- January 6, 2004
- January 20, 2004
- February 3, 2004
- February 17, 2004
- March 2, 2004
- March 16, 2004
- April 6, 2004
- April 20, 2004
- May 5, 2004
- May 18, 2004
- June 1, 2004
- June 15, 2004
- July 6, 2004
- July 20, 2004
- August 3, 2004
- August 17, 2004
- September 7, 2004
- September 21, 2004
- October 5, 2004
- November 3, 2004
- November 16, 2004
- December 7, 2004
|
 |
REGULAR MEETING
TUESDAY, MARCH 2, 2004
10:00 A.M.
The regular meeting of the Porter County Board of Commissioners convened at 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, March 2, 2004 in the Commissioners Chambers of the Administration Center.
Those present were: 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 February 23, 2004, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.
APPROVAL OF CLAIMS
Com. Evans moved to approve the claims of March 2, 2004, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Com. Evans moved to approve the minutes for December 16, 2003, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.
Com. Evans, “Also a thank you to Vi for all the hard work she does on them.”
Com. Burrus, “I have a comment, too. We have had some inquiries about the timing on getting these done. We have had a number of large meetings and we are getting some additional help to bring our minutes up to date. We hope to have that done pretty soon.”
ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A SPECIAL FUND FOR LONGEVITY PAY—1ST READING
Com. Burrus, “This ordinance is for a special fund which would be to receive forfeited drug money. This is confiscated money that is directed to the county by Judge Webber before he retired and the purpose of this money would be to be used by the Council however they see fit. We do have a draft ordinance. Any discussion?”
Com. Evans, “The proposed use is for longevity, but this is going to allow them to do what they seem fit.”
Com. Burrus, “Our role in this process is to get the fund established so they have the ability to appropriate as necessary.”
Com. Evans moved to approve the ordinance to establish a fund for the deposit of $215,610.25, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.
ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A NON REVERTING FUND FOR THE RECEIPT OF COURT ORDERED DETENTION SERVICE FEES FOR THE JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER—1ST READING
Ken Perkins, Juvenile Detention Center Director
Mr. Perkins, “Essentially the financial situation over the last couple of years continuing to have new needs for services programs other than (inaudible) . We actually would be able to have the parents . . .(inaudible) for detention services provided. The Commissioners already established the per diem rates so that would be the maximum they would be charged. But then, there is the . . .(inaudible) to figure what portion of that amount that is apparent they have to pay. So in looking at establishing a fund that will accept those fees and those fees will be deposited into that fund for a variety of uses at the detention center to help the programs and other things mentioned it there.”
Com. Evans, “These are fees that are not being collected now?”
Mr. Perkins, “No. We actually discovered in the last several months that there were some Indiana counties doing this so we checked into how we could it.”
Com. Harper, “What ordinance number is this?”
Atty. Rinkenberger, “We don’t assign numbers until the second reading. This will just be a motion to approve on first reading and then on second reading we assign numbers.”
Com. Harper moved to approve the ordinance to establish a non reverting fund for the receipt of court ordered detention service fee on first reading, Com. Evans seconded,
Com. Evans, “I would just like to know who will appropriate this money, will the Council have appropriation for you?”
Mr. Perkins, “Yes, I will have to go before the Council.”
Motion carried.
AMEND ORDINANCE 03-16- PLAN COMMISSION FEES AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT FEES-1ST READING
Robert Thompson, Plan Commission Director
Mr. Thompson, “This amendment is for alterations, repairs, or remodels to all residential structures is amending an (inaudible) for the first draft. The old ordinance did state $.15 per square foot, minimum $25.00. The ordinance that was passed in June or July of last year just simply stated $40.00 when the intention was really to make it a minimum of $40.00 or $.15 per square foot. The other item I have on here is for Board of Zoning Appeals cases. While working on some of these items, if we put in time with no (inaudible) applications or cases in front of the Board of Zoning Appeals for temporary certificates of occupancies and also we used it for use variances so I felt that we needed to recoup some of that time that we put into those situations. So, the Board recommended a $20.00 per year fee for the TCO’s and use variances.”
Com. Evans, “Will that be imposed at the time they make the application?”
Mr. Thompson, “No, at the application we would have the regular application fee with use variances of $200.00 or $250.00, I don’t know right off hand, but if they got approved for five years, for example, when they came back in to request the renewal, it would be five years from the Board of Zoning Appeals, they would have to pay that fee at the time. Temporary Certificates of Occupancy are $200.00 and we do it every year so they would be paying $20.00 for that.”
Com. Harper moved to approve the amendment to Ordinance No. 03-16 on first reading, Com. Evans seconded, motion carried.
ORDINANCE 04-04, TO ADOPT A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN—2ND READING
Com. Burrus, “Our next item is the ordinance to adopt the CEDIT Plan that was passed on first reading at our last meeting. This will be the second reading. Any discussion?”
ORDINANCE NO. 04-04
PORTER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
AN ORDINANCE TO ADOPT A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
PURSUANT TO IC 6-3.5-7
________________________________________________________________________
WHEREAS, the Indiana General Assembly has authorized counties to impose a county economic development income tax (EDIT) on the adjusted gross income of county taxpayers, in accordance with IC 6-3.5-7 (Act); and
WHEREAS, the Porter County (County) Council imposed EDIT on July 1, 2003 at a rate of 0.25% of one percent (.1%) annually on the adjusted gross income of County taxpayers; and
WHEREAS, the Act provides that a county, city or town which fails to adopt a capital improvement plan may not receive (1) its fractional amount of the certified distribution of revenues from EDIT (Distinctive Share); or (2) any amount of EDIT revenues designated for its use by a city or town in the county; and
WHEREAS, the County will receive its Distributive Share upon adoption of this Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and will receive its Distributive Share semiannually in May and November from the County Auditor; and
WHEREAS, the County now desires to finance certain projects as authorized by the Act; and
WHEREAS, the County may use its Distributive Share to finance capital projects for which general obligation bonds may be issued and economic development projects as defined in the Act, through the issuance of bonds or through lease financings;
WHEREAS, under the Act the projects will be economic development projects if the County determines that they will (a) promote significant opportunities for the gainful employment of its citizens; (b) attract a major new business enterprise to the County; or (c) retain or expand a significant business enterprise within the County; and involve expenditures for the acquisition of land, interests in land, site improvements, infrastructure improvements, buildings, structures, rehabilitation, renovation, and enlargement of buildings and structures, machinery, equipment, furnishings or facilities (or any combination of these);
NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Commissioners of Porter County, Indiana, that:
1. The Capital Improvement Plan of Porter County is hereby adopted, which plan is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
2.Based on the factual report included in Exhibit A, the construction of the
economic development project will:
(a)promote significant opportunities for the gainful employment of citizens of the County;
(b)attract a major new business enterprise to the County; and
(c)retain or expand a significant business enterprise within the County.
3.The construction of the economic development project involves expenditures for:
(a)the acquisition of land;
(b)interests in land;
(c)site improvements;
(d)infrastructure improvements;
(e)buildings;
(f)structures;
(g)rehabilitation, renovation, and enlargement of buildings and structures;
(h)machinery;
(I)equipment;
(j)furnishings; and
(k)facilities;
(l)any combination of these.
4.This ordinance shall become effective from and after its date of adoption.
Adopted this 2nd day of March, 2004.
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
PORTER COUNTY, INDIANA
S/David L. Burrus
S/John A. Evans
S/Robert P. Harper
Attest:s/Sandra K. Vuko
Com. Evans moved to adopt the Capital Improvement Plan Ordinance No. 04-04, on 2nd reading, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.
ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A COUNTY CORRECTIONS FUND FOR LEVEL 3 FUNDING—2ND READING
Com. Burrus, “Is there any discussion on this?”
Com. Evans, “We had some things on this last time that Dave Lain was going to research.”
Chief Lain, “I have to be quite honest in that I thought this was going to be tabled today. Can I postpone this until later in the meeting? I thought I was here on another matter.”
Com. Burrus, “Sure.”
Atty. Rinkenberger, “Did we need additional information to approve this?”
Com. Evans, “I think we got most of it last time but we were going to get the specifics as to how the money would be spent.”
Chief Lain, “I did gather that information but quite frankly I don’t have that with me.”
Com. Evans, “Okay, it is a fund that we do every year if I recall from the last time, about where the monies come from . . . “
Chief Lain, “This is from housing misdemeanants that would otherwise go to state facilities and there are only about three areas that money is spent for, I believe gas, tires and I don’t recall the third one.”
Com. Burrus, “Do you want to proceed or wait for some additional information?”
Com. Harper, “The funds are in there regardless. I think he got us some information, he sent it over, or somebody sent it over.”
Chief Lain, “Yes, about a week or so ago.”
Com. Harper, “I would like to see where it is spent, but I am fine with it right now. It is about $90,000.00 a year, right? Yes, I would like to see a little more, but I can get that later. The ordinance has to be passed.”
Com. Burrus, “And the source of this is the State of Indiana paying us to house misdemeanants in lieu of sending them to the state penitentiary?”
Chief Lain, “It is established, and I have to read the specific ordinance, but it is set forth by the state based solely on, not the jail population which I believe I said last time, but the county’s population and there is a set value that each county is entitled to.”
Com. Harper, “If I understand it correctly, if we send certain prisoners down state, we can take money away from this fund, is that correct?”
Chief Lain, “That is correct.”
Com. Harper, “It is a bonus to keep and not send certain prisoners to the state? I saw last week in the $90,000.00 and they didn’t have a break down on where it was spent, they did have in the ordinance what it would be spent on. I would like to see the breakdown, other than that I am okay with it.”
ORDINANCE NO. 04-06
PORTER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A COUNTY CORRECTIONS FUND
FOR LEVEL 3 FUNDING
PURSUANT TO I.C. 11-12-6-1 ET SEQ.
________________________________________________________________________
WHEREAS, the Porter County Board of Commissioners adopted the Porter County Municipal Code on Tuesday, December 2, 1997 pursuant to Ordinance No. 97-38; and
WHEREAS, the Porter County Board of Commissioners has deemed it necessary to pass a new ordinance for inclusion in the Porter County Code; and
WHEREAS, for the purpose of this ordinance, the Board of Commissioners of Porter County, Indiana, constitutes the County legislative body as per I.C. 36-1-2-9; and
WHEREAS, I.C. 11-12-6-1 et seq. provides that the Board of Commissioners of Porter County may elect to establish a County Corrections Fund; and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT AND IT IS HEREBY ORDAINED THAT:
1.Chapter 3.12 (County Corrections Fund) Section 3.12.010 (Fund established) is added to the Porter County Municipal Code to read as follows:
3.12.010 Fund established
Pursuant to I.C. 11-12-6-1 et seq., a County Corrections Fund is established and the County elects to receive deposits into the fund from the Indiana Department of Corrections on the basis of Level 3 Funding as set forth in I.C. 11-12-6-13(c).
(Ord. 98-10; Ord. 97-9; Ord. 96-7)
This ordinance passed and adopted this 2 day of March, 2004.
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
PORTER COUNTY, INDIANA
S/David L. Burrus
S/John A. Evans
S/Robert P. Harper
Attest:s/Sandra K. Vuko, Auditor
Com. Evans moved to approve Ordinance No. 04-06 on 2nd reading, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.
APPOINTMENT OF HIGHWAY SUPERINTENDENT
Com. Burrus, “As all of you know, Jack Jarnecke, our County Highway Superintendent passed away after a lengthy illness. During the subsequent time, the Assistant Highway Superintendent, Al Hoagland, has been named and been performing as the interim Highway Superintendent. We feel it is appropriate to move forward and make any kind of an appointment official and permanent at this time. We open the discussion to the Board here for recommendation.”
Com. Evans moved to appoint Al Hoagland to the Highway Superintendent position,
Com. Evans, “He has functioned well in the interim, he has been a Highway Department employee for a long time, he always gives his all and he is a very dedicated person.”
Com. Harper seconded,
Com. Burrus, “I would like to give my compliments to Al, too. He picked up this responsibility in probably the worst time of the year, right at the beginning of the winter. Fortunately, and maybe through his successes, we have not had any major problem with snow removal or any other typical emergencies that seem to come about as a result of the winter weather. Al, I would like to add my positive comments.”
Motion carried.
CONVENTION, RECREATION AND VISITOR COMMISSION APPOINTMENT
Attorney David Hollenbeck
Com. Burrus, “Next item was continued from our last meeting. The County Commissioners are responsible for appointing members to the Convention, Recreation and Visitor’s Bureau at the recommendation of the three north county communities of Burns Harbor, Chesterton and Porter. We have recommendations of an individual from two of those communities and Dave Hollenbeck is here today representing the third. I understand that your town is in concurrence with the recommendation.”
Atty. Hollenbeck, “Yes, the town of Porter acquiesces in the recommendation.”
Com. Burrus, “The name of the gentleman that has been recommended by the other two towns is a Brian Moore, is that correct? Any discussion?”
Com. Evans, “I would just like to mention that the reason we were doing this is because one of David’s new clients in the town of Porter, an elected position on the town council, had resigned from this Board.”
Com. Evans moved to accept the recommendation of Brian Moore for the position on CRVC, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.
RISING DAMP AT COUNTY COURTHOUSE DISCUSSION
Com. Burrus, “The next item we want to address this morning that has been discussed both inside the county government offices and to an extent in the newspapers. This has to do with a condition that appears to be reoccurring in the county courthouse building on the ground floor level where some of the employees have expressed symptoms of an allergic reaction. Their fear and concern is that situation is caused by moisture and in turn by mold in the building. The Commissioners have looked into this issue again and I would like to give a little bit of background and also some indication on where we are what we are planning on doing. This Board first became aware of the situation in about August 2002 with the same complaints and concerns I just mentioned. At that time, we visited the location where these issues were supposedly occurring and we noticed that there was in fact some moisture problems evident on the walls. We were able to get in touch with a laboratory that did testing for all kinds of spores of mold and other allergic causes. The firm was ACM Environmental out of South Bend. They came back with a very detailed report. First they gave us a report of the presence of any kind of spores in the outside air outside the building to be used as a standard or a benchmark. Then they gave us a report on various locations inside the building, I believe there were four specific locations where they sampled on the lower floor. In every case the report indicated that the quality of the inside air with respect to any potential allergic causing spores was a great deal lower than what the outside air was. We felt that was a fairly satisfactory report at the time, however, we did know there was moisture present and we did install a number of dehumidifying units to help reduce the moisture. Since then the issue has resurfaced. We visited it again, we have talked with the testing laboratory and we have also taken one additional step in that we talked with the architectural firm that was involved with the renovation of the building back in 1995. In discussing it with them, it was determined that a report was done by a firm out of Northbrook, Illinois by the name of EHA who does material testing for buildings and structures. They came in and did some investigations and they found that there was some moisture in the lower level of the building. They determined that the structure of the courthouse is all brick and that the brick is a form of a conduit for moisture; it is a wick of sorts; and that it has the ability to absorb and percolate moisture upward from the soil through all the walls that bear on the ground. In other words, all of the outside walls as well as a number of the interior load bearing walls. Their conclusion was that any kind of remedial action on that moisture problem would probably be very difficult to achieve successfully. They were not aware of any guaranteed successful remediation process. They also indicated it was a very, very expensive process to even attempt it. With those two items making up the bulk of the report’s recommendation, the Commissioners at that time decided not to pursue any further remediation work on that condition. I might add from my own recollection, going back 20 or 30 years, the lower floor of the courthouse has always had a problem with moisture that was indicated by moist, wet plaster, sometimes peeling paint; otherwise signs of seepage. At this point, we are interested in seeing if anything has changed with respect to technology, if anything has changed that would give us a better opportunity to remedy the situation. In my own opinion, and I am opening this up for Board discussion, I think it would be appropriate that we go back to a different laboratory firm this time so we have a second opinion and update the test on the air quality and make sure we know what we have there. The previous test is now a year and a half old. I would also suggest we contact the testing firm on the building material and see if that can be updated along with any potentially new and improved methods of addressing the situation. At this point in time, we don’t have any concrete evidence that this situation is definitely causing anybody’s problems but I think we need to investigate again to confirm or deny those concerns. Any comments?”
Com. Harper, “I agree and think we should get on that right away. I don’t see what else we can do at this time.”
Com. Burrus, “I think since we have followed up in the past, our conclusion was that the air quality was well within the satisfactory range but in the event that has changed, then we can certainly test that again.”
Com. Evans, “I think it needs to be further clarified that we have been prudent in this endeavor and have not neglected our responsibility or duty and that things get taken care of in a manner that is appropriate. Calling the newspapers doesn’t make it go any faster.”
Com. Burrus moved that a different laboratory do the air testing again and also contact the building material testing firm to get an update on that report, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.
DISCUSSION ON SELLING THE PORTER COUNTY HOME
Com. Evans, “We have been looking at this issue for some time and I know it is dear to many people’s heart, but I think in our financial condition we need to consider either selling that facility; destroying the facility and selling the property; or by some means removing ourselves from ownership.”
Com. Burrus, “I would add from my perspective I think the responsibility of maintaining an old building that we don’t have a demanding use for right now is money that could be well saved. The land, however, would be something that we could save for future or potential uses. There has been discussion in the past and number one, John and I were in favor of putting the County Home on the same auction block that we had for the old Porter County Jail facility. It was not totally agreed with by Larry Sheets at that time so we pulled it off. Since that time also we were under the impression that there may be some interest on the part of some local organizations with respect to the County Home and if we agree today to explore the disposal of the building that we might first want to talk to some of these local agencies and groups to see if there is any interest.”
Com. Evans, “The Valparaiso School System certainly would be an avenue to explore.”
Com. Burrus, “They are a current occupant, we can check with them.”
Com. Evans, “It is in your district, Bob.”
Com. Harper, “Well, to me it is a sad, sad thing, but it is something that has to be dealt with. The County Home obviously has been a fixture in Porter County and some people, including myself, have feelings about fixtures that may have historical value, however, the problem with this one is it is such a large structure and I have talked to more than one person who has been through there, the head of the Parks has looked at that structure. To keep that structure and upgrade it to any sort of safe manner, would probably cost more than it would to be built. That is just a fact so we are stuck with a home worth of plumbing and electrical and everything else would have to be reworked. I think we need to face it and the utilities we pay a year are astronomical. I don’t think the people that are in there are picking the utilities up. It is a huge structure that is not suited to be heated in an economical manner to say the least. I think that it has to be faced. The land has value, perhaps as park land, it has some wetlands on it, but I think we need to make a decision on that building. And we need to do something where it moves along so it doesn’t just go on and on. I don’t know if we should set up a quick committee or just how to do it but I think we need to do something. We can’t have some people paying, whatever we are paying in utilities, we can’t ask the taxpayers to pay that so we have to do something. That is all I have to say.”
Com. Burrus, “I have another piece of information. Prior to the disposal of the jail, we convened a committee of community people; we had an architect, an attorney, a real estate person and a couple of others, to evaluate the situation with the county home among other buildings.”
Com. Harper, “I was not aware of that.”
Com. Burrus, “The conclusion they reached regarding that structure was yes, it is an old building but it doesn’t really have any historical significance. To the extent that we want to accept their evaluation, that is part of the record report we have.”
Com. Harper, “Did they make a report on the condition of the plumbing and heating and all of that or did they not go that far?”
Com. Burros, “We have a separate report on that dealing with renovation.”
Com. Harper, “It’s in very bad shape, right?”
Com. Burros, “Yes, very expensive. Both of those reports are available. I think the reason we wanted to talk about this today was to get the ball rolling one way or the other, or if wanted to table this further review with some of the reports that we have, that would be fine.”
Com. Evans, “I think we could open the discussion to those municipalities or those agencies or anyone that would be interested in purchasing the property from us first. The Valparaiso Schools or the city of Valparaiso, or some other municipality or government entity, I think we should entertain conversations with those first and then from there proceed.”
Com. Burros, “If we can concluded then if we wanted to pursue a sale, that would be very accurate. Does anyone want to move on that or do we want to talk further?”
Com. Harper, “Why don’t we do this; because it is discussed today, it will probably be moved on and I think we have no choice but to move ahead and take some action to dispose of that facility. Either someone pays and makes use of it, so why don’t we hold off until next meeting so see if anyone comes forward and if they don’t by next meeting, then we will start with a formal motion.”
Com. Burros, “If someone comes forward, we better take the feedback.”
Com. Harper, “In fact, why don’t we put it on the agenda for two meetings from now so that is 30 days notice and if people from the community want to come in, and if they have feedback, then they can have a chance to speak on this.”
Com. Evans, “Bearing in mind that whatever avenue we proceed with we are not going to be financially responsible for this building in the future.”
Com. Burrus, “We will continue that until the second meeting in April.”
Com. Harper, “That gives everyone about 30 days if anyone wants to get some ideas together or whatever.”
WELLNESS PROGRAM FOR PORTER COUNTY EMPLOYEES
Michael Anton—Anton Insurance Agency
Mr. Anton, “Good morning. Each year, we get into negotiations with Porter Memorial Hospital regarding the Porter County Employee Benefits Preferred Wellness portion of the plan. The idea behind that is to, while the hospital prices their testing and screening figures, this is for the Porter County employees and being consistent with the prescribed benefit in the plan. I am giving you a copy of the actual preferred wellness benefit portion of the Employee Benefit Plan. You can see how extensive it is so we negotiate with the hospital to give us the best possible pricing as we can get. We are behind the curve a little bit this year because the hospital is in a little bit of a state of ____ in determining how they wanted to handle this for the calendar year 2004. They decided they want their occupational health arm, NIOMS, to perform these services for the county. We have been in negotiation with Jim Feeney of NIOMS and he has presented us with a proposal to present to you for these services for this year. Now part of this is that these services mostly are rendered on site for the convenience of the county employees and to encourage them to take advantage of this program.”
Com. Burrus, “These are at five different county sites?”
Mr. Anton, “Yes, we have five different county sites. The principle sites would be this Administration Building, the Courthouse, North County Annex, Highway Department, and Sheriff’s Jail facility. Those county employees that would not be available to either of those sites, would just schedule it at any one of the five sites. If an employee wasn’t able to meet that particular schedule which we would be involved in establishing, they would arrange through NIOMS to go either to LaPorte Avenue site or the site in the Portage clinic so that we can facilitate as many employees that can be taken care with this particular program. Two years ago when we established this the county had approximately 3% of the employees or 4% take advantage of it; last year we jumped up to around 16% and hopefully we will try for more this year. In that proposal Mr. Vanleet has put together there is really no financial impact to the county because our benefit max has stayed the same. There is no change in that benefit level. The benefit level is $150.00. What is changed in there is that NIOMS is asking that they are given a $100.00 fee per day per site so we are anticipating five days, five sites, would be $500.00. And that portion I need to have your approval to do.”
Com. Burrus, “Mike, do these fees you show here on this handout, those are covered by the program?”
Mr. Anton, “Yes, to a maximum of $150.00 . . “
Com. Burrus, “Then the program pays that amount of money to the hospital?”
Mr. Anton, “Yes.”
Com. Evans, “Can the employee pick and choose which tests he wants?”
Mr. Anton, “Yes. The only caveat to that is that to participate in the Enhanced Wellness Program the employee has to submit to the cardio screening program to get a baseline then they can pick and choose off the menu of screenings or tests or they can follow the recommendations as developed by the cardio screening assessment program.”
Com. Evans, “There is an increase in the fee for the screening program?”
Mr. Anton, “Yes. Last year the hospital charged $20.00; this year they want to increase that to $30.00. It is still within the $150.00 maximum benefit. That particular screening takes anywhere from 20 minutes to half an hour to conduct and they just didn’t think they could it within that $20.00 fee.”
Com. Evans, “I think we are still getting a good deal.”
Com. Burrus, “I think it is an exceptionally good program.”
Mr. Anton, “I make a notation on the sheet there, they left off one screening, and I don’t want anyone to think we are not including that, but that will be included.”
Com. Burrus, “The issue then that we are dealing with then is . . “
Com. Evans, “Pay the fee of $500.00.”
Mr. Anton, “$100.00 per day, $100.00 per site. Then we will be willing to provide NIOMS with a room on the site that they can perform these screenings and tests. We will schedule that with your permission.”
Com. Evans moved to approve the 2004 Wellness cost of $100.00 per visit, or $500.00 fee, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.
Mr. Anton, “Thank you. We will proceed with your permission as soon as possible.”
Com. Burrus, “Thank you, Mike.”
Com. Evans, “And thank the hospital for us.”
OFFICE HOLDERS/DEPARTMENT HEADS
Ken Perkins, Juvenile Detention Center, Maintenance Agreement
Mr. Perkins, “This is an agreement for the control panel that controls the locks, the intercom system, and some control of lighting and electrical outlets in that system. And it interfaces with our closed circuit TV system. That is separate but there is some software that is necessary for that.”
Com. Evans, “This is $525.00 per month, is that an increase from last year or the same?”
Mr. Perkins, “Pretty close the same, I am not sure what it was last year. I believe .. . yes it does look like the same thing.”
Com. Harper moved to accept the maintenance agreement for 2004 for the control panel and locks at the JDC, Com. Evans seconded, motion carried.
Approval of contract for inmate medical care with Jerry G. Back, M.D.
Chief Deputy Dave Lain, Porter County Sheriff’s Department
Chief Lain, “It is time to renew the jail physician’s contract. He has agreed to renew it at the same rate as last year so there are no changes.”
Com. Evans, “Has he moved to Porter County yet?”
Chief Lain, “No.”
Com. Burrus, “He is from LaPorte, correct?”
Chief Lain, “Yes.”
Com. Evans, “Sure wish you could find a Porter County doctor.”
Chief Lain, “Just for the record, we have spoken to a couple other physicians, but right now this is the best deal going.”
Com. Harper moved to accept the contractual agreement for inmate medical care with Jerry G. Back, M.D. for 2004 in the amount of $36,000.00, Com. Evans seconded, motion carried.
HIGHWAY REPORT FROM COMMISSIONERS
North District: Com. Evans
1. Troon Subdivision Road Agreement, located on the north side of CR 700
North east of Meridian Road. Offer to contribute $750.00/lot for a total of $21,750.00. Owners and subdividers are Patrick & Brenda Kleihege. Recommend approval.
Com. Evans moved to approve, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.
Center District: Com. Harper
1. Fox Burrow Run Subdivision Road Agreement, located on the north side of
CR 550 North between CR 250 West and CR 175 West. Offer to contribute $660.00/lot for a total of $15,840.00. Owner and subdivider is Timothy P. Saylor. This is an updated road agreement due to ownership change. Recommend approval.
Com. Harper moved to approve, Com. Evans seconded, motion carried.
2. Bridge 1010 (Joliet Road over CSX) Consultant Proposal Request. Porter County previously received permission from INDOT to start designing a federally funded rehabilitation project for this bridge. I propose that the Commissioners receive consultant proposals for the design engineering and construction engineering by April 19, 2004. These proposals would then be opened during the meeting on April 20th to be taken under consideration.
Com. Harper, “Dave Schelling is here today. Could you come forward and tell us a little bit about this?”
Mr. Schelling, “Good morning. About a year and a half ago, we had to do some emergency repairs on this bridge to replace some concrete pedestal. In front of that problem is that the large structure has to move and there’s bearings; some of them are fixed bearings and some of them are sliding. They are all frozen, they need to get replaced. They need to replace the joints on the bridge with ones that will float to prevent water from going down onto the structure. Also the substructure has some deteriorated concrete and we did have approval for several tons in the amount of $200,000.00 which I just checked on today and they are still there. So we can go ahead and move on with the federally funded project.”
Com. Evans, “What is our match?”
Mr. Schelling, “It would be 20%. And we would have to pay for the design for this structure.”
Com. Evans, “The percentage would come from the Bridge Fund?”
Mr. Schelling, “Yes, they would be coming from the Bridge Fund. At this point in time I was wanted to try and get a design in.”
Com. Harper, “So you are asking us to do what?”
Mr. Schelling, “Right now we have a Request for Proposal form that should be in the packet of information that the Commissioners would approve and then we would advertise and just notify the various consultant and we could …(inaudible) to submit proposals for this if they so desire.”
Com. Burrus, “I think what your question is, Bob, would be to authorize Dave to go ahead and proceed with the receipt of RFP’s.”
Com. Harper moved to go ahead with the project, authorize the receipt of RFP’s and approve the document, Com. Evans seconded, motion carried.
Resignation of James Feeney, Veteran’s Service Officer
Com. Burrus, “We have the resignation of James Feeney, Veteran’s Service Officer indicating that his health has deteriorated to the point where he is requesting to resign from his position as Veteran’s Affairs Officer. We need to act on that, first to accept his resignation and to serve notice we will receive applicants to be considered for his replacement.”
Com. Evans moved to accept James Feeney’s resignation and accept applications for the position, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.
Com. Burrus, “I would ask the news people here if you would include your publications that we are looking for a qualified Veteran’s Affairs Officer and we also will be posting that as well.”
Com. Evans, “And we would like to thank Sarge for his commitment and dedication over the past many, many years.”
Com. Burrus, “That is correct. I don’t have any idea of when he began, Mike, do you have any idea?”
Mike Aylesworth, “No, but it was a long, long time.”
Com. Evans, “We wish him well.”
E911 FEES AND RAISES FOR EMPLOYEES
Com. Burrus, “This has to do with an issue that has been discussed rather openly the last few days. It has to do with the match the Commissioners took on the topic of the 911 office. I would like to clarify and add some significant information that a lot of folks have overlooked on this and reiterate why the Commissioners did what we did on this. To help me do that, I would first like to ask Dave Sheibels to come up and give us an overview of the department’s operations before they assume responsibility for the dispatchers and then after.”
Mr. Sheibels, “Good morning. It is a pleasure to be here. I would like to start with a progress report that the transition has done very well. That would be to the public 911 services seemed like nothing happened during that very busy time last fall. The department has always been a three or four person 911 phone system and technology, repair and project management technology department from its conception. Last summer as we know the County Council entertained a motion to increase the surcharge with the purpose of including the Sheriff’s Department dispatchers into a newly formed department. That job of developing that newly formed department rested on our shoulders for the Commissioners and myself as the number one director to create and transition those personnel to become now a heavily involved personnel administration management team instead of just a technology support team. So we got to work and in a flurry of activity, almost overnight we created a new department, County Communications 911, which now included the four existing personnel, my management staff and support staff plus 21 dispatchers that operate 24/7 year round. This has as predicted when we looked into it and went to restructure and recreate this department, was going to give myself and my staff with the considerable burden of now becoming personnel managers and all the things that go along with personnel. With that respect, we are running a 24/7 operation. We took that task on, met the goals of the Council and then the Board of Commissioners to meet that challenge. We met that challenge successfully. We now have duties that include hiring, firing, discipline, payroll, training, and many other miscellaneous personnel problems that always pop up when you have a staff this large of 24/7 type of operation. So this is where we are today. We are moving ahead. I want to applaud the Board of Commissioners for helping me with a very smooth and complicated transition. We not only looked at today’s problems, but we looked down the road to the future to keep this department stable, whoever takes this job and comes into this department from this point on.”
Com. Burrus, “From a personal perspective here, Dave mentioned a number of items that I would like to include in my remarks as far as emphasis is concerned. The first thing is this transition from dispatchers being under the Sheriff’s budget to the E911 budge which is one of the Commissioner’s departments, was done at the behest of the County Council, many of whom had stated publicly that they were not in favor of any tax increase but yet they still thought to increase the safety E911 fee. In an effort to cooperate with the intent of that move, which would be a free up of somewhere in the neighborhood of $800,000.00 of the Sheriff’s budget in the general fund, the Commissioners agreed to accept the responsibility of the dispatchers and put them under the E911 budget. The point Dave made very clearly, but bears repeating is the fact that he had a job description, his staff had a job description, they were fully occupied and doing an exceptionally good job under the original configuration under the E911 Department. One of the things I would like to point out that they have done extremely well is in that environment they are prone to receiving a number of change requirements through technology upgrades that are very, very expensive. By prudently managing the resources that they have, they have always been able to meet those requirements and they have never had to go in to any accounting situation with either the Council or the Commissioners to request additional compensation. I want to stress that we have had a very successfully managed department. Now the change that occurred is these same people with their same responsibilities now took on the additional responsibilities of managing around 21 additional employees. I am convinced that no matter what department that is in, that is a significant responsibility. The criticism I want to address is in the form of both comments and articles in the newspaper particularly the Times today that had a blistering editorial and a very tasteless cartoon that indicated these folks were given unrealistic pay raises. I think the definition of a pay raise is increased compensation for the same level of duties and responsibilities. What we are having here are significantly increased duties and responsibilities in what we have done is we have met that level of responsibility with an appropriate amount of compensation. Anybody that wants to criticize this should get all the information together, understand what these folks are doing before they throw any more unfounded charges at either the department or the Commissioners. With having that on the table and with the idea that we feel very strongly that we did the right thing, Dave mentioned the fact it was a seamless transition and in fact even had some significant changes and increases at the same time in the form of personnel turnover, it is an ongoing challenge to make sure that he has qualified people sitting at those dispatch desks as he said around the clock everyday of the year. The level of service we have and the confidence the community has in that level of service and the record they have established with providing good service is above challenge. The whole situation has been blown out of proportion and hopefully this will clear that up. Bob, or John, any comments?”
Com. Evans, “I would like to say I agree. I don’t believe these people received a raise, I think these people took a new position within a newly created department and were justly compensated for the position they were assuming.”
Com. Burrus, “A final comment on that issue is I would suggest that neither anybody on the Council nor the editorial staff of the Times would assume this kind of responsibility themselves without any additional compensation. I think that is the end of the issue.”
Com. Evans, “You could also compare a lot of the salaries paid to county workers in second in command positions to the second in command position at the 911 department has now.”
CORRESPONDENCE
Weights and Measures monthly report for February, 2004 is on file.
Sheriff’s Department Annual Activity Report for 2003 is on file.
Approve request to hold concert on Courthouse lawn July 21, 2004
Com. Evans moved to approve a request by the Valparaiso Dept. of Parks and Recreation to hold a concert on the east or west lawn of the Porter County Courthouse on July 21, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. with proof of insurance, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.
Request to host an “Easter Pet Parade” around Courthouse on April 10, 2004
Com. Harper moved to allow Bark & Meow to host an Easter Pet Parade on the Courthouse Square with proof of insurance on April 10, 2004 at 12:00 p.m., Com. Evans seconded, motion carried.
Request by Elementary School Art to be displayed at county sites for 2004-2005
Com. Burrus, “This is a request from Eric Kepler of the Valparaiso Elementary Art Department to exhibit elementary school art in the courthouse and Administration building beginning with the 2004-2005 school year. Their request involves 3 pictures per site with a possibility to expand if funds and space become available. We do have a rotating art display in this building that we allow to take place on an ongoing basis.”
Atty. Rinkenberger, “I spoke with him and he indicated that the schools were trying to get back to partnering with government and government services to benefit both the school children and have them learn from government.”
Com. Evans moved to approve Eric Kepler’s proposal for art to be placed in the county buildings, Com. Harper seconded with the condition he speak to the security at the courthouse, motion carried.
Appoint Dale Brewer to Common Wage Construction Rate Committee for 2004
Com. Harper, “What is this for?”
Com. Burrus, “I believe it is the regional or the local committee that establishes prevailing wages for construction projects.”
Atty. Rinkenberger, “The Commissioners make the appointment and Dale has been it now for about 5 or 6 years. She goes to meetings whenever any municipality is having a project that has to have a prevailing wage set for the bids.”
Com. Evans moved to appoint Dale Brewer as the representative for Porter County on the Common Wage Construction Rate Committee for 2004, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.
Approve March 14-20, 2004 as Severe Weather Preparedness Week
Com. Burrus, “We have a request from Phil Griffith of the Porter County Emergency Management Agency to proclaim March 14-20 as Severe Weather Preparedness Week. Any additional comments, Phil?”
Mr. Griffith, “I sent out press releases to all the news media and the governor has sent out his proclamation also coinciding with that. There will be a tornado test on Wednesday the 17th, throughout the state of Indiana.”
Com. Burrus, “And this is in anticipation of the tornado season?”
Mr. Griffith, “Yes, it is very rapidly approaching. In fact, yesterday we had a little excitement as far as the severe weather, fortunately it stayed in Lake County and we got just a little bit of it. It is that time of the year.”
PORTER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS PROCLAMATION
SEVERE WEATHER PREPAREDNESS WEEK
MARCH 14-20, 2004
WHEREAS, the months of March through June present the highest risk for severe thunderstorms and tornadoes to strike Porter County; and
WHEREAS, Porter County is located within the nation’s “Tornado Belt” becoming a prime target of devastating tornado outbreaks and other types of severe weather; and
WHEREAS, a statewide tornado warning exercise will be held on March 17, 2004 for the purpose of testing communication systems, equipment and procedures; and
WHEREAS, during this week, Porter County Emergency Management Agency is emphasizing its safety procedures involving tornado activity;
NOW THEREFORE, We, the Porter County Board of Commissioners do hereby proclaim March 14-20, 2004 as “Severe Weather Preparedness Week” in Porter County and encourage all citizens to become aware of tornado danger signs, and to learn how to safeguard the lives of their families, friends and citizenry in the event of severe weather activity in our area.
S/David L. Burrus
S/John A. Evans
S/Robert P. Harper
Com. Evans moved to proclaim March 14-20, 2004 as Severe Weather Preparedness Week, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.
Request for transfer of funds-Highway
Fund 02$200.00from acct 4410office equipment over $100.00
Into acct 2120office fixtures under $100.00
Needed to provide a Key Lock Box for the Valparaiso garage.
Com. Evans moved to approve the transfer, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.
Request for Additional Appropriation-Highway
Fund 26$20,000.00acct 2261salt
Salt fund depleted.
Com. Evans moved to approve the additional appropriation, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.
Com. Burrus, “Gentlemen, is there anything we have overlooked?”
Com. Harper, “I would like to discuss this recycling ordinance.”
COMMISSIONER HARPER COMMENTS ON RECYCLING ORDINANCE
Com. Harper, “There has been ongoing discussion about the county requiring the solid waste firms who provide services in the county to provide recycling. The discussion has been about who should pass that ordinance if in fact the ordinance is passed whether the Commissioners should do it or the Solid Waste District should do it. After research I believe this Board has reached the conclusion that it should be the Solid Waste District that does it and I think everyone here is committed to getting it done. The Commissioners, by virtue of their office, are also members of that Solid Waste District Board. So our attorney has gone over it and prepared an ordinance for us that we intend to introduce at the next meeting of the Solid Waste District and I just wanted to announce that so people would know that we are taking action on that. I am assuming it will be passed at that meeting and I think it will be accepted. We are moving forward on this.”
Com. Burrus, “Would it be worthwhile that I have a vote on the approval of the recommendation of this draft?”
Com. Harper moved that the Commissioners approve and present the ordinance to the Solid Waste District Board, Com. Evans seconded, motion carried.
(A ten minute break was taken before the afternoon session.)
The meeting was called back to order at 11:10 a.m. by President David Burrus.
PLAN COMMISSION SESSION
Robert Thompson, Plan Commission Director
Repeal a portion of Aberdeen PUD Ordinance, Autumn Group, 2nd reading
Mr. Thompson, “This is Plan Commission Resolution No. 04-03, Petitioner Autumn Group, LLC requesting a PUD be repealed and reverted back to the original zoning prior to the PUD of R1, Single Family Residential. This is second reading.”
Com. Harper moved to pass Ordinance No. 04-07 repealing a portion of the Aberdeen PUD on second reading, Com. Evans seconded, motion carried.
Rezone, R1-C3, George Sigler, Owner, 2nd reading
Mr. Thompson, “This is Plan Commission 04-02, Petitioner George Sigler requesting R1 Single Family Residential zoning be amended to C3-Shopping Center District. The Plan Commission did recommend approval of this with written commitments and I have them here.”
Com Burrus, “Has the Plan Commission seen those commitments?”
Mr. Thompson, “They have actually not seen the actual legal document but as far as the uses that they are committing not to construct at that point, yes they did seem them. They did seem a form of the sheet I gave the Commissioners.”
Com. Burrus, “The commitments are consistent with what the Plan Commission expected to see?”
Mr. Thompson, “Correct.”
Com. Evans, “Can you give us a highlight of those commitments?”
Mr. Thompson, “Sure, the uses that they are agreeing not to construct onto the parcel will be the following: private swimming pool, a barn, radio, television and tower should mention these are within the authorized uses to go in the zoning chapter. Sewage disposal plant; public or employee parking area; public water wells and filtration; railroad right of way and uses; school, public or parochial; telephone or public utility station; automobile repair, indoors, public garage, public parking area, country club or golf course, home occupation, tourist home; mini warehouse; assembly hall; auto sales room, radio or television studio; billiard room; bowling alley; nightclub; outdoor commercial recreation, recreational enterprise and tavern. I should say that tavern is a stand alone situation where if they did come in with a restaurant, with a bar inclusive.”
Com. Evans, “Can anyone give a written commitment not to locate a railroad?”
Mr. Thompson, “This is why we are going forward to proceed with the revision of our Master Plan, unauthorized use . . .”
Com. Evans, “The railroad has the right of eminent domain, in many instances?”
Mr. Thompson, “Exactly. But that is a popular (inaudible).”
Com. Harper moved to approve the rezone from R1 to C3 on 2nd reading subject to having written commitments, Com. Evans seconded, motion carried.
Mr. Thompson, “I have one other thing. I want you to know I am going in front of the Plan Commission the purpose of, as you know the administrative assistant position is open. I am planning on going in front of the Council on Plan Commission next week and my intention is not to replace that position with a full time person. We will proceed with a part time employee. We do have a part time secretary slot already in the budget when we combined the Planning and Building Department together in one budget. I am going to be requesting to transfer monies from the full time salary slot into the part time salary slot. At this time I do not feel we need a full time person to fill that spot and since this is experimental as far as going forward and seeing how we are doing this year, I feel obligated to make sure the salaried employees we have working now are taken care of first and foremost.”
Com. Burrus, “You have intended to preserve that position but just not fill it?”
Mr. Thompson, “I do not have intentions of eliminating that position at all. I think one of the things I explained to the Plan Commission that maybe after the fund gets going and we see there is enough money, we’ll figure out how the Plan Commission wants to proceed in reorganizing the office in the future. But I do not have intentions of eliminating the position.”
Com. Evans, “You need to be very careful when you approach the Council in stating that very thing because the way they are structured now, if a salary comes out of your budget and that salary is zeroed out, in other words, you move that money into a part time position and that item becomes zero in that full time position, it will not be filled if it becomes vacant.”
Mr. Thompson, “I am only requesting a portion of that salary to come out at this time.”
Atty. Rinkenberger, “Well, you guys approve the actual budget they appropriate pursuant to the budget so as long as that full time slot remains in the budget, he can move the money around so I don’t think he’ll have a problem.”
Com. Evans, “Just as long as the slot isn’t zero because if it becomes zero, it wont be eliminated.”
Mr. Thompson, “If they were going to eliminate it I guess I would be quickly withdrawing it trying to figure out what I am going to do. At this time, I do not see where I am going to fulfill a full time position.”
Com. Evans, “I know you are trying to save money, but I don’t want you to be in a position down the road where you are in need of somebody and you are not able to hire them.”
Mr. Thompson, “I appreciate that. One other thing, RFQ’s are due for redoing all of our ordinances this Friday and my intention is to have a set of the original sets that the consultants submit down to the Commissioners’ office and also at the Plan Commission office for display so you will be getting a copy of this.”
Com. Evans moved to recess, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.
With no further business to discuss the meeting was recessed.
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
PORTER COUNTY, INDIANA
David L. Burrus
John A. Evans
Robert P. Harper
Attest: Sandra K. Vuko, Auditor
|
