in the offices that hadn't been done to this point, namely the Prosecutor's office and the Assessor's office. I have also instructed her to try and match as much as possible the color scheme and the carpet as close as possible. I have the quotes she has returned to me. The bottom line is for floor covering would be for those two offices would be $11,283.29 and the painting would be $8,100.80."

Com. Evans moved to appropriate the funds from the Building Maintenance Fund to our CCD to go ahead with the projects.

Com. Evans, "I tentatively have it on line to occur for the painting portion over the Christmas holidays and the carpet shortly probably after the first of the year. The Sheriff has graciously allowed us to use some manual labor to get all the equipment out of those offices to be able to lay the carpet at that time. We didn't think the painting should be done by an amateur."

Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

SWITCHBOARD COMMENTS REGARDING INCOMING CALLS

Com. Harper, "Some of the office holders have expressed to me they are getting some of the calls they feel shouldn't come to their department and I realize it is tough for one person to decide where they go. But I thought two things I have to suggest, number one have the operator give everyone the number of the office they are calling so hopefully they will call the number directly. In other words, say I will transfer you but their number is such and such. And two, perhaps provide some of these departments with a form where if they feel they are getting the wrong calls they can fill it out. This is an information thing and give it back to the switchboard to try to help that person out. I realize it will never be 100% but I just wanted to make that suggestion."

Com. Evans, "I have a proposal on my desk that I will show you, Bob, for an automated attendant system to be installed here that would probably accomplish what we want to do."

BOARD VACANCIES, REQUESTING VOLUNTEERS TO APPLY

Com. Burrus, "Okay, two final quick items. We have advertised and we are requesting volunteers to sign up for various boards and commissions. The newspaper folks have been very helpful on that. The openings we have available include the Alcoholic Beverage Commission; the Animal Welfare Board; the Hospital Building Board of Trustees; Property Tax Assessment Board of Appeals; the BZA; Westport Township Fire District; South Haven Advisory Board. In addition, I would like to add we also have at least one, if not more, openings on the Solid Waste Advisory Committee. Some of these positions have specific requirements of residency or political affiliation. We will be glad to share that information with any interested party."

JANUARY 2, 2004 AS PAID HOLIDAY FOR EMPLOYEES

Com. Burrus, "The last item has to do with the calendar as it falls this year, the holiday of the New Year is on January 1st, a Thursday, and Friday, January 2nd has been suggested as a day for holiday. I would support that idea. Is there any discussion regarding the 2nd of January?"

Com. Evans, "I think we set a precedent already by doing that for the Christmas Holiday and I think it is a good idea. Especially in view of the fact we can't give longevity for the second half of this year."

Com. Burrus, "It will not occur every year."

Com. Evans moved to approve January 2, 2003 as a paid holiday for the employees of Porter County Government, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Kevin Breitzke, "We also have an opening on Plan Commission that we need to fill."

Com. Evans, "We announced that earlier. And that needs to be a republican from the rural area."

Com. Evans, "Before we recess we should mention the fact that this is Linda's last meeting. She is going to be leaving us, which we don't like."

Com. Burrus, "I think it is appropriate to mention that Melissa from the Auditor's office is our new Administrative Assistant to be Linda's replacement."

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

PLAN COMMISSION SESSION-11:00 A.M.

Ray Theaker, request for rezone from RR to R1

Mr. Thompson, "This is Plan Commission Resolution No. 03-17, Petitioner Ray Theaker, Classic Designs, requesting an amendment to the zoning maps requesting an RR to R1, single family residential. This case was heard before the Plan Commission at their November 12th public hearing. It is forwarded to the County Commissioners with an unfavorable recommendation by an 8-0 vote."

Com. Burrus, "The parcel is 64 acres, is that correct?"

Mr. Thompson, "Yes."

Com. Burrus, "At this time I will open the hearing and offer the floor to the petitioner who is represented by Attorney Todd Leeth."

Atty. Leeth, "Thank you. I am here appearing on behalf of the petitioner today. Classic Design Builder, Inc. is Ray Theaker. Mr. Theaker owns approximately half of the 64 acre parcel that is petitioned before you and has an option to purchase the northern half of that. I have provided to you a long sheet with the highlighted property as well as the display board showing the property's location. Let me help you for orientation. The property, 64 acres, is outlined is red. US Highway 30 is in this location, approximately a half mile north of the property. County Road 750 West is a frontage, in this location, Lake County boundary line is the western boundary of this property. For the record, we did notify not only the property owners within 300 feet surrounding this piece in Porter County but the Lake County owners as well. The petition is to change the classification of the current zoning from Rural Residential to R1. The zoning in the area is primarily rural residential and has been since 1983 and my suspicion is that it predates the 1983 zoning ordinance, probably to 1974 and beyond. There are small pockets of commercial zoning in close proximity that I wanted to highlight to you. The Walgreen's property is zoned C2 and is located in that area immediately across Highway 30 there is the little wedge parcel at the intersection of old 30 and US 30 that is zoned C4. approximately ½ mile to the east of that property there is also a C4 property as well. In the vicinity of Porter County there is some areas that are zoned commercial that are along US Highway 30. Primarily the zoned classification is Rural Residential throughout Union Township and in the immediate vicinity of this property as well. The purpose of the petition is to allow for Mr. Theaker to develop a residential subdivision on the property in question. He can do that under the current zoning classification of Rural Residential but to do so he would be able to do with septic systems which would required one acre size lots which is consistent also with the lot size of the current zoning as well. We have learned that the Merrillville Conservancy District will be extending a rather large sanitary sewer to serve this property to the east of this, running along US 30, ½ mile from this property. Currently, there exists Indiana American Water for drinking water as well. So this property in a short period of time is going to be serviced both with sanitary sewer and with municipal drinking water. That is what gives rise to the petition before you. Historically, the Commissioners and the Plan Commission have looked with disfavor in zoning classifications or changes from zoning in Union Township primarily. I think that had to do with a couple things. First, in 1992 the county conducted a study, the overlay zone, was the result of that for US Highway 30 and that zone indicated that from the City of Valparaiso westerly, that a rezoning should looked upon with caution. Those cautionary words have historically resulted in unfavorable zoning. Primarily, a good example of that is the Sandy Ridge Subdivision which lies in this area to the east and extends down. This parcel here with frontage on 750 as well is also a part of Sandy Ridge. That property, 504 acres of Sandy Ridge was denied for a PUD with a number of housing types and some felt too dense. Beyond that, we have some new changed circumstance. First, is the extension of sanitary sewer. I think that is an important tool that planners should look with favor on to place single family homes rather than having individual septic systems. When I was representing the Sandy Ridge Development one of the things I was asked to do was to get a special exception from the County Board of Zoning Appeals. At that time I solicited a letter that I also provide to you from the Health Department. Mr. Letta writes, the Porter County Health Department supports the use of wastewater treatment plants as opposed to individual septic systems. He goes on to indicate, my words not his, they can be ticking time bombs. We want to have the development on sanitary sewers. I omitted from quoting it the first sentence of his letter the words 'in all cases' because I think it is important because it says specifically Sandy Ridge but I think he says in the letter 'in all cases.' I don't think this letter is specifically regarding its support of municipal sewers just for Sandy Ridge. It is an issue of public health and safety that we place homes and developments such as the one Mr. Theaker is proposing on sanitary sewer. The incentive for Mr. Theaker to reach out a half mile north and extend those utilities southward is the ability to place more homes on that property than the current zoning allows. Lastly, the purpose we think the historical reluctance of the county to change some, why that should be changed today, is the comprehensive plan. As I indicated in 1992, we had the overlay zone and some suggestions in the review and suggestions that lead up to that ordinance that we had cautionary rezonings west of the city of Valparaiso. We now have the comprehensive plan that has been recently adopted. I believe there have been significant suggestions in the comprehensive plan that suggest that we should utilize our infrastructure wisely and the result of that is better utilization of our precious resource of land itself. We can place more homes on less acres and preserve the remaining land for future homes for commercial, farming, for all the other uses that our economy requires and a diverse economy requires so that we can utilize our land more efficiently. I think I have highlighted the proposal that was presented by the Plan Commission and would like to offer any answers to questions that you might have."

Com. Burrus, "Thank you, Todd. It is now open for anybody to have the opportunity to speak against."

Mr. Thompson, "This letter comes from Mary Granzow, 190 North 750 West, Valparaiso, Indiana. (Mr. Thompson read the following letter):

I am against the rezoning of the property at 199 N 750 W which is the Ray Theaker property. This property is zoned R1, we could have 12,000 square foot lots that's a lot of homes per acre. We live out here because we like the rural area and we like to see it stay that way. When I sold the property to Mr. Theaker he assured me he didn't want to live around a lot of people and noise. He likes living in the country. We came to an agreement of 6 lots, he said he would keep around 20 acres for himself. I would not have sold him the property otherwise and he knew that. During a phone conversation with him prior to the planning board meeting he denied making the agreement. Attached is a copy of the sale agreement. Thank you for your time, Mary Granzow."

Com. Burrus, "Does that accurately reflect your remarks?"

Mrs. Grandzow, "Yes."

Com. Burrus, "Any others against?"

Atty. Leeth, "The Porter County Zoning ordinance provides for the lot sizes based upon a number of criteria which is relative to the allowances and credits for utilities. Actually, under your ordinance, if Mr. Theaker provides for storm sewer as well as sanitary sewer and extends the water service down, the lot sizes could be 11,000 square foot lots rather than the 12,000 as indicated. That is not a small lot. I think many of our citizens believe in the county that it is a small lot. In many communities that is probably true. For example the city of Valparaiso under their R1 zoning they can have 8,000 square foot lots, 27, 28 % smaller. 11,000 square foot lots, for municipal served property, is not small. Second of all, I am unfamiliar with the contract to purchase and I know it was Mr. Theaker's intent to provide for a limited number of homes. In fact, perhaps you can see from the Auditor's map Mr. Theaker placed a minor subdivision on this property prior to the Merrillville Conservancy District's action in adopting the resolution and annexing the property over to the east here for service. That was done to follow through with the intent and follow through with the zoning as he understood it at the time. We think the location of the utilities at this point in time is cause for hearing the petition before you."

Com. Burrus, "I will close the public portion of the hearing and will open it for discussion among the Commissioners. Bob?"

Com. Harper, "I think the Plan Commission has sent this to us at 8-zip. I personally agree with that but I wasn't at that meeting. I understand that what size the lot is in the eye of the beholder and I guess what my fight is for, I think there is a lot of people that have chosen to live here, and they are already here and in their eyes, they would like some sort of rural character remain in the county. I listen to them, I think they should have the right. If we rezone this to R1, we are not rezoning 64 acres, we are rezoning 1,000 acres because everyone is going to latch onto this and say all the sewers are coming out, the septic is coming out, we want it north of it; south of it; how can you say no? If we are doing this today, we are not doing 60 acres, we are doing thousands of acres. Let me comment on Valparaiso and 8,000 square feet. I think someday, and I understand they are building a lot of buildings and are putting up a lot of houses but I think someday, with the resulting problems with that, they are going to rue the day they have done that. I think this area is a residential rural area and the people have moved to that area with the understanding it is going to be a rural area; and land in a rural area, well it can be developed just as you said. It is not that it can't be developed, it is how densely it is developed. I make the motion that we deny it based on the fact that it is spot zoning."

Com. Evans, "How many houses are you proposing on the 64 acres?"

Atty. Leeth, "Without the topographic survey we simply don't know. How many homes would be there. We do know that you simply can't take 64 acres and multiply it by square feet and divide by 11,000 because the developers rule of thumb is you can only develop 75% of the ground you have. In this case, it is far less than that because this little squiggly line is Deep River, so we have some very serious topographic concerns back there. The answer is I don't know."

Com. Evans, "Did you sign this rider when you purchased the property?"

Man, "Yes, and the intent of that at that time, I was planning to keep the 20 acres in the back to the west, that is 15 and 5 split up because my house is there. I own a house there and have lived there for 2 ½ years now. At that point, that was our intent, that is why I did the four lot minor subdivision and had the 20 acres for the back end for me to be able to reside there. Since the sewers have become available instead of developing with septic, that was the whole idea. This was far more responsible development to be able to develop it with sanitary services since they are available. I have no idea that they would be available out there."

Com. Burrus, "Bob, I have a thought on one of your comments that has to do with the perspective on lot size and the individuals who move to this area because they wanted to enjoy the county or the rural atmosphere. You take that same perspective and move it back 50 years, their move to this location has constituted a growth that may or may not have been desirable at that time either. Where you place the bar or where you establish a bench mark is one of the issues here. With respect to this project, I think there is a conflicting thing. If we do take the most current and basic document we have for a reference it would be the land use plan. It is strongly suggested in there that we try to consolidate, condense or otherwise increase the density of residential developments where municipal services are available. We are shooting high density rings around some of the municipalities, and around some other growth areas that are anticipating municipal services and whether we like that document or not, I think that direction is there. Now, on the other hand I noticed in the Plan Commission's report that this is located in a conservation development area due to its proximity to the Deep River drainage area. I can recall in that land use plan that we do have corridors along some of these major drains that represent a fairly natural undeveloped area that has been suggested as being retained or preserved that way. So I can see a conflict existing between the planning components right here. With the municipal services available, they have the encouragement to develop. However, the location is next to a conservancy area according to our report that suggests it not be developed at all. So those are the two views I have on this. Any further conversation? I think we had a motion on this already."

Com. Harper moved to deny the request for rezone of RR to R1 of Ray Theaker, Com. Evans seconded, motion carried.

Com. Burrus moved to stand in recess until 1:30 p.m., Com. Evans seconded, motion carried.


AWARD HIGHWAY BIDS-1:30 PM

The meeting was called back to order.

Com. Burrus, "The meeting is called back to order for the purpose of awarding Highway Department bid items that were received and taken under advisement at our previous meeting. I believe our objective is to go item by item. We have 30 plus items, so if I could read the item, Al, you could tell me who is the successful bidder."

1. LIMESTONE:

HARRY BROWN TRUCKING, RALSTON PAVING CORP. VULCAN
MATERIALS AND WHITCOMB TRUCKING

Com. Evans moved to accept, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

2. SLAG:

LEVY CO. AND RALSTON PAVING

Com. Evans moved to accept, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

3. BITUMINOUS ASPHALT:

AGGREGATE INDUSTRIES EXPRESS, CENTRAL PAVING, REITH-REILY AND WALSH & KELLY

Com. Evans moved to accept, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

4. ICE ABRASIVE MATERIAL:

WHITCOMB TRUCKING, RALSTON, VULCAN AND AGGREGATE INDUSTRIES.

Com. Evans moved to accept, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

5. FILL SAND:

WHITCOMB TRUCKING, RALSTON PAVING, GE MARSHALL

Com. Evans moved to accept, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

6. PAVEMENT STRIPPINGS/MARKINGS

AIRMARKING COMPANY

Com. Evans moved to accept, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

7. EQUIPMENT RENTAL:

GE MARSHALL, WALSH & KELLY, REITH REILLY.

ITEM 7A: MT. CARMEL SAND AND GRAVEL
ITEM 7B: NORTHERN

Com. Evans moved to accept, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.


8. SIGNS AND SIGNPOSTS:

HULL SIGNS, AND FISHER & ASSOC.

Com. Evans moved to accept, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

9. CALCIUM CHLORIDE SOLUTIONS

GREAT LAKES CHLORIDE

Com. Evans moved to accept, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Com. Burrus, "Al, have we enough rock salt in storage to get us through the winter?"

Mr. Hoagland, "No, we only order that as we need it. We only have storage capacity at three locations and we have had no problem previously and this year, in ordering. And at a guaranteed price."

10. GASOLINE, HIGHWAY ONLY

BAIRD MARINE

Com. Evans moved to accept, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Com. Burrus, "On the part of the Sheriff's department, does their portion of the gasoline bid show up somewhere or is it included in the one we just did."

Mr. Hoagland, "They have their own, I did not include it. It was bid separate to the Sheriff's Department."

11. DIESEL FUEL:

BAIRD MARINE

Com. Evans moved to accept, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

12. MOTOR OIL

PAULSON OIL COMPANY, PRIMARY
BAIRD MARINE, SECONDARY

Com. Evans moved to accept, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

13. TIRES:

BROWN TIRE, MOSER TIRE; A&M TIRE; T.C.AREM TIRE CENTER

Com. Evans moved to accept, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

14. TUBES:

BROWN TIRE; MOSER TIRE; A&M TIRE; T.C.AREN TIRE

Com. Evans moved to accept, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

15. CULVERTS:

DEBCO, METAL CULVERTS; ST. REGIS

Com. Evans moved to accept, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

16. GUARDRAILS:

DEBCO; METAL CULVERTS; JAMES H. DREW

Com. Evans moved to accept, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

17. PRECAST, PRESTRESSED BRIDGE SLABS AND BEAMS

RAYFORD MATERIALS, BRIDGE TECH; ST. REGIS CULVERT

Com. Evans moved to accept, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

18. CONCRETE

SIMCO; PRIMARY
OZINGA; SECONDARY

Com. Evans moved to accept, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

19. GRADER BLADES:

AMERICAN WIRE ROPE & SLING; ST. REG