The regular meeting of the Porter County Board of Commissioners convened at 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, April 20, 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 April 19, 2004, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.


APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Com. Evans moved to approve the minutes of February 3, 2004 and February 17, 2004, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.


NICTD STATUS OF SERVICE PRESENTATION
Jerry Manus,

Com. Burrus, "First item of new business is a presentation from representatives of Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District indicating the status of the service as well as the projected service that was discussed earlier with Congressman Visclosky."

(Mr. Manus was speaking very low and away from the microphone for his presentation and was not heard completely by the recording machine.)

Mr. Manus, "We have a PowerPoint presentation for you this morning that briefly describes the status of the possible rail service of Gary. I will go through it with you this morning. Just as a background, the existing city of Hammond and the town of Munster own about a 4 ½ mile segment of the old . . . . corridor that runs from north Hammond to south Munster. That has been owned for several years and provides the backbone for what could be a new commuter rail line that could provide service into Lake County and the east area here in Porter County. With that is this extension at the north end of Hammond we would have to acquire some property to reterminate that at this particular railroad, the existing South Shore service at approximate 124th Street in Chicago, but it also provides some of the residents an opportunity to . . . . . and carry additional rail service east of Valparaiso or Lowell. At that particular point, we would have to negotiate contracts with existing freight railroads in all the corridors. This particular corridor that we have outlined here is east of the Grand Trunk Western now as the National Railroad. It is certainly a negotiable item to be able to come and provide additional rail service. This whole issue of why we are doing this is about jobs and economic development. Existing South Shore service has a base salary of existing riders, of $170,000,000.00 salary base annually that is brought in to Northwest Indiana as discretionary income. Our axis into Chicago more than doubles the job base in Lake and Porter Counties. So it is a powerful economic tool which is highlighted here. The latest census data that we have is approximately 330,000 jobs in Lake and Porter County that are based here and there is a half million jobs based within a mile radius of the downtown determinates of Randolph Street. So that an individual seeking employment can almost double their job opportunity search and becoming a commuter and then also as the Congressman has indicated in the past, being able to retain (inaudible) . . . and talented in the area and provide them with a job base from Chicago keeps the economic (inaudible) . . . healthy in terms of residential development, and community development as well. So, what we are looking at why (inaudible) . . that provides opportunity to seek higher paying jobs, gives us commute time . . .(inaudible) and then again bring discretionary income back into Northwest Indiana since we do have lower tax rates. Certainly we have amenities and a number of reasonable issues here for living in Northwest Indiana and competing for jobs is a big issue for our residents as well. The existing service is near capacity during the rush hour trains; the highway congestion you are all familiar with, reflects our ability to compete with the job market in downtown Chicago, so we believe that a new rail line would economically provide daily trips in to the Loop of approximately 38% beyond what is happening today, again we would be able to access a greater amount of jobs. The Illinois rail system that is operated by Metra of Chicago is 500 miles of existing rail service in the form of new railroads. Some of these are independently owned by Metra and they are exclusively . . (inaudible) in their operations. Some are jointly operated as passenger railroads similar to what we are talking about here whether it be the Canadian National or the CSX line. Our system here is 90 miles and kind of what is missing is the . .(inaudible) of the state line, is this particular rail line. We didn't do this at first, we didn't superimpose this on the existing member system, but around south geographically it is doing quite well and it makes a lot of sense with the land use plan that we have this kind of distribution. We are predicting, and the economists we work with, 2,700 or 2,900 new jobs as a result of this rail expansion as well as spending an additional 130 or 140 million dollars. One of the things we found was how difficult it would be for Porter or Lake County to land an employer with 2,700 or 2,900 good jobs, it would be very difficult. At the same time it would provide exported labor into the market that has . . . . .(inaudible.) The first issue we are talking about here and what we are asking the Commissioners to review is the prospect of additional funding at the local level for studies to further this cause. We have broken it up into federal planning prospective of two segments, and the jargon that is used is from an operating segment which is the backbone system that we currently own with exception that we do not own this piece up here but it just a lightly used piece of freight rail road that we would acquire. This is keen being put in place before there is any other service established, then of course the minimum operatives of cycle two. So the work is broken down into two categories and you have to do the basis and first before the extensions can be planned. The first extension is for the base segment . . . (inaudible) is $210 million dollars and what you get with that is basically an entire operable railroad that would include key bridge structures, traditional . . . (inaudible) and a little bit of construction . . (inaudible) through rail stations of that operating segment and maintenance facilities as necessary. There is a key bridge structure in a community of . . (inaudible) in Illinois that is required over several railroads that would be part of that $210 million cost and all these costs by the way are 2001 costs. There is some inflation issue particularly with the commodity inflation of steel and a number of other commodities that we see play into those costs. What we have to develop this particular line is key (inaudible) to make it work and then connect, again . . (inaudible). This expressway, this is the waste management plan that for many of you . . (inaudible). With the Valpo segment it would be an additional $139.00 on top of the . . (inaudible). There is a number of communities that are after rail projects and just recently came back from the National Meeting of Commuter Railroads and looking at this, my colleagues were saying that they felt this was a pretty reasonable project compared to some of their projects. Many of the commuter rail projects are easily defined with 500 million to almost a billion dollars and still has a . .(inaudible) cost. To do this, there is pretty regular process that we wanted to brief you on this morning. There is a feasibility study, the first segment, we have to define them and this . . (inaudible) getting into a scoring basis on a national basis. We are in kind of a competition with all other areas of the country with respect to the scoring process but we have to do that because there is so much competition for the federal money. What that scoring process entails is for project justification and what the administration looks at whether or not there is the ability for these improvements and a number of common sense things that you would think you would have with a rail project like cost effectiveness in particular it would reduce travel time, reduce travel costs, in the major urban areas. We think we would score very high on all of these because we are actually an existing known rail park in downtown Chicago. We had been in Valparaiso's rail park in the past years so it is certainly a good project that has been well phased. Financially the competition is difficult for us because of what was here. Certain projects in California although Governor Schwarzenegger has changed this in the last couple of months, saw that the project in California were actually in a bidding war for federal money so traditionally, these projects are going off 50-50 meaning 50% more funds at the 50% level, their raising their local shares to 52% and 55% to score higher to get moved up in the process faster compared to other projects. So financial rating is something we are working on as the key to be moving this forward in terms of reality. The key word is the traditional scope of items that you would see and I am sure the Commissioners are used to, including the right of way assessing bridge structures and a number of traditional items. The environmental work can be kind of a difficult area and it can be some . . issues involved with certain corridors, however since all of this is existing rail corridors, we don't believe at this juncture we see any failed or flaws environmentally. Again, we are filing through a national park or something of that nature that tries to believe that it will come out fairly well in the environmental assessment. Typically, there are issues of noise, backyard noise, resulting in trains and whistles that could be an issue. Again, those can certainly be overcome. So we go to a scoring process to get the final design, and through all of that we will end up with a construction project. Then the . . (inaudible) we are after is the co funding . .(inaudible) agreement and then of course construction. The emphasis as to why we are moving now, is there is 142 planning studies across the country of which we are one of only 32 projects that made it into the preliminary engineering, only 15 projects have made it into final design and only 29 for a grand total of . .(inaudible) 5 of which are regional from Metra. Obviously, if there are . .(inaudible) with horse power they had the most of any area in the United States. It doesn't hurt to have to speak with the house as part of the delegation. In order to move this forward, we have this battle at the Indiana General Assembly of raising funds and the most recent RTA . . (inaudible) down in Indianapolis . .(inaudible) made it very clear that there has to be some development of local share by the local communities involved to make this work and that has enough controversy associated with it, but we are taking it to heart and we think that under the study, we did a formula that is based on population of route miles, if we could come up with a table that you could see your allocations of cost to communities and counties that would be fairly reasonable for each individual entity, in case of the county's, it is about a million and half dollar study that has moved to the next phase. Half of that local share is $750,000.00 so we assessed half of that for $375,000.00 to Lake and Porter Counties, Porter County's share would be $77,000.00 as a result of the allocation based on the population of route miles and all the individual counties that rate. So we ask that you take a look at this and move forward for the future of economic development and we think the commuter rail project is important and we think this is an important first step at a level for Indianapolis and certainly in level with the federal government to start. With that , I will answer any questions you may have."

Com. Burrus, "Thank you, Jerry. Is there any discussion or comments from the Board?"

Com. Harper, "I read something in the paper today about 250 local matching funds. Let me see if I understand this correctly. The estimates on this project run about 450 meetings to complete. Is that a fair number? And further that to be competitive, half that money is going to have to come locally because to get on the federal list you have to have 20% but you're not competitive but to be competitive you are going to have to have half of that local money. And if this sales tax were passed, it would raise about $6 million a year, is that for Lake and Porter County?"

Mr. Manus, "Are you referring to the Food and Beverage Tax?"

Com. Harper, "Yes."

Mr. Manus, "Yes, that is a correct estimate. We have not been the impedious behind that particular tax."

Com. Harper, "I understand that but I am just asking. The way the legislation is written, half that tax is committed to buses."

Mr. Manus, "Yes."

Com. Harper, "So, obviously that is not going to solve this problem with what we are funding."

Mr. Manus, "That is correct. In fact, that is Senator Forest's analysis and his criticism of that proposal that it was not large enough to scope, to take in account the rail project that was presented as part of the package."

Com. Harper, "How are we figuring if this gets through the study stages and it's a project that Northwest Indiana wants to proceed on, how are we planning to pay for that?"
Mr. Manus, "The only thing we can say is we look to the rest of the country and look at regional based taxes as our initiatives such as incremental optional sales tax like the Metra and the CTA has in Illinois. It is a fractional percentage of sales tax that is increased in order to pay for those systems. It has to be a broad based particular tax. We don't think that the restaurant tax is enough of financial capacity to absorb a project of this scope."

Com. Harper, "I am just trying to visualize in my mind, you know, government in Porter County, the general fund, and this is like 8 to 10 times the general fund. How much of a tax and where, I am just trying to think of the feasibility of this whole thing."

Mr. Manus, "Bear with me on this, I am not quoting from my hat, but the last study we did on 1% optional sales tax in both counties would raise $66 million. So again, it has to be that kind of tax structure with that kind of financial capacity to do so. This is not something that can be property taxed based or . . "

Com. Harper, "A 1% sales tax on how many counties?"

Mr. Manus, "I believe it was four counties raised something like $66 million."

Com. Harper, "Why would four counties want to be part of a sales tax for this system?"

Mr. Manus, "It was related to the existing South Shore service."

Com. Evans, "What we are being asked to do is the funding of the study. I think there is a lot more questioning that is going to go into the funding and any commuter rail is always subsidized to the hilt by the federal government and everybody else. It cannot possibly run on its own fare collections so, I don't know if those questions are within our parameters right now and to try to guess at what it is going to be is kind of difficult. Nothing is going to go any further unless the study is done. We put money aside when we talked about our CEDIT funds a couple years ago, or the first part of this year when we talked about it, to pay for that so I think our share of the money is available if we choose to use it."

Com. Burrus, "From my perspective, there are two points that might be appropriate. Number one is that in the wake of the recent difficulties that our local steel industry has experienced, the immediate reaction in many minds was we need to develop economic diversity. This is a fairly significant endeavor if we try to develop enough diversity to make up for lost steel jobs. I think if we embarked on that endeavor then we would probably not see the thing accomplished within our lifetime, so it is a long, long term effort. The effect of the access to the job market that has been presented today, has a potential of being somewhat more immediate even though still long term. As the equivalent of economic diversification so it has the ability in the reasonably long term to do just what we need to do and that is to diversify the job market within Northwest Indiana. Another point is that if we look at that same map that was displayed earlier, we can see that we are on the economic periphery of the Chicago market. We are there geographically, that is not going to change, we are not going to be able to modify that and we need to be aware of what that impact could very well be. In a nutshell, we can say that growth in Porter County is inevitable. The type of growth we are talking about may have multiple types, it might be desirable, or it might not, but we are going to be in the path of growth. The question we have then, is how do we address it, do we sit back and let it happen and not take any action and accept whatever comes or do we take a proactive stance and try to deal with it in advance and possibly offset some of the negative features and at the same time trying to enhance some of the positive features. From a transportation view, we can already see the nature of the congestion that exists on almost all of the interstates, it is already trickling down to the state highways, we can see the volume of traffic that exists here on the east side of Valparaiso and the 49 By-pass. We are already seeing a large number of traffic vehicles shifting from the state highways to county roads to take advantage of short cuts in less congested areas. So we are already experiencing a lot of the impact of this growth; from a county's point of view, we are going to have to deal with it at the county road level, we are going to have to deal with it at the regional level. I think part of the plan that was established by this board 2 or 3 months ago in the form of the Economic Development Income Tax plan, did have a provision, as John mentioned, some contributions, some participation in a regional transportation endeavor. We did not know at that time what it would be, we did not have any idea of what our responsibilities would be, but we thought we needed to be able to be involved in the discussions and if those discussions would in turn involve some contributions of one kind or another, we wanted to be able to do that. So, my perspective today, as John mentioned also, we do have provisions in our economic development plan for some application of dollars towards an endeavor like this and I would certainly move at this time that we would act favorably on the request with the $77,000.00 plus per year for 2 years and that we would allocate those funds from our economic development project that is identified for the RTA."

Com. Burrus moved to approve the allocation of funds from the economic development project for the RTA, Com. Evans seconded,

Com. Harper, "The Council sought fit to ask for economic development funds, they passed that this board under the law, was charged with coming up with the financing and although Indiana law is rather open in how that money could be used, I think our plan meets Indiana law. The intent of the tax was to encourage economic development and local jobs, etc. So I think this is the use to use this money for this plan is probably one other than the other monies are set aside for to . . . (inaudible) promotion work is one of the most proper uses of that money. And I think that jobs are important, however; I do not intend to lose sight of the fact that when we talk about the steel jobs that have been lost, we are also talking about men and women in our community that have been forced to get by on less and less money and I am haunted by an article, I think it was in the Post Tribune a couple days ago about a couple in Miller and I don't know if this is a mistake or not, but they received a $20,000.00 tax bill on their house. It is important that we have development, but it is also important that we not let government get out of control. I am going to vote for this for this time, but I will tell you this, when the time comes to move forward, there has to be citizen input and input from men and woman that . . (inaudible) and on retirement income and own homes and so forth, how they feel about spending $250 million and where that money is coming from. Because, we have to look at both sides of the coin, we have to consider those people. And I've read so many proposals, I see these county income taxes, and now we are talking sales tax; and they are talking this sales tax here and I have seen so many tax proposals that it makes me shudder. I wonder if it is good for that family that has had their pension pulled back, and they have had their medical benefits pulled back, and so forth. Is the benefit well worth the burden? I intend, when the time comes, and as Commissioner Burrus said, this is a future thing we are talking about, when the time comes, the taxpayer has to be listened to also at this point. That is all I have to say."

Com. Burrus, "Thanks, Bob. And I would agree with Bob's comments, too. This cannot be done in a vacuum, it has to be community wide. The overriding thing I see at this point is that we are involved in a movement that is irreversible and our unfortunate status is being where we are. It is something we are going to have to deal with and certainly is going to need input from all corners, I agree with that completely."

Com. Evans, "I agree totally, too. I think that the tax situation you are talking about needs to be overhauled from the bottom up from all aspects of every tax that is implemented in this state, it should have been done fifteen years ago. Property taxes in Lake County, they refer to going up $20,000.00 because the assessments weren't obviously done in the correct manner. Somebody was inhibiting the proper use of the assessment over there. The state legislature had a meeting, or a couple of their people did in Hammond yesterday, and said don't blame us, it is not our fault. Well, they were given a decree from the Supreme Court to do something and what they did was not sufficient so I do blame them and I still think it is their fault. I think they are the ones that need to do the changing. But I do think that we need to progress and transportation is going to give us the jobs so we need to fulfill and that is what we have to do and rail is the best way to go."

Motion carried.


DISCUSSION/UPDATE ON THE COUNTY HOME PROPERTY

Com. Harper, "We discussed this the last time and I will make the following motion:

Com Harper moved we create a committee to study the County Home and the surrounding land owned by the County. The committee will hopefully report back to the County Commissioners within six weeks. I envision the committee studying all the aspects of the County Home, including but not limited to, (A) the possibility of the use of the land by the County Parks Department including answering the question of whether the Parks Department would be interested in the use of the land if the parcel within the County Home was sold, and also if the County can sell the land for future expansion; (B) whether the County Home could be sold and if so, can any estimates be made of the possible selling price at this time; (C) what would it cost to demolish the County Home and what is that cost, and could it be done alternate ways, it might be less expensive rather than just putting together the entire project out to bid. The committee should include individuals who have varied experience that could help the committee answer these questions. I nominate Dave Burrus to chair that committee, also Jack White, a local realtor; Dave Schelling from the Highway Department; Dave Pilz, a local engineer; and Park Department Director Ed Melendez to serve on the committee, Com. Evans seconded, noting that we do have communication from someone who wishes to purchase the County Home and a letter from the Historic Landmark Foundation that should also be taken into consideration, motion carried.


OFFICE HOLDERS/DEPARTMENT HEADS

Award bids for Liquid Bituminous--
Al Hoagland, Highway Superintendent

Mr. Hoagland, "As you can see, you have copies of all tabulations of all the bids received. As I mentioned before, the majority of our projects would be AE90 and also ADP, historically those are 99% of the product we purchase. I would like to request at this time Koch Materials be awarded primary bid and also that Seneca Petroleum; BitMat Products be accepted as secondary bidders."

Com. Burrus, "Just for the record, Koch Materials is quoting $.58.8 cents per gallon for AE90 and they are quoting $.94.2 per gallon for AEP. In the case for Seneca Petroleum for AE90, they are quoting $.59.3 per gallon and for AEP, $1.15.3 per gallon. For BitMat, AE90 was quoted at $.63.7 per gallon; AEP was $1.21.7 per gallon. So your recommendation, Al, would you state that again, please?"

Mr. Hoagland, "I would recommend that we accept all bids and that Koch be awarded main supplier and Seneca and BitMat be secondary supplier."

Com. Evans, "I think that is a wise choice given the volatility of the fuel industry today so that you will always have a supply."

Com. Evans moved to accept the recommendation of Koch as the main supplier, Seneca and Bitmat as secondary, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.


REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS FOR JOLIET BRIDGE WORK

Com. Burrus, "What we have next are the Requests for Qualifications for the Joliet Bridge work. These are engineering firms that have expressed an interest in doing the design work for this project. We intend to open them, read the name and location aloud and take them under advisement. We have a stack of documents as high as this desk, so bear with us as we go through this."

1. McDonough & Associates of Chicago2. RQAW Consulting Engineers
3. First Group Engineering4. Transportation Consult. Engineers
5. Troyer Group, Mishawaka 6. Bonar Group, Valparaiso
7. Consoer Townsend Eng.8. Floyd E. Burroughs & Assoc.
9. Butler Fairman & Seufert10. Short, Elliot, Hendrickson
11. USI Consultants12. Ken Herceg & Associates
13. Farrar, Garvey & Associates14. Lawson Fisher Associates
15. DLZ Engineers16. RW Armstrong & Associates
17. Beam, Longest & Neff18. Collins Engineers

Com. Burrus, "This project has obviously gained the attention of the engineering community. We are looking to upgrade the structure of the bridge at Joliet Road as it passes over the CSX Railroad in Valparaiso on the west side of town. Again, these are qualification submittals of the various firms. They will be taken under advisement by our Engineering Department and I would expect to hear back as far as a recommendation from Dave Schelling. Dave, do you have any idea when you may be prepared to make a recommendation?"

Mr. Schelling, "It will be at least your May 5th meeting, maybe even after that."

Com. Burrus, "We will wait to hear from you on your recommendation and we'll post it on the agenda accordingly."

Mr. Schelling, "There are some very good firms, this will be a difficult decision."

Com. Burrus, "Is there anyone here from any of these firms? We want to thank everyone for your submittals. We appreciate that and appreciate your interest in what we are doing here."


LAKE ELIZA RECEIVING PAVED FIRE LANES DISCUSSION

Com. Harper, "Let me ask you guys, I read this article in the paper today about Lake Eliza getting paved fire lanes, you remember when we had Jack Jent here back a couple weeks ago talking about having an open meeting on those lanes in Portage and I have said in the past that I am for us helping these areas. I think I said something at the last meeting about us helping. I don't think you should volunteer Lake and Porter County assets before you bring it before a public meeting and talk about what's . . , I mean, I read here that Trustee Wichlinski had a meeting and it is decided we are going to provide labor and work down there in Lake Eliza and that may be a good plan and a fine plan, but I think in the future, if things like this are going to happen we should do it the way we did it in the Jent case and have the people here at the public meeting and decide how it is going to happen."

Com. Burrus, "Let me respond to that. I'll take the criticism on that, Bob, because I have discussed it with the neighborhood representatives down there and I authorized the use of one of our machines for a day to that effort."

Com. Harper, "Well, I think it is a good plan. It sounded like, well it didn't sound like a one day machine if you read it, but the story said we were to provide labor. So, that's fine."

Com. Burrus, "Well, these fellows were not involved in that, I was involved in that and if there is any criticism, I'll take it and accept it. But they have been in contact with me."

Com. Evans, "I have one other thing in relation to Mr. Jent's visit at the last meeting. I know Dave you have written a letter to Indiana American Water Company, and I have had conversation with the president of Indiana American Water and they are more than willing to cooperate in the endeavor to move those fire hydrants and they will be back in touch with us shortly."


TIBURON FINAL PAYMENT APPROVAL/E-911
Dave Sheibels, Director

Mr. Sheibels, "This is the final disbursement in this request No. 9 to finish drawing from Bank of America. Our final draw request to pay Tiburon on the completion milestone of the RMS project. Just requesting this disbursement be approved for the Bank of America to draw the final disbursement to pay Tiburon the $132,098."

Com. Evans, "This is in a timely manner, there are two invoices here, David, are they both due at the same time or are we paying this off early?"

Mr. Sheibels, "They are both due at the same time."

Com. Evans moved to approve the final disbursement to Bank of America to pay Tiburon, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.


BE KIND TO ANIMALS WEEK PROCLAMATION, Porter County Animal Shelter

Com. Evans, "I have a proclamation I would like to do for the Animal Control people and Be Kind to Animals Week celebrated May 2 through the 8th."

OFFICIAL PROCLAMATION:

WHEREAS, We have been endowed not only with the blessings and benefits of our animal friends, who give us companionship and great pleasure in our daily lives, but also with a firm responsibility to protect these creatures, with whom we share the Earth, from pain and suffering; and
WHEREAS, We recognize that instilling attitude of kindness, consideration, and respect for all living things, through human education in schools and the community helps provide basic values on which a humane and civilized society is built; and
WHEREAS, the people in this community are deeply indebted to the Porter County Animal Shelter for their invaluable contribution in caring for lost and unwanted animals and promoting a true spirit of kindness and consideration for animals in the hearts of all people; and
WHEREAS, the first full week of May has been established as the annual celebration of the philosophy of kindness to animals for the 89th years in 2004;
THEREFORE, by virtue of the power vested in me as Commissioner of Porter County, Indiana, I proclaim and pronounce the week of May 2 to 8, 2004 as:

BE KIND TO ANIMALS WEEK

And do heartily encourage full participation of all our citizens attending the festival at the Porter County Animal Shelter on May 8, 2004.
S/Board of Commissioners
Date/4-20-04

Com. Evans moved to approve the Be Kind to Animals Proclamation for May 2-8, 2004, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.


REPORT FROM COMMISSIONERS

All District report:

Com. Burrus, "We currently are under the habit of approving by this Board at our meetings utility pole permits. This means that any utility that requires a pole, be it a telephone or NIPSCO, we take action on that. We have a utility inspector on the Highway Department whose job it is to coordinate those kinds of things and he makes those recommendations but I would suggest that we delegate that authority to grant those permits to the Engineering Department. They look after our interest there and as you know, we see them here and we have very little understanding of what is going on. I think I would prefer it myself to address those by exception basis, as compared to dealing with all of them. One of the reasons for that is the utility people have indicated they are now dealing with a fair number of modular homes and if they happen to miss one of our meetings for a power pole approval, it could delay a closing on a house for two weeks because of the speed in which they are putting these things in. Open for discussion, I personally recommend we delegate that."

Com. Harper moved to approve the Engineering Department be given the authority to grant permits for utility pole permits, Com. Evans seconded,

Com. Evans, "Obviously the Engineering Department is the one that does the research and supplies the information to us and if they don't think it is appropriate, they let us know and vice versa, if they think it is appropriate, then it's a go. They are doing the work, they might as well have the authority to authorize it."

Motion carried.

Center District: Com. Harper

1. Utility Agreement for NIPSCO to set two poles on CR 500 North west of CR 400
East. Verbal approval given 4-13-04.

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

South District: Com. Burrus

1. Utility Agreement for Wabash Valley Power Association, Inc. to set pole on Baums
Bridge Road, starting at the intersection of SR 8 and going south for .5 mile on west side. Recommend approval.

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


CORRESPONDENCE

Court Security Activity Report for March 2004 is on file.
Treasurer's monthly report for March 2004 is on file.
Building Department monthly report for March 2004 is on file.
Report of Accomplishments for EMA Office for March 2004 is on file.

Approval of Service Agreement between Porter County Assessor and Nexus Group
Lindy Wilson, Assessor's office

Ms. Wilson, "I don't know if I can tell you a lot about this. Shirley thought she was going to be here but she is on vacation with her family and doesn't return until tomorrow morning, so that is why I am here in her place. This is a contract with the Nexus Group who specialized in income approach. It is mandatory by the state, all the income approach data be taken into account, especially for our Trend A, which will happen in 2005. I haven't seen any regulations on that from the state, don't know if it is really going to go through. We have to have all the data available, it would be nearly 3,500 appeals that we have now, the township assessors need help with the parcels that have to do with income approach; the duplexes, all the rental units; the strip malls; all these of these income producing properties; commercial. So we are pleading and begging."

Com. Burrus, "Do you know if the Assessor's budget has this covered?"

Ms. Wilson, "I would say yes."

Atty. Rinkenberger, "I would say motion to approve conditional upon having the money in the budget."

Com. Burrus, "Well, that was one thought I had but have you reviewed this?"

Atty. Rinkenberger, "Yes, I have except there was one clause I want to strike on page 2 of the original where is says they charge 12% for late fees, we can strike that out."

Com. Burrus, "Pending any other discussion, the proposal then would be to possibly approve it subject to that alteration and also to the availability of funds. Any other comments?"

Com. Harper, "No."

Com. Evans, "You have used this group before?"

Ms. Wilson, "Yes."

Com. Evans, "And they are the main ones throughout the state for this type of project?"

Ms. Wilson, "Yes."

Com. Evans moved to approve the agreement with Nexus Group contingent upon the Assessor's funding and the striking of the interest clause, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Approve Public Official Bond for Weights and Measures

Com. Evans moved to approve the Public Official Bond for Richard Claussen, Weights and Measures Inspector in the amount of $8,500.00, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Request by Sons of Union Veteran's of the Civil War for annual Memorial Day Service

Com. Burrus, "This is a request by the Sons of Union Veterans of the Civil War to hold their annual Memorial Day service on the Courthouse Square and they are requesting that the flags at the Courthouse be lowered to half staff for the service and that they use the Memorial Opera House as an alternative site in case of inclement weather. Any discussion?"

Com. Evans, "Of course the insurance thing is a problem but the Memorial Opera House makes their own bookings. I think we can give them permission to use the Courthouse Square as long as they have proof of insurance. The matter about the Memorial Opera House needs to be discussed with the Opera House."

Com. Burrus, "Refer them to the Opera House on that, then is that acceptable?"

Com. Evans, "Yes."

Com. Evans moved to approve the request by the Sons of the Union Veterans of Civil War to use the Courthouse Square on May 31, 2004 at 10:30 a.m. conditional upon having proof of insurance and discussing the booking with the Memorial Opera House, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Appointments of Mark Savinski, Joe Grossbauer, and Dale Huyvaert to the Workforce Investment Board

Com. Burrus, "This is a request from the Center for Workforce Innovations to honor their recommendation to reappoint Mark Savinski, who is the District Director for Congressman Visclosky's office to serve a 3 year term on the Workforce Investment Board. Said term would be from July 1, 2004 through June 30, 2007."

Com. Harper moved to appoint Mark Savinski to the Workforce Investment Board for the term of July 1, 2004 through June 30, 2007, Com. Evans seconded, motion carried.

Com. Burrus, "This is a recommendation to appoint Joe Grossbauer of the Grossbauer Group and Dale Huyvaert of ISG to serve 3 year terms on the Workforce Investment Board from July 1, 2004 through June 30, 2007."

Com. Evans moved to appoint Joe Grossbauer and Dale Huyvaert to the Workforce Investment Board for the term of July 1, 2004 through June 30, 2007, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.


SAFETY COMMITTEE DISCUSSION

Com. Harper, "I am suggesting we amend the Porter County Government Employee Personnel Manual effective April 20, 2004 under Section 12.06, Loss Control Policy of the Porter County Government Employee Personnel Manual as amended through the addition of the following:

Section 12.06 Safety Committee is hereby established whose function will be to assist in the implementation, revision and maintenance of a loss control program and to assist in early accident investigation in Porter County. The Safety Committee shall consist of the following individuals:
A.A Porter County Commissioner
B.A Porter County Council person
C.Porter County Attorney
D.Sheriff, Porter County Sheriff's Department
E.Porter County Highway Superintendent
F.Representative from Porter County Insurance Carrier
G.Emergency Management Director;
H.A Representative from the Sheriff's Department to perform in an investigatory capacity.

The Safety Committee shall meet quarterly, and more frequently as deemed necessary by the Porter County Board of Commissioners.

The Safety Committee shall meet and recommend additional policy and procedure to the Porter County Board of Commissioners to assist in the implementation and the maintenance of a loss control program and early accident investigation in Porter County.

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
PORTER COUNTY INDIANA
S/David L. Burrus
S/John A. Evans
S/Robert P. Harper

Com. Burrus, "This action, if approved, is consistent with discussion we had one or two meetings ago when we renewed our workman's comp insurance as well as some of our automobile insurance issues. So we are intent to try to minimize loss and also to minimize safety risk in our environment of our employees. I think this is consistent with what we already thought."

Com. Evans, "I think that is exactly right."

Com. Harper moved to approve the amendment to the Porter County Government Employee Personnel Policy with the addition of Section 12.06, Loss Control Policy, Com. Evans seconded,

Com. Evans, "I would like to suggest that Com. Harper be the Commissioner's representative on that committee."

Com. Burrus, "Do you accept, Bob?"

Com. Harper, "Yes."

Motion carried.


COM. HARPER'S STATEMENTS REGARDING FOLLOW THROUGH ON STATEMENTS MADE AT MEETINGS BY DEVELOPERS

Com. Harper, "There is one more thing I want to bring up. I am bringing it up because of my work on the Plan Commission and some perplexing problems that I think everybody here is aware of but I would just like to bring them to light and tell you what I think is a possible resolution to the matter. The problems seem to recur again and again with statements made at hearings of the Plan Commission, sometimes at the Commissioners' hearings and sometimes at the BZA of promises made to the county that don't seem to get followed through. Sometimes I think we need to do more legally ourselves to try to insure this gets followed through. I think we need to study the problem and try to bring it to everyone's attention involved in the process, that we have to watch these kinds of things. One of the letters that the Commissioners received was about Golf Creek Trailer Park which you are familiar with. This fellow wrote this letter to bring to your attention, of an ongoing situation at Golf Creek Trailer Park development on State Road 130, west of Wheeler. He has contacted the Plan Commission, the Commissioners, I think he has talked to everybody he can. He attended a series of meetings on the development of this trailer park where he alleges there were promises made about how this was going to be developed, there were going to be lines of trees, it was not going to be used for rental property, and so forth. I asked, and I have the minutes from the meetings, and I think he is correct; that those promises were made and even as a lawyer, I am not sure of the course of action that should be taken, it is not my area of law. I think this is one example of what happens when these promises are made in meetings, they are made in the minutes, when these people come before the Plan Commission, or the BZA, or ever here, they are hearing a proposal, they listen to these promises and somewhat of the actions are put into the meetings, of the granting of the rezonings and acceptions, are based on those promises and I think we have to look at them. Another one is this Falling Waters Subdivision. Bob Thompson, back at the Plan Commission in November 2003 received a letter from the Porter Township Trustee, Wichlinski, that said approximately three years ago, Porter County Plan Commission granted preliminary plat approval for the above captioned subdivision. As you can see from the attached letter, certain representations were made by the developer concerning Lake Eliza volunteer fire department. The only contingency in the letter is the granting of preliminary plan approval. Like all other public service organizations, our fire department is experiencing budget difficulties. We have made certain plans based upon the representations of Porter County Plan Commission, which plans have gone unfilled. We would appreciate it if you could advise us of the status of this obligation, has the escrow been established, and if so, where? Just real briefly I want to read a letter that was sent to Commissioner Sheets back in November 2000 from Todd Leeth at Hoeppner Wagner & Evans. Earlier I have provided to you a copy of the plat of the Falling Waters Subdivision. Recently the partners and the developers of Falling Waters discussed with the Lake Eliza Volunteer Fire Department certain matters. In light of the Plan Commission's desire to have submitted evidence in advance, I want to provide information to you for the hearing on November 8. Floramo Partners have agreed to donate one acre of real estate on County Road 675 West from the side of the fire station. Mr. Floramo is currently negotiating with the property owner at this location to approximately 3 acres of property . . . . (inaudible). In addition, he will place $200,000.00 in escrow for the express purpose of allowing Lake Eliza Volunteer Fire Department to construct a new fire station on property donated or to purchase fire apparatus and equipment. So he is saying he is going to put $200,000.00 in escrow for property that is either donated to the Lake Eliza Fire Department or buy them new equipment. In the event he does not acquire the real estate, they will increase the donation by $50,000.00 for a total of $250,000.00. In other words, he is saying if we don't get the land we will still give you $250,000.00 instead of the $200,000.00 without the land. There are letters from the developers and so forth on that and these things end up in limbo and one of the reasons they end up in limbo, is not everything has gone through at the meetings. What I would like to suggest is a committee of Gwenn Rinkenberger, Lily Schaeffer and Robert Thompson to go over these documents and make a report back to the Commissioners on what can be done here. Keep in mind, that we really haven't got any money in the Plan Commission budget for extended litigation which may, if we are going to get into it, have to be discussed. So I think we should do that."

Com. Burrus, "Let me make a comment on that, Bob. What you are referring to there are promises made during the approval process and we have had experience with some other issues that are somewhat similar and that is any improvements that are proposed for a development in the form of roads and drainage and so forth, constitute a promise also. What we have found in the past, on occasion, very few developers, have been guilty of not following through on their promises if you will in the form of their approved design and engineering plans. On at least two occasions in the last two years we have addressed those by suggesting or recommending to the Plan Commission that they withhold building permits, that the impose moratoriums on building permits until such discrepancies are corrected. So that is one avenue we have taken on the engineering side. Now with respect to other issues, that probably has to be exposed and be evident and some kind of action may be necessary."

Com. Harper, "Apparently, this Golf Creek Trailer Park can't take any action like that. They are renting places, I read the minutes, I think these people are right. I know there is $8,000.00 in the budget for legal fees for the Plan Commission, which isn't a lot. I would just like to see us get together a plan of action."

Com. Evans, "I think the problem comes in from people offer these things up and there is no mechanism for enforcement, they make these offers in there, sometimes, $250,000.00 for a fire department is pretty hefty. So, you look at that and say that is a great thing and the fire department is going to profit, and everybody is going to profit, and come out a lot better for this and then the guy says I am not going to pay you. We have no way to . . . so maybe the offers need to be written in a manner so that there is enforcement written into the offer."

Com. Harper, "I think we need some enforceability in these things. I think we should take a look at them and see if there is."
Com. Burrus, "I agree with that. I can also, just for information, share with you that I have had a conversation with the Falling Waters developer and he has no intention whatsoever of walking away from that obligation, it is just a matter of timing at this point. So we can keep an eye on that and see what develops. Certainly there are a lot of other issues that fall into that category. I would say to discuss it with the Planning Department and see what kind of procedure they recommend. Okay, we are running a little behind but I would like to declare a ten minute recess and then we will reconvene for the Plan Commission portion of our business. Excuse me, yes sir?"


REQUEST FROM FRANK O'REILLY FOR HELP WITH SEPTIC PROBLEM

Mr. Frank O'Reilly, "I have a problem that I would like to discuss with the Commissioners before your break. I am a resident and I don't know the procedure. What I am having is a three year problem that I have had out on my property. It has to do with the Health Department. I think Keith Letta is not our problem. The Health Department has pretty much washed their hands of this. They have turned it over to the legal department and as of December of last year, it went to the legal department and nothing has been done."

Com. Evans, "The Health Department's legal department?"

Male, "Yes. Keith Letta has told my neighbor to pump and haul his septic out and that was in November, we had a meeting and since then, actually nothing has been. I was guaranteed to my lawyer, myself and my wife, that this man does not want to mess around and not have it pumped."

Com. Burrus, "We need some background. First of all, could you tell us your name for the record?"

Mr. O'Reilly, "My name is Frank O'Reilly. I live at 519 East 900 North, Jackson Township."

Com. Burrus, "The complaint you are talking about is with a neighbor?"

Mr. O'Reilly, "With a neighbor that is pumping raw sewage."

Com. Burrus, "And his name is?"

Mr. O'Reilly, "Lansky. Michael Lansky. He is at 523 East 900 North."

Com. Evans, "I think the name is Lasowski."

Mr. O'Reilly, "The first complaint started on 4/1702. We had noticed a pipe on my property that was outside the easement. I had it tested through the Health Department and it came up E.coli."

Com. Burrus, "And the status of the issue right now is?"

Mr. O'Reilly, "As you can see, the status is unresolved, unresolved, unresolved and unresolved. The other thing is we have had . . . "

Com. Burrus, "That is the history, now where is it at this point?"

Mr. O'Reilly, "Actually, it is in the legal department. Keith sent two or three notices to the man giving him more deadlines and as of right now, not one thing has been done in my neighbor's back yard."

Female in audience, "He has been receiving that final notice June of last year."

Mr. O'Reilly, "All the final notices are here."

Female, "He had eight or nine final notices sent by Porter County Health Department."
Com. Burrus, "Gwenn, what can you tell me as far as jurisdiction on this?"

Atty. Rinkenberger, "We have none."

Com. Harper, "This gentleman handed me this document about a week or two ago. First, I called the county because I wasn't sure what our jurisdiction was. First I called members of the health board and then I called the attorney and questioned him about this."

Com. Burrus, "I see there has not been any progress on this."

Mr. O'Reilly, "Every time he tells Mr. Letta's department he is going to do something, it is just long enough to get somebody off their back. He has no signed contract with nobody, he says he was in a contract for pump and haul with A-1 Septic, I have never seen them. According to Mr. Letta, he does not have a contract for pump and haul."

Com. Harper, "Here is what I suggest we do. I have been over this document. This will take some time to go through. I suggest we set this for two weeks from today and have them come and explain what the situation is. Put this gentleman on the agenda for the meeting and lets find out what is going on. At least try to help to see what is going on."

Com. Burrus, "John, this is in your district, do you have any comments on this?"

Com. Evans, "Well, I wish I would have known about it sooner, but I think we also better ask Mr. Hollenbeck."

Mr. O'Reilly, "There are cover ups in here that the man tried to cover up the problem. It is bubbling out of the ground today so what does he do? He brings in four more loads of dirt and covers it up. My thing is when it rains, the sewage is going to come to the top and go over right down Coffee Creek. I am the beginning of Coffee Creek."

Com. Burrus, "So your recommendation, Bob, is to what?"

Com. Harper, "Continue this for two weeks, until our next meeting of May 5, ask Mr. Hollenbeck to be here and give everybody a chance to look this over and have this gentleman come back and try to get a status on this."

Com. Harper moved to continue the matter until the May 5, 2004 meeting, Com. Evans seconded, motion carried.

The meeting was recessed for a ten minute break from 11:15 until 11:30 a.m.

The meeting was called back to order at 11:30 a.m. for Plan Commission





AFTERNOON SESSION--PLAN COMMISSION

Amend Chapter 17.84-Floodplain Zoning, of the Porter County Codes

Com. Harper, "Since Bob is here, why don't we let Mr. Read make his comments and then we can ask Bob to respond to that."

Com. Burrus, "We need to get the issue on the table and then we can discuss it from any point of view. Bob Thompson?'

Mr. Thompson, "This is Plan Commission Resolution No. 04-6, the petitioner is the Porter County Plan Commission amending the Flood Hazard Area and Floodplain Zoning within the Title 17, Zoning. The reason this came about is because of the Department of Natural Resources coming up with comments stating that we must revise our ordinance, the existing ordinance that we have. I have the letter in the file, the amendments were quite minimal that they were requesting, stating that our old ordinance said 'executive secretary' and they said my official title now is 'executive director' and that needs to be in there. It is just a few language changes within the ordinances is all they were proposing. Now one of the things is the code under Title 17 was an ordinance that was passed in 1982 or 83. When researching this, I found that Plan Commission and County Commissioners approved an ordinance in 1993. So what is in the codification is an older ordinance. The DNR did approve an ordinance in 1993 but for some reason, I can't explain why that only was not codified. So, what the DNR was actually amending language changes that they were requesting, was in an ordinance approved by the County Commissioners in 1993 and what is codified really is the 1982 ordinance. This is mainly just talking about construction within a flood zone and what you can and cannot do and the procedures. One of the things is they told me the DNR came up and highly discouraged any residential construction. They also highly discourage the Board of Zoning Appeals granting any variances, but there is a variance procedure within the ordinance on how to do this. Any questions?"

Com. Harper, "I would like to see that letter because I have seen that letter in the past."

Com. Burrus, "Did that letter impose a deadline for this action?"

Mr. Thompson, "Yes, it did. They want it done by May."

Com. Burrus, "I'm curious, from one of you legal people, just exactly how do they fit into our ordinance role here?"

Mr. Thompson, "The Department of Natural Resources?

Com. Burrus, "Yes."

Atty. Rinkenberger, "Well, nine times out of ten, the ordinance is based on state law; for federal rights or something they have jurisdiction over and they are wanting us just to pass an ordinance that clears their . . ."

Com. Evans, "I want to be clear on something. We passed an ordinance in 1982 that was supposed to have been codified in 1992 or 1993 and was not, so technically, we are not in compliance with the DNR's request at this point in time."

Atty. Rinkenberger, "Wrong. Just because the old ordinance was put into the code doesn't mean that is the ordinance in effect. The ordinance in effect is the one we passed in 1993 but wasn't put in the code. Just because it wasn't put in the code, doesn't mean it is not a valid ordinance. Really what has been in effect was the ordinance passed in 1993, somebody made a mistake and put an invalid ordinance in the code book. That is what I think."

Com. Burrus, "What is DNR's understanding? Are they looking at the 1982 code?"

Atty. Rinkenberger, "I think you are saying this is an amendment from 1993?"

Mr. Thompson, "Yes, and I am just asking for this new ordinance to be replaced in Title 17."

Atty. Rinkenberger, "All we will do if this is passed, we will send it to BPC and they will just take out the wrong ordinance and put in the right ordinance and then it is in the code."

Com. Burrus, "So on one hand we have the DNR requirement we need to address. That is probably what has initiated this."

Mr. Thompson, "DNR and FEMA are ones who can administer emergency funding, and they come out for disasters, so therefore that is why they are requiring all jurisdictions to have such an ordinance. This will be on file and anybody that has this ordinance on file and administers it properly, will be capable of receiving FEMA money in case of a disaster."

Com. Burrus, "Could you recap in outline form, if you can, what are the content of the changes."

Mr. Thompson, "Com. Harper has that letter right now."

Com. Evans, "This passed the Plan Commission at 5-0?"

Mr. Thompson, "Yes, it did."

Com. Harper, "This says your committee has until February 27, 2004 to revise this ordinance and send a draft copy to this office for the DNR approval."

Mr. Thompson, "Correct, that has been done."

Com. Harper, "It has been noted that the communities fund for development does contain a section to identify those improvements."

Mr. Thompson, "The draft was submitted to the Department of Natural Resources, they did approve the draft and now the end of May that I gave you as the date, is when they are requesting they want a signed approved copy by the County Commissioners to them by the end of that date."

Com. Harper, "What if we don't do this?"

Mr. Thompson, "It would jeopardize federal funding."

Com. Harper, "Is that the only thing, I mean that is enough, but is that the only thing that could happen?"

Com. Burrus, "The other issue has to do with flood plain insurance, too, I am not sure how that factors into it."

Atty. Rinkenberger, "I recommend we not find out what happens."

Herb Read, "For the record my name is Herbert Read, I live at 1453 N. Tremont Road, Chesterton. That is in rural Westchester Township. Before I get into the matter of the flood plain ordinance, I would like to say just a few words on the matter that came up before you regarding the County Home property. I think it would be no surprise to you that I am in favor of as much of that property as being turned over to the county park department. I have no feeling at all about the building itself, but it should be at least all of Salt Creek frontage, the bottom land that surrounds it plus enough of the high land that some facilities of the Park Department can be placed on it. It doesn't have to be extensive facilities, I think that they will all be low key, low impact site type of things. Back to the matter of the flood plain ordinance. What I have here is what Mr. Thompson gave me as being the existing one, I am not sure after this discussion if it is existing or not. But, I also have a copy of the proposed new ordinance. I understand the state wants this done statewide, that is because there are some counties that don't have ordinances or have very weak ordinances if any. So if the proposed state ordinance is very good compared to some counties, probably most counties. However, Porter County has a few things in what I surmise to be the existing ordinance, that are better than what is proposed here. I am going to ask a question of your county attorney. Under the existing floodway district, Section 17.84.050 says the Porter County Plan Commission may impose turns and conditions on any permit it issues in this district which are more restrictive than those imposed by the natural resources, or DNR. It goes on to say the floodway district may stand by itself or be combined with any other district in which case some of these restrictions can be applied to other districts such as floodway, fringe, flood hazard, special flood hazard areas and so forth. I think anybody who knowingly builds in a special flood hazard area is plain nuts or he is trying to hood wink somebody into buying it before the flood comes along. Now, I ask you, now the new one is silent on that; it doesn't have that paragraph so I ask you to consult with your attorney, do you still have, you in this case being Porter County cumulatively, specifically the Plan Commission, I ran this by the Plan Commission when they had their meeting but it didn't bother them, but they were possibly losing their authority. It bothers me they are losing that authority. Postpone this for enough time for you to consult with your attorney to find out whether you still retain this by implication or otherwise. If your attorney concludes you don't have that authority, I ask you to crank that paragraph into this new ordinance."

Com. Burrus, "As I hear this conversation develop, Bob, has there been items from the 1993 ordinance that has been deleted in the new one?"

Mr. Thompson, "Well the one Mr. Read is reading off of is the older one, from 1982."

Atty. Rinkenberger, "Was that ordinance ever repealed?"

Mr. Thompson, "With that language, I would have to go back and find out exactly how it was worded with the 1993 ordinance. I would assume they would have wrote in there that this is to replace the existing one. I will try to word this one in the way that is amended that one in its entirety."

Atty. Rinkenberger, "I think you better forget that. The history of this is so convoluted that we are not even sure of it. I would write this ordinance to repeal all other ordinances, put all the language in that you want and not have it try to incorporate by reference anything in the past, and just insert that language in that ordinance and repeal all past ordinances. That document in front of you should be the only document that anybody has to look at to understand what our ordinance is and it should repeal all others."

Com. Evans, "Why would we not want that wording?"

Atty. Rinkenberger, "I think that wording is good."

Mr. Thompson, "I don't have a problem with it. Now I am going to have to send it back to the DNR. For anybody that wants to come in and build any kind of structure on the floodplain, before I issue a permit, I must send it down to the DNR to get their approval."

Com. Evans, "If by doing that the way it is written, we lose local control, then I mean, DNR can have fires in their property and nobody else can."

Atty. Rinkenberger, "Local control means we can have restrictions that are more stringent than even DNR's and why would they complain about that?"

Mr. Read, "That is my basic point."

Mr. Thompson, "One of the things that DNR will allow is fill to come into a flood plain and start filling and compacting and . . . (inaudible)."

Mr. Read, "That is permitted in this new state proposal; they can fill it in. I am totally opposed to that except maybe under extreme circumstances."

Atty. Rinkenberger, "There is no doubt in my mind that we are taking one ordinance that repeals all others that should contain the language so prior to . . "

Com. Evans, "The DNR expects us to jump through all their hoops by May, they need to get on board and jump through the one we are going to require, and that's if they approve it."

Mr. Thompson, "I can go ahead and put that in under a new section, somewhere I can fit that in. I will write them a letter saying this is what was approved."

Com. Harper, "First I want to know if that is the only comment you are going to make on this ordinance."

Mr. Read, "There are some other differences between what I thought was and maybe the existing, for example, they specifically say, permit things like park and agriculture in the flood plain area under what I thought was the existing, and that is not mentioned at all here. There are some other minor differences. I think the ability of Porter County to put more stringent requirements is the important thing I want to emphasize."

Com. Harper, "Can we see that document you are reading from?"

Mr. Read, "Yes, I have it underlined."

Com. Harper, "Is this ordinance, that you are proposing here, a total and complete ordinance and can rest on its own, and not have to refer to other ordinances. Do you understand my question?"

Mr. Thompson, "I guess not, totally, is it going to refer back to another ordinance?"

Com. Harper, "Is it going to refer back to another ordinance covering this same subject matter? In other words, you've got this ordinance on flood plain zoning, can it stand on its own without us referring back to older ordinances whether they were codified or not, can this stand on its own without referring back to any of these older ordinances?"

Mr. Thompson, "I have the language which Mr. Read said, for example, I think it can very well stand on its own without any problem."

Com. Harper, "Is there any other reason it can't stand on its own, that's what I think you were asking, because we can repeal the other two just to clean the thing up. But we want to have this document be able to stand on its own. So we are asking does it have everything in here it needs to be complete, other than this paragraph, on flood plain zoning, does it have everything it needs, if those others are repealed?"

Mr. Thompson. "We have to repeal the existing ordinances that are on the books just to codify everything and I can go back and get a listing of all those past ordinances. The next issue is about . . .(inaudible) that is within our table of uses that we talked about, what is allowed, I think I Xeroxed that for you. Does it have specific language in there for that? No, it doesn't. One of the items that he mentions is a park. Our uses within our ordinance doesn't even mention a park, but it does mention private recreation development, agricultural within flood plain and a few others. It is Table 19 within our code."

Mr. Read, "There is a page I passed out to you that is under the category of uses by right. In other words, agriculture by right is included in the flood plain recreational uses and so forth. I think that is a good thing to clarify. If you take this, and modify it as I have asked you to do, I think that is a good thing to clarify also, if we can clarify parts so that I don't think we have a county park when that . . ."

Atty. Rinkenberger, "Do we want to be able to have a county park?"

Mr. Thompson, "Sure."

Atty. Rinkenberger, "Well, then we will put it in."

Com. Evans, "This permitted use by right, is that incorporated into the new ordinance?"

Mr. Thompson, "No. In Chapter 17.16 zoning, Table 1, is our official schedule of district regulations and to let you know things that are allowed by right in a flood plain zoning."

Mr. Read, "I am not saying it should be under by right, but I think it should mention in here that you may do that. Discretionary."

Mr. Thompson, "A county . . . golf course is allowable in a flood plain, private recreational development, (two people were talking at the same time and made in impossible for the recording secretary to distinguish what was said.) Parks isn't even listed on the schedule."

Mr. Read, "My request is that it not be by right but by discretion of the Plan Commission and the County Commissioners."

Com. Evans, "My concern is are we going to be able to complete this in a timely fashion for the DNR."

Com. Harper, "I think we should amend it today, adding a paragraph, for each of the parks, repeal the others, and we can have Bob send it downstate and if they have a problem, we can face it at that time."

Com. Evans, "The DNR wanted our ordinance draft in February, so we are changing that draft copy."

(Mr. Thompson, Com. Burrus, and Atty. Rinkenberger were all speaking at the same time.)

Mr. Read, "And that includes the discretionary on your part to . . . we are going to . . ."

Mr. Thompson, "As far as getting a signed copy down to the DNR, I don't see a problem with that. If they request changes, I can make them and present it at the next Commissioners' meeting and you can still have first and second reading to get the signatures done."

Com. Burrus, "Now as I understand it, we are going to take the ordinance as proposed, we are going to make possibly two or three changes to that. The first change would be to insert the paragraph that reads Porter County Plan Commission may impose terms and conditions on any permitted issues in this district which are more restrictive than those imposed by natural resources. The Floodway/FW District may stand by itself or be combined with any other district. That is one proposed amendment. We also wanted to address the issues of what utilization could be made."

Mr. Read, "I think that might be cleaned up a little bit to say that the more restrictive can apply to any of these various districts. Because the paragraph itself initially starts out only floodway, but then the second sentence introduces the other."

Com. Burrus, "As far as category of usage, are we primarily concerned about including parks, is that our main thrust?"
Mr. Read, "That is my concern that we do."

Com. Burrus, "This table we are reading from, Bob, is that part of the ordinance?"

Mr. Thompson, "It is not referred to in the ordinance, no."

Atty. Rinkenberger, "I think it better be. I think that is another amendment we should make, if we have a table here that we want to incorporate by reference. That won't be that hard to do."

Mr. Thompson, "Floodplain is really considered an overlay; for example, Salt Creek goes right through residential districts, and within a residential district it seems to . . . (inaudible) the residents as well. So now my question is there going to be a conflict of interest?"

Com. Evans, "The tables referenced is part of the ordinance, 17.16.040, Table 1, Official Schedule of District Regulations."

Mr. Thompson, "That's true, but if you look at our zoning maps and everything, there is not laid out on our zoning maps, the floodplain district."

Com. Burrus, "What I was going to suggest . . ."

Com. Evans, "But if the regulations are what we speak of in the Table, so that regulations would speak to the ordinance, the creation of the district would be at the decision of the Plan Commission."

Mr. Thompson, "Correct."

Com. Burrus, "Would there be any value to change this table to modify private recreational developments to include public and private, which are authorized in the flood plan?"

Mr. Read, "I think that would be satisfied with me, yes."

Mr. Thompson, "Sure."

Atty. Rinkenberger, "You can insert it on page 249."

Mr. Thompson, "I can do that as a separate ordinance, it will come through . ."

Com. Burrus, "With those two modifications, does that address the issues we are talking about?"

Com. Evans, "And to assert that the table is part of the ordinance."

Atty. Rinkenberger, "Just take this one, you can re-word it. We are not going to do any separate document to amend it; we are going to come back with one complete ordinance off the draft we have."

Com. Harper, "Are we going to pass that today?"

Atty. Rinkenberger, "Yes, we'll just pass it today and then you'll bring it down to me and we will make sure the language is correct all in one document. Then we will have second reading."

Com. Evans moved to pass the ordinance contingent on the changes recommended and that those changes be incorporated before the second reading, Com. Harper seconded,

Atty. Rinkenberger, "You forgot to talk about the repealing."

Com. Evans withdrew his previous motion and moved to repeal all existing ordinances that are pertaining to

Atty. Rinkenberger, "Within this ordinance. This ordinance will be the repealing document; the language in this ordinance will say this ordinance hereby repeals all other ordinances. That is another amendment to have changed."

Com. Burrus, "So to have three changes as discussed?"

Atty. Rinkenberger, "Right."

Com. Burrus, "So does your original motion stand with those additions?"

Com. Evans, "Yes."

Com. Burrus, "And the second stands with that addition?"

Com. Harper, "Yes."

Motion carried.

Com. Burrus, "Now there will be three changes to this ordinance prior to the second reading and will be specified by the attorney."

Atty. Rinkenberger, "Yes and we will get copies of the other three ordinances and make
sure everything is in there and then put these new language in and we are done."

Com. Burrus, "Any further business? Okay, we have Solid Waste this afternoon at 3:30 and with no further business we will stand in recess."

With no further to business to discuss the meeting was recessed at 12:05 p.m.

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
PORTER COUNTY, INDIANA

David L. Burrus
John A. Evans
Robert P. Harper

Attest: Sandra K. Vuko, Auditor