PORTER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REGULAR MEETING
TUESDAY, JANUARY 4, 2005
10:00 A.M.

The regular meeting of the Porter County Board of Commissioners convened at 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, January 4, 2005, in the Commissioners’ Chambers of the Administration Center.

Those present were: Commissioners Robert Harper and Carole Knoblock, County Attorney Gwenn Rinkenberger, and Melissa Hartig and Vi Wagner.

President Harper called the meeting to order with the Pledge of Allegiance.

REORGANIZATION

Com. Harper, “I want to start off by welcoming our new commissioner, Carole Knoblock, who has been involved in county government for many years. I am sure it is going to be a pleasure working with Carole. I would also like to say Commissioner John Evans has had a death in the family and the funeral is the same time as this meeting so he will not be here today for this meeting. With that, we will start off with reorganization. We’ll start with the officers.”

Com. Knoblock moved to appoint Robert Harper as President, John Evans as Vice President, and herself as Secretary, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

APPOINTMENTS

NIRPC

Com. Knoblock moved to appoint herself to NIRPC, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

NICTD

Com. Knoblock moved to appoint Leon West to NICTD, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

PLAN COMMISSION

Com. Knoblock moved to appoint Robert Harper to the Plan Commission, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

DRAINAGE BOARD

Com. Knoblock moved to appoint herself to the Drainage Board, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

KANKAKEE VALLEY JOB TRAINING CORP.

Com. Knoblock moved to appoint Robert Harper to the Kankakee Valley Job Training Corp., Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS BOARD

Com. Knoblock moved to appoint John Evans to the Community Corrections Board, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

CHILD PROTECTION TEAM

Com. Knoblock moved to appoint John Evans to the Child Protection Team, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT BOARD

Com. Knoblock moved to appoint Robert Harper to the Wildlife Management Board, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

ANIMAL WELFARE BOARD

Com. Knoblock moved to appoint John Evans to the Animal Welfare Board, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

DEPARTMENT HEADS

Com. Knoblock moved to re-appoint all the various department heads to stay the same for 2005, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Com. Harper, “In years past, and I have discussed this with the county attorney, we have gone through all the different ones, in fact we included all the department heads, and we are simply referring that there will be no changes at this time in department heads and they are all remaining the same.”

ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE COMMISSION

Com. Knoblock moved to appoint Donald Cirrincione to the Alcoholic Beverage Commission, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

ANIMAL WELFARE BOARD

Com. Knoblock moved to appoint Donna Werner and Greg Quartucci to the Animal Welfare Board, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

CONVENTION, RECREATION AND TOURISM BOARD

Com. Knoblock moved to appoint Sylvia Graham and James Reed to the Convention, Recreation and Tourism Board, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Com. Harper, “On the Drainage Board, we are going to wait a month on that or at least until the next meeting.”

DRAINAGE BOARD

Com. Knoblock moved to delay the appointment to the Drainage Board until the next Commissioner’s meeting, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

PTABOA

Com. Knoblock moved to appoint James Kopp and Janine Chrisman to the PTABOA Board, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

WEST PORTER TOWNSHIP FIRE DISTRICT

Com. Knoblock moved to delay the appointment to the West Porter Township Fire District for two weeks, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

PLAN COMMISSION

Com. Knoblock moved to appoint Herbert Read to the Plan Commission, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

HOSPITAL BUILDING ASSOCIATION BOARD OF TRUSTEES

Com. Knoblock moved to appoint Robert Parks to the Hospital Building Board of Trustees, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD

Com. Knoblock moved to appoint Gale Carmona, Steve Morgavan, Larry McAfee, Bonnie Swarner and Frank Zona to the Wildlife Management Advisory Board, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

BOARD OF HEALTH

Com. Knoblock moved to appoint Dr. Frank Sturdevant and Gregory Frye to the Board of Health, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

KANKAKEE RIVER BASIN

Com. Knoblock moved to appoint Harold Haberline to the Kankakee River Basin, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

APPROVAL OF PAYROLL

Com. Knoblock moved to approve the payroll of December 13, 2004 and December 27, 2004, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

APPROVAL OF CLAIMS

Com. Knoblock moved to approve the claims of December 21, 2004, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Com. Knoblock moved to approve the minutes of December 7, 2004, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

RESOLUTION 05-01, SETTING MEETING DATES FOR 2005

Com. Harper, “It is through Indiana statute that we set our meeting dates for the rest of the year. We can have special meetings if we decide but we have to set our regular meeting dates for throughout the year. Since the first time I have been here as a commissioner, and the first meeting I was at, we had a big hearing in Plan Commission and there were people here asking us to have these meetings in the evening which LaPorte County and some of the other counties do so the people who have Plan Commission issues and other issues with the Commissioners don’t have to get off work to come to these meetings. I am suggesting we accept the schedule that we do the first and third Tuesdays, and do it at 6:00 in the evening so we are more accessible to the public.”

Com. Knoblock moved to hold the Commissioners’ meeting at 6:00 p.m. every first and third Tuesday of the month, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

UNSAFE BUILDING ORDINANCE NO. 05-01, 2ND READING

Com. Harper, “Porter County does not have a vehicle to use when we have abandoned buildings, we have had reports from different departments, even some houses that have been abandoned and not used and ice boxes in the yard and so forth. We have no way of really dealing with that and that is what this Unsafe Building Ordinance is intended to do. We discussed at our meetings many times, we have gone to the Council and they have approved money out of the CEDIT Plan to pay for starting this unsafe building project that Indiana statute requires that we have funding for before we start on it. We do now have the funding, we set it up with our Building Department because we have to pick a department to have it. We are going to have second reading on this. The effective date for this is March 15, 2005. So hopefully in the next 45 days, we will give it to the Building Department and they can get it set up and start using it as of March 15.”

Com. Knoblock moved to approve Ordinance No. 05-01, Unsafe Building Ordinance on second reading, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

ORDINANCE NO. 04-_______
PORTER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
UNSAFE BUILDING ORDINANCE
________________________________________________________________________
WHEREAS, the Porter County Board of Commissioners has deemed it necessary that an ordinance adopting the unsafe building law be passed in Porter County, Indiana, providing for the inspection, repair or removal of unsafe buildings or structures which may, from any cause, endanger the life, limb, health, morals, property, safety or welfare of the general public; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to IC 36-7-9, the Porter County Board of Commissioners hereby establish a Porter County Unsafe Building Law; and
WHEREAS, in order to achieve the above stated goals, the Board of Commissioners has deemed it to be in the furtherance of the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of Porter County to adopt Ordinance No. 04-____, an Ordinance Adopting the Unsafe Building Law; and
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 hereby pass for inclusion in that Code, Chapter 8.36 entitled Unsafe Building Ordinance.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT AND IT IS HEREBY ORDAINED THAT:
Title 8, Chapter 8.36 (Unsafe Building Law) is added to the Porter County Municipal Code to read as follows:
A. 8.36.010 Title and Scope
Section 8.367.010 (Title and Scope) is added to the Porter County Municipal Code to read as follows:

In accordance with Indiana Code (IC) 36-7-9-1, et seq., this chapter is established and shall be known as the Unsafe Building Law of Porter County, Indiana. The regulations of this chapter apply throughout the unincorporated areas of Porter County, Indiana. (Porter County).

B. 8.36.020 Adoption by Reference
Section 8.36.020 (Adoption by Reference) is added to the Porter County Municipal Code to read as follows:

I.C. 36-7-9-1 through 36-7-9-28 (collectively “State Code”) is hereby incorporated by reference as the Unsafe Building Law of Porter County, Indiana. All proceedings within Porter County, for the inspection, repair and removal of unsafe buildings shall be governed by the State Code and by the provisions of this chapter. In the event the provisions of this chapter conflict with the State Code, then the provisions of the State Code shall control. The building standards and rules of the Indiana Fire Prevention and Building Safety Commission, as set forth in the Indiana Code and in the Indiana Administrative Code, are adopted as the building standards and rules for matters considered under this chapter.

C. 8.36.030 Administration
Section 8.36.030 (Administration) is added to the Porter County Municipal Code to read as follows:

The Porter County Building Commissioner, or his duly designated representative, such as the Code Enforcement Officer from the Plan Commission, is authorized to administer the Porter County Unsafe Building Law and to order the repair or removal of unsafe buildings and structures in accordance with the procedures set forth or incorporated in this chapter.

D. 8.36.040 Public Nuisance
Section 8.36.040 (Public Nuisance) is added to the Porter County Municipal Code to read as follows:

All buildings, structures or portions thereof which are determined after inspection by the enforcement authority to be unsafe, as defined in this ordinance, are hereby declared to be a public nuisance and shall be abated by repair, rehabilitation, demolition or removal.

E. 8.36.050 Definitions
Section 8.36.050 (Definitions) is added to the Porter County Municipal Code to read as follows:

As used in this chapter, the following terms shall have the following meanings unless clearly contrary to the context:

“Community organization” means a citizen’s group, neighborhood association, neighborhood development corporation, or similar organization that:

1.) has specific geographic boundaries defined in its bylaws or articles of incorporation and contains at least forty (40) households within those boundaries;
2.) is a nonprofit corporation that is representative of at least twenty-five (25) households or twenty percent (20%) of the households in the community, whichever is less;
3.) is operated primarily for the promotion of social welfare and general neighborhood improvement and enhancement;
4.) has been incorporated for at least two (2) years; and
5.) is exempt from taxation under Section 501(c)(3) or 501(c)(4) [FN1] of the Internal Revenue Code.

“Department” means the Porter County Building Department.
“Enforcement Authority” means the Porter County Building Commissioner, Code Enforcement Officer of the Plan Commission, or other appointed designee of the Building Commissioner.
“Hearing Authority” refers to a person or persons designated as such by the executive of the county.
“Sealing a Building or Structure” means padlocking the entries to the building or structure and posting the building or structure with a notice that forbids entry to the building or structure and securing all other entry points to the building or structure from entry as prescribed by the enforcement authority.
“Substantial Property Interest” means any right in the real property that may be affected in a substantial way by actions authorized by this chapter, including a fee interest, a future interest, a present possessory interest, or an equitable interest of a contract purchaser. In a consolidated city, the interest reflected by a deed, lease, license mortgage, land sale contract, or lien is not a substantial property interest unless the deed, lease, license, mortgage, land sale contract, lien or evidence of it is:

1. recorded in the office of the county recorder; or
2. the subject of a written information that is received by the division of development services and includes the name and address of the holder of the interest described.

“Unsafe Building or Structure” means any building or structure, or any part of a building or structure that is:

(1) in an impaired structural condition that makes it unsafe to a person or property;
(2) a fire hazard;
(3) a hazard to the public health;
(4) a public nuisance;
(5) dangerous to a person or property because of a violation of a statute or ordinance concerning building condition or maintenance; or
(6) vacant and not maintained in a manner that would allow human habitation, occupancy, or use under the requirements of a statute or an ordinance.

“Unsafe Premises” means an unsafe building or structure and the tract of real property on which the unsafe building or structure is located.

F. 8.36.060 Order and Notice
Section 8.36.060 (Order and Notice) is added to the Porter County Municipal Code to read as follows:

(A) The enforcement authority is authorized to issue an order requiring any remedies described in IC 36-7-9-5 and containing the information and time limit required by IC 36-7-9-5.
(B) An order that requires sealing a building under IC 36-7-9-5(a) requires notification to each person holding any fee interest or life interest. For other orders issued under IC 36-7-9-5, each person having a substantial property interest in the unsafe premises must be notified.
(C) Notification under this section must be made in accordance with IC 36-7-9-25.

G. 8.36.070 Hearing and Review
Section 8.36.070 (Hearing and Review) is added to the Porter County Municipal Code to read as follows:

The Porter County Board of Commissioners shall annually designate a person or persons to serve as the Hearing Authority for the purposes of conducting hearings in accordance with IC 36-7-9-7.
The Hearing Authority shall meet once a month as required and shall be comprised of one Hearing Officer.
The Hearing Authority shall create reasonable rules of procedure for holding a hearing as required by the Unsafe Building Ordinance.
The Porter County Board of Commissioners shall, at a public hearing, after having given notice of the time and place of the hearing by publication in accordance with IC 5-3-1, adopt a schedule setting forth the maximum amount of performance bonds applicable to the various types of ordered action and the Hearing Authority shall use this schedule to fix the amount of the performance bond required under and pursuant to IC 36-7-9-7(e).
Hearing and review are provided as set forth in IC 36-7-9-7 and IC 36-7-9-8.
A hearing is not required to carry out an order to seal a building. However, a previously issued order to seal may be modified or rescinded only if the persons previously notified have been notified of the change or rescission by means of a written statement in the manner prescribed by IC 36-7-9-6. The order to seal does not become final until ten (10) days from issuance within which time a fee interest or life estate holder may, in writing, request a hearing.
An action taken under Section IC 36-7-9-7(d) is subject to review by the circuit court or superior court pursuant to IC 36-7-9-8.

H. 8.36.080 Emergency Orders
Section 8.36.080 (Emergency Orders) is added to the Porter County Municipal Code to read as follows:

Emergency action in order to protect life, safety or property may be taken without issuing an order or giving notice, but shall be taken in accordance with IC 36-7-9-9. The action is limited to the abatement of any immediate danger. The County may recover the costs of the action by filing suit in the Porter County Circuit Court against any persons then holding the fee interest or a life estate in the unsafe premises. Alternatively, the enforcement authority may bring a civil action under IC 36-7-9-17 and IC 36-7-9-22, alleging the existence of unsafe premises which present an immediate danger to the community sufficient to warrant emergency action. In such case there shall be a hearing within ten (10) days on the complaint.

I. 8.36.090 Manner of Performance
Section 8.36.090 (Manner of Performance) is added to the Porter County Municipal Code to read as follows:

The manner of performance of work, including bids and notifications, must be in accordance with IC 36-7-9-11.

J. 8.36.100 Liability for costs for performance of work required by order
Section 8.36.100 (Costs) is added to the Porter County Municipal Code to read as follows:

When action required by an order is performed by the enforcement authority or by a contractor acting under Section 11 of IC 36-7-9, each person who held a fee interest, life estate interest, or equitable interest of a contract purchaser in the unsafe premises from the time when the order requiring the work performed was recorded to the time that the work was completed is jointly and severely responsible for the costs set forth at IC 36-7-9-12(a)(1) and (2).
Costs shall be determined on the basis of the factors listed in IC 36-7-9-12.
If all or any part of the costs listed in IC 36-7-9-12 remain unpaid for any unsafe premises for the time period set forth at IC 36-7-9-13 the Enforcement Authority shall proceed pursuant to IC 36-7-9-13 and IC 36-7-9-13.5.

K. 8.36.110 Unsafe Building Fund
Section 8.36.110 (Unsafe Building Fund) is added to the Porter County Municipal Code to read as follows:

An unsafe building fund is hereby established in the operating budget of the County in accordance with the provisions of IC 36-7-9-14.

L. 8.36.120 Standard of Work
Section 8.36.120 (Standard of Work) is added to the Porter County Municipal Code to read as follows:

All work for reconstruction, alteration, repair or demolition shall be performed in a good, workmanlike manner according to the accepted standards and practices in the trade. The provisions of the building laws, as defined in IC 22-12-1-3, adopted as rules of the Fire Prevention and Building Safety Commission (675 IAC), including 675 Indiana Administrative Code Section 12-4-9 and 675 Indiana Administrative Code Section 12-4-11(a), shall be considered standard and acceptable practice for all matters covered by this chapter or orders issued pursuant to this chapter by the Building Commissioner of Porter County, Indiana, or his designee.

M. 8.36.130 Inspection Warrants
Section 8.36.130 (Inspection Warrants) is added to the Porter County Municipal Code to read as follows:

The enforcement authority may obtain an inspection warrant from the Court in cases when the owner or possessor refuse the authority permission to inspect as provided in IC 36-7-9-16.
N. 8.36.140 Enforcement
Section 8.36.140 (Enforcement) is added to the Porter County Municipal Code to read as follows:

The department, acting through its enforcement authority, a person designated by the enforcement authority, or a community organization may bring a civil action regarding unsafe premises in the circuit, superior, or municipal court of the county. The department is not liable for the costs of such an action. The court may grant one (1) or more of the kinds of relief authorized by sections 18 through 22 of IC 36-7-9, et seq.

O. 8.36.150 Violations
Section 8.36.150 (Violations) is added to the Porter County Municipal Code to read as follows:

It shall be a violation of this chapter for a person who:
1.) remains in, uses or enters a building in violation of this chapter;
2.) knowingly interferes with or delays the carrying out of an order made under this chapter;
3.) knowingly obstructs, damages or interferes with persons engaged or property used in performing any work or duty under this chapter, or
4.) fails to comply with section 27 of IC 36-7-9 et seq.
commits a Class C infraction. Each day that the violation continues constitutes a separate offense.

P. 8.36.160 Separability
Section 8.36.160 (Separability) is added to the Porter County Municipal Code to read as follows:

Should any section, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this chapter be declared unconstitutional or invalid, for any reason, the remainder of the chapter shall not be affected thereby.

Q. 8.36.170 Effective Date
Section 8.36.170 (Effective Date) is added to the Porter County Municipal Code to read as follows:

This code shall go into effect on March 15, 2005.

This ordinance is adopted this ____ day of ________________, 2005 and

shall take effect on March 15, 2005.

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
PORTER COUNTY, INDIANA

S/Robert P. Harper
S/John A. Evans
S/Carole M. Knoblock
attest:s/Sandra K. Vuko, Auditor

ORDINANCE FOR VACATION OF GARDEN TERRACE—ORDINANCE NO. 05-02, 2ND READING

Com. Harper, “Is there anyone here on this? This is the second reading. We had already discussed this at our last meeting. This is the one the neighbors had all worked out and everybody is in agreement.”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “Everybody is in agreement, we have written commitments attached and it should be approved on second reading.”

Com. Knoblock moved to approve Ordinance No. 05-02, Vacation of Garden Terrace, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

OFFICE HOLDERS/DEPARTMENT HEADS

Replacement of 4H Exhibit Building Roofs
Lonnie Steele, Expo Center Manager

Mr. Steele, “We had some wind damage to the roof, if you recall reading the memo and that occurred on October 30th, requiring us to do a major replacement of a good portion of that roof in lieu of replacing just a portion of the roof, the roof being now 18 years of age, a shingle roof, I am recommending that we accept a gift so to speak from the Porter County Ag Society to roof that building with a steel roof as I described in my memo to you. It will match the other roofs that we have replaced out there in recent years. That replacement roof would include cupolas that would match the décor of all of our buildings. The Ag Society recognizes that the 4H Program uses this particular building a great deal and would like to offer to pay the balance of the cost of that roof. They are requesting that the amount of $3,800.00 that the Commissioners received on the claim for the damage on that roof be applied to the cost of that roof. They will pay for the rest of that. As you consider this, I would suggest that the Ag Society is also interested in roofing it by memo indicated to you, the rabbit and poultry building down near the grandstand. The age of the roof is comparable to the roof on the 4H Building. It has some damage, not to the extent that we absolutely have to roof it, but we can save some money if we do both roofs at the same time. So I am requesting that we accept the gift from the Ag Society and re-roof those buildings and save further damage to the 4H Exhibit Building that is experiencing some leakage right now.”

Com. Harper, “Number one, the first thing we have to deal with is the check. That check was given by the insurance company for damage on several buildings, but you are going to use in on one building.”

Mr. Steele, “The adjuster allowed that we use it for that one building.”

Com. Harper, “And the amount of that check was $3,878.00. But it was made out to the county and you are asking that we refund it to your department to apply to that job. Who do you ask for that?”

Mr. Steele, “I would like for it to be made out to the company that is actually doing the roofing, but it certainly could go through our funds if you would like us to do that. I would prefer it go directly to the roofing company, but either way, it can certainly go through that.”

Com. Harper, “Then the Ag Society was to completely pave and re-roof the building and somehow you feel that you need our approval to do that.”

Mr. Steele, “I believe the building belongs to the Porter County Government. That is the reason I am asking.”

Com. Harper, “Can you tell me the designation of those two buildings?”

Mr. Steele, “The 4H Exhibit Building would be one of the buildings, the other one would be the rabbit/poultry building.”

Com. Harper, “Now can somebody tell me what we do about that check?”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “It may be easier for them to just re-issue that check.”

Mr. Steele, “I encouraged them to consider that possibility, I asked Anton about that.”

Com. Knoblock moved to turn over the $3,878.00 insurance check to the Expo Center funds and further ask that we approve the Ag Society go ahead and re-roof the rabbit building, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Mr. Steele, “Just another consideration that has to do with the roof going on this building. If we put it on under the current configuration of the 4H Building, it would necessitate putting three holes in the roof for vents from the heaters that are in there. If you recall, my memo is indicating that the Ag Society is also proposing to add central air and heat to that 4H Exhibit Building. I am not sure if I am prepared today to give you all the information that would be necessary for you to make a decision on that, but if I could have tentative approval to move forward in doing that. What I am suggesting is that if we put that roof on and it is likely going to be put on before the end of January, then we would like to go ahead and pursue the central air and heat for that building, paid for completely by the Ag Society.”

Com. Harper, “Can we hold off and you come back in two weeks and you have it exactly down. I think you are going to find that there is not going to be any opposition from the Commissioners on the Ag Society doing these improvements. Lets get it all done at once. No sense in doing it piece meal at this meeting and the next meeting.”

Mr. Steele, “If you are comfortable with approving it, the Ag Society has certainly agreed they have the funding to do it and they want to improve that 4H Building, and central air and heat is high on their list, they will pay for it.”

Com. Harper, “Who will pay for the utilities?”

Mr. Steele, “During the Fair, it would be the Ag Society, during the other eleven months, it would be the Expo Center. The Expo Center is going to reap benefits from the rental of that facility that will help pay for those utilities with the central air and the heat. It will be much more rentable that it is today. I think it is going to pay for itself where the utilities are concerned.”

Com. Harper, “I think you should come back, it is getting this involved, I think you should come back in a couple weeks and we have an idea of what we are committing the county to and if you think it is going to make money for the county. And if the Expo is going to be able to cover it out of their budget. I think we should get hits all set up and come back and decide this.”

Mr. Steele, “I don’t disagree with you. However, I would suggest the insulation that is part of this as well as the heat and the central air is quite likely going to cause the utilities to be less than they are right now. And the Expo Center is paying the utilities right now. The reason I am kind of pushing on the roof is we have damage to that roof, . . .”

Com. Harper, “Are you just asking for the approval on the roof?”

Mr. Steele, “Yes. Lets just go with the roof and we will come back in two weeks with more of idea we could alter the configuration of the roof.”

Com. Knoblock moved to approve the replacement of the roof, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Maximus Contract
Sandra Vuko, County Auditor

Ms. Vuko, “Basically this is done every year. Comes through your office, you pay for this. Estimated cost for coverage from the state and welfare. They come in and make sure we are getting full reimbursement for this. Then they bill the state themselves. Basically it is done every year since I have been here. I really don’t understand it, they’ve been coming in and doing it and it saves us money. Whatever saves us money and we get more money in return.”

Com. Harper, “They come in and do what?”

Ms. Vuko, “They come in and go through the claims.”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “The claims submitted to the county that are paid out by the state to make sure we are getting all the reimbursements from the state that we should get for claims. They follow up on the claim submission to the state to make sure we are getting all our reimbursement and then take a portion of it.”

Ms. Vuko, “So it doesn’t really cost us anything and we get a portion of it.”

Com. Harper, “Let me ask the county attorney. You have gone over this and tell me a little bit about it, you have approved this contract?”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “It’s a contract that is approved on an annual basis for Maximus to come in and perform services for $15,750.00. They come in make sure the claims that are submitted to the county that go through the state are reimbursed and get all the money back from the state that we should get from claims submitted for certain issues.”

Com Knoblock, “How many years have they been doing that?”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “Twelve years. What they are doing is performing a service for us that we do not have the capability of performing our self which is the case many times when we retain people to come in like the Assessors do to perform services that we don’t either have the personnel or the expertise to perform and follow up on. They end up recovering more money for us than we pay out for the service.”

Com. Knoblock moved to approve the contract, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Office supply bids discussion

Ms. Vuko, “I don’t know if you wanted to make a decision, but I would like to not bid the office supplies out this year and see what happens.”

Com. Harper, “This is something Commissioner Evans has worked on and he has asked us to wait two weeks until he is here.”

Ms. Vuko, “That is fine. We are going to have to get started on it.”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “Have you had conversations with Commissioner Evans how he would implement the guidelines? And that we would not bid it but the department would purchase it on their own?”

Ms. Vuko, “No.”

Atty. Rinkenberger “That is what we are going to have to have before the next meeting, some type of directive or policy from this office as to how we are going to proceed.”

Chemical Dependency and Addictions Program Agreement
David Reynolds, Sheriff

Com. Harper, “Let me bring everybody up to date on what happened last time. Last time we were here, we weren’t sure if this figure was $7,687 a month or $5,000 a month. Further we were working under the information that the people from Porter Starke were there at the jail 24 hours a week total. One person. So we questioned that amount and that is where we are at today.”

Sheriff, “First of all I would like to apologize because two weeks ago I was supposed to be here and we had that situation with the missing lady in Lakes of the Four Seasons and I had to go down there for that family. In fact, during the time of your meeting was when we located her so I was not able to get here, that is why I missed it and Dave Lain was here, and he did not have the information I had. The agreement that we worked out Mr. Shirelli, so I should have just waited for two weeks until I could get here. He didn’t know the figures of what we had agreed on. I brought Rocky here, we have a packet for you, too with information that verifies the hours that are put in by a therapist at the jail and also the amount of inmates they have actually treated over the last several years. They put together a recidivism rate. Which is up 67% and the figures aren’t as good as what we have and we only work with them for the last three years. They have actually come up and the people who have gone through this program, the recidivism is 24%, which means 24% of the people that have got out have come back. So, that is pretty remarkable. I think, as you know in your profession, the seriousness of drug abuse across the country, and in our jails. We’ve got a pre-test of all the inmates after they are booked. Questions on their drug abuse and for males it is 98% who have substance abuse problems. The females is around 77%, I think that is pretty low, I think it is higher but that is what they have here. So the need is there. I think the program has been effective. Rocky is here to address your concerns as far as the hours these people put in.”

Rocky, “Yes, we were unaware of the last meeting so we are here today to clarify anything. We have two full time staff at the Porter County Jail and they work full time for the Porter County Jail. I have a list I gave to the Sheriff a week or so ago in terms of itemizing their time. Now they are not in the actual jail the entire time, they do a lot of the paperwork out of the jail and Porter Starke is accredited by Carr and we have a lot of requirements for the clinical staff in terms of in-services, staffing with the physician, and team staffing. So we also do a lot of the clinical work and a lot of the follow up and statistical work outside the jail. But it is two full time staff and to give you a brief history. Up until 2001, we had one full time staff member at the Porter County Jail and that position was funded through a grant by the Indiana Criminal Justice Institute, a four year grant that expired in 2001. So since 2001, we have been with, along the Sheriff’s Department, been splitting the cost of the program and we are at the point now up until this point Porter Starke was funding one of the physicians and the Sheriff was funding the other through the mechanism of charging the inmates. What we initially requested was could both physicians be funded, just because that was our cost just for the staff and benefits. The Sheriff felt that a more appropriate arrangement would be to not fund both positions but to increase the amount of funding that we receive. So that is basically where we are.”

Com. Harper, “You are saying Porter Starke is paying the salary of two people whose duties are nothing else but to run the intensive out patient, to run that program at the jail whether they are actually there running the program. Do they have individual meetings with these people in these groups?”

Rocky, “Individual meetings, group meetings, all of the inmates are tested with a pre and post test; also we purchase a sassy, which is a much more sophisticated clinical test that we use that has met all the tests for that of which is rather expensive to administer as well as to purchase the cost of the test because its _____. Costs like that we haven’t even requested to be reimbursed for either.”

Com. Harper, “This money, if we approve this contract, this money comes from your booking fee and we pay about for the 1 ½ to 2, is that about right?”

Com. Knoblock, “If the funds aren’t there, (inaudible)?”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “There is a clause in the contract that permits the county to cancel the policy without penalty if something occurs with funding.”

Com. Harper, “The reason it was continued was because we didn’t understand exactly what we were paying for.”

Com. Knoblock moved to approve the contract, Com Harper seconded,

Atty. Rinkenberger, “I just wanted to make sure in our motion that since there was a sum scratched out in my copy, that we showed payment is monthly. And that would be $5,000.00 per month.”

Motion carried.

REQUEST TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS FOR MOBILE CYLINDER AIR STATION AND LIGHT SYSTEM
Phil Griffith, EMA Director

Com. Harper, “You were on the agenda last time and it was put over to this time because we had some questions about how this unit was going to be insured and stored. You have provided us with a letter since that last meeting.”

Mr. Griffith, “The city of Portage has agreed to take complete ownership of it and provide us and the other agencies with an accounting should that become necessary. So we will simply through the Homeland Security Agreement, buy the trailer, turn it over to Portage, and they will own it, title it, license it, do whatever, and will become their piece of equipment but it must be made available to every agency in Porter County.”
Com. Harper, “So this is being paid for entirely by this federal grant?”

Mr. Griffith, “That is correct.”

Com. Harper, “Portage also has a training facility with a fire trailer, or burn trailer and so forth?”

Mr. Griffith, “They do have a burn trailer, they got that through a fire grant through FEMA and they can train for structure fires and support firefighters.”

Com. Harper, “Is that open to other fire departments in the county?”

Mr. Griffith, “Yes it is. Since is was from a grant it has to be made available.”

Com. Harper, “So, we have a training facility in Porter County for the fire departments.”

Mr. Griffith, “To some degree, yes. The biggest problem would be getting your staff and personnel over there to utilize it; getting Portage to pay their staff to stay over and train. So we have the facility, we just really don’t have the training funds at this stage of the game to make it an all out full time training facility. Yes, they do train other departments.”

Com. Harper, “They receive that physical plant, somewhat through federal grants, correct? And so one of the requirements is that they make it open to other fire departments. Are you telling me they don’t do that?”

Mr. Griffith, “No. That is not what I am saying. It is a tough thing for I’ll use the city of Valparaiso for an example. For them to send all of their staff over there, they would end up paying overtime so it is hard on the local departments to send . . . “

Com. Harper, “It would seem to me that one training center would be enough.”

Mr. Griffith, “Absolutely, we are just working on some of the grants and figuring out how to pay for all the training. It is made available.”

Com. Harper “We don’t need another facility, what we need is the money to get people over there to train, is that what you are saying?”

Mr. Griffith, “Yes. The training facility they have as far as the ______ is _____.”

Com. Harper, “I think the mayor of Portage has made a plan to have this open to other departments.”

Mr. Griffith, “Yes.”

Com. Harper, “I appreciate the fact, because the county is paying a lot of insurance on vehicles and everything else that you worked this out and all the departments are going to have use of this piece of equipment, that one governmental unit is going to pay for it and also they have a place to store it. How big is this?”

Mr. Griffith, “I think it is a 23 foot trailer. It will cost about $67,000.00.”

Com. Knoblock moved to approve the request to advertise for bids for the mobile air breathing system, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Mr. Griffith, “I would like to come back next time and actually put out a bid for early warning sirens. I have submitted information to you, and would be happy to meet with you on that. That is all through federal grants and we have about $300,000.00 to put sirens through Porter County where there are none. No additional cost to us. The agreement, will go out to all the agencies that get a siren such as Portage, Portage Township, Westchester Township, Washington Township. They will all become the owner once we get the bid in for a the 22 sirens; they will become the owners.”

Tower Site Sublease Agreement update
David Sheibels, E-911 Director

Mr. Sheibels, “I will start with an update of the National Weather Radio Tower system. Last month I was here and you approved the Intergovernmental Agreement which went out to the Center Twp. Trustee office and the Porter Twp. Trustee office and then about a week later I got a request from the Porter Twp. Trustee to send the agreement to the Boone Twp. Trustee which we did. I have not spoke with Melissa today but she informed me yesterday we had one reply back from the Porter Twp trustee office committing $10,000.00 to the project. Unless she has heard today from the other two, they are still pending. I don’t know what communication Com. Evans has had. I also presented a copy of the Vertical Real Estate Tower site sublease agreement with the inter-government agreement just to introduce it to you. Gwenn and I had looked it over as a basic tower and sublease agreement. What I was trying to do last month was make a recommendation that we not execute the agreement contract with Vertical Real Estate until we get all our funding in place, get equipment ordered, and we get at time table for installation there is no sense paying for a tower lease when we are not using it. We could approve the agreement collectively with the Commissioners and then in the approval process just say when I feel that we are getting ready to execute the installation of the equipment will become fully funded in those issues then I will come back and simply have you sign it and we can execute it at that moment in time if you want to do it that way. Otherwise we can just sit on the agreement, just execute it until we are ready to make that milestone.”

Com. Knoblock, “Do we have to notify the neighbors for this within so many feet?”

Mr. Sheibels, “That is an excellent idea. I am sure that the coordination with the Commissioners and the Porter Township Trustee who is leading the way with this, will issue a decent press release and some information to let everybody know this system is available. I think we have already talked about that in the operational side so that for people’s goals and businesses can go out and buy the necessary receiver equipment from many places.”

Com. Harper, “So this is just a report of what is going on and I think Commissioner Evans wanted to make sure this project was going along.”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “My question was how much money do you anticipate being committed by the different organizations total?”

Mr. Sheibels, “That I am not sure. Commissioner Evans has a lot of that information. I have not talked with the Boone Township or Center Township trustee, I believe he was talking to those offices.”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “My thought was whatever the balances, this board is going to have to determine where that funding is coming from before we can find a ________? That would be ___ for us once we get the total amount that will be funded by the other municipalities. We are going to have to come up with a $25,000 or $35,000 lump sum from one of our funds to proceed with the project until we determine where that money comes from.”

Com. Harper, “And also, I think we are going to have look this over and decide if you are going to sign it in advance or wait until you are ready.”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “I think we should wait.”

Com. Knoblock, “Don’t you have to have a permit for something like this?”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “The tower is already up and what they are going to do is put some equipment on it.”

Mr. Sheibels, “Correct. And for Commissioner Knoblock’s benefit, the total cost of the project is estimated to be $46,000.00. That is basically all equipment, a price quote from the National Weather Service. IREC is the name of the company from Elkhart, Indiana. That includes the installation cost also. That is the dollar amount that we are trying to put together.”

Com. Harper, “That is where that $10,000.00 from Porter Township will be applied to. If there is no objection we will set this for 2 weeks or 4 weeks?”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “When we get the commitments from the other two trustees then we will be able to know how much money we need to commit and start proceeding with obtaining that money.”

Com. Harper, “Okay. So we’ll put it on the agenda for two weeks from now.”

Mr. Sheibels, “And I would like to invite Commissioner Knoblock to come by our facility when she gets a chance and meet our staff and take a look at our operations. We would be happy to walk you through the operations. I do have one quick announcement if I may. This is just for your information. This is an important milestone that President Bush signed, an enhanced 911 Act of 2004. Basically what this is going to do for 911 systems across the country is help fund enhancements to location technology for wireless 911 calls. There will be an agency set up through the new legislation program office which means we may be eligible for some grant money in the next few years due to the signing of this piece of legislation by Pres. Bush. So I just wanted to bring this to your attention at this time.”

Com. Harper, “Do you have any more information on how the legislation is going down state on the 911 funds?”

Mr. Sheibels, “I understand that through the Indiana Chapter of International Emergency Number Association that there will be some additionally sponsored bills along the lines of last year’s house bill 1304 that died in the summer sub committee. I had not seen the draft of those yet but I will get them to you.”

COMMISSIONERS REPORTS FROM HIGHWAY

Com. Harper, “We really don’t have anything from the North District except the update on the sidewalk project. Why don’t we do that in two weeks, since that is Commissioners Evans’ district.”

South District:

1. Agreement between Porter County – Beam Longest & Neff, LLC for the Rehabilitation of Porter County Bridge No. 58, CR 50 West over Kankakee River. This is for $28,000.00 for Preliminary Design.

2. Boone Minor Subdivision #1354-C-1 Road Agreement, located on the east side of CR 200 West between SR 8 and CR 750 South. Offer to contribute $750.00/lot for a total of $3,000.00. Owner & subdivider is Marty Good, Trustee.

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

3. Morgan Minor Subdivision #2246-D-1 Road Agreement, located on the north side of CR 400 South between SR 49 and CR 300 East. Offer to contribute $750.00/lot for a total of $3,000.00. Owner & subdivider is Marty Good, Trustee.

Com. Knoblock moved to approve, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.
4. Morgan Minor Subdivision #2544-D-1 Road Agreement, located on the north side of CR 300 South between CR 300 East and CR 500 East. Offer to contribute $750.00/lot for a total of $3,000.00. Owner & subdivider is Marty Good, Trustee.

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

Mr. Schelling, “I have Fred Laramore from Beam Longest and Neff. This is for Bridge 58 over the Kankakee River. We received approval for several monies to rehabilitate this bridge and this is the first step. We had to advertise for proposals and then, . . .”

Com. Harper, “Well, Commissioner Knoblock hasn’t been at the prior meetings when this went on so would you bring her up to date?”

Mr. Schelling, “Last fall we advertised for proposals from consulting engineers for this work for designing improvements. We had 17 proposals from different firms and Beam Longest and Neff LLC was selected as the consultant to do this work for the county. This is a bridge over the Kankakee River that has some issues not only with the deck, but with the railing but primarily the stower in the waterway, should have been _____ probably 20 years ago and it needs more attention. We were able to secure federal monies for this. I have taken from the top of my head, I think a little in excess of $200,000.00. We have an agreement with the consultant to design the work that needs to be done. This is kind of an involved project that we do need to have a field rep with INDOT. INDOT administers the federal money and in conjunction with that we might want to try to obtain additional monies for this. We have to have a bridge inspection in conjunction with this work done and this is the first phase of the design.”

Com. Knoblock, “Does Jasper County have anything to do with this?”

Mr. Schelling, “No, but I think once we get things established I will be contacting them to help share in the cost. We did that on Bridge 62 over near Ramsey’s Landing probably 8 to 10 years ago and they were very cooperative. I will be contacting Jasper County about this but I have not yet.”

Com. Harper, “How much of this is going to be federal money and how much of your budget?”

Mr. Schelling, “I believe the federal money would be $212,000.00 and that would represent 80% of the construction of this rehabilitation of the bridge. We would be paying 100% of the design costs which is pretty typical. This part of the design cost agreement that we have is around $28,000.00. That is not going to cover the entire design of the bridge, I would estimate it to be $75-80,000.00 more, we don’t know that yet because we don’t know the entire scope of the work.”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “This document indicates the funds are available for service so you are saying this contract is for approximately $28,000.00?”

Mr. Schelling, “Yes, we have monies allocated in the bridge funding for this bridge. I am not sure what the dollar amount is but it is probably at least $150,000.00 if not more.”

Com. Knoblock moved to approve the firm of Beam Longest and Neff for work on this bridge, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Mr. Schelling, “I do want to point out that this agreement states that they may receive their signed agreement it is also the notice to proceed. Normally, I write a letter notifying the consultant to get started. Which is fine.”

Gottlieb and Wertz Agreement/License/Escrow Agreement
Judge Mary R. Harper

Judge Harper, “We are in the process at the juvenile system of acquiring a case management software that will keep us apprized of what we have now. It will also allow public defender access; the office of Family and Children access. This basically provides case management software now for 70 to 75% of the juvenile case in the state of Indiana. Its ____ system an we just wanted to ask your approval. We have a license agreement and sample contract and a source ____ escrow agreement which has been very helpful in looking at as well as Sharon Lippens has looked at for us. We needed her expertise.”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “Our concern in this type of agreement is whether or not the software works, usually there is a clause in the contract to say there is no warranty and there is no way for us to get around it. I talked with Sharon, and this system is being used statewide successfully so we are aware that the software works. So, in contract terms that is the only term I am concerned with. There is a maintenance clause, that is another concern that we have to address with our computers, we have a maintenance program that is determined here that Sharon indicates is a reasonable fee for maintenance of software. The license agreement is boilerplate. The funding, I am assuming is, . . . “

Judge Harper, “We are being deliberate in our approach for software so we are in the process of acquiring licenses and as funding allows we will add on components of the system and as we are able to acquire funding, we are able to do that including a couple of grants requested. Anything we can do to keep it out of the general fund we are trying to do.”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “If we approve this contract, if you look on the page that says licensee, it says the county shall pay a one time fixed fee of $1,000.00 per concurrence ________ be licensed? And then the county shall pay a fee of blank for the work to be performed under section 2. there are some blanks for the fee amount, do we know the total amount?”

Judge Harper, “We have the approximate amount and they have agreed to bill us and allow us to spread it out over three years so we can accommodate in our department’s budget.”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “So you think the initial fee to begin this would be $28,000.”

Judge Harper, “We did a bunch of transfers and encumbered.”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “So you have $28,000.00 and if we approve this contract you can pay for it. Then you are saying anything that you would follow up on you would need additional money.”

Judge Harper, “From our budget at this point will grant funding and they will spread it out over the three years. So probably our estimate of the annual cost spread out over three years might be $10-$12,000.00. Which we can accommodate. The good thing we are doing with this is it is juvenile system wide so we have a _____ on it, we have probation on it, we have the public defender fund, we have the OFC on it and within our court budgets we will have the money to pay them. Add ons that we are hoping to acquire are a scanner, we have a DOC corrected ___ and I think that is just being a responsive department head to look for any add ons.”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “This is for three years? Does that incorporate ___?”

Judge Harper, “That is not in the licensing. Because what we are doing right now is the license. Here’s what we are buying. We are buying the ______ license, now any additional purchases will (inaudible).”

Com. Harper, “Are you asking this contract be approved today? And the funding is coming from your department.?”

Judge Harper, “Yes. We already have the $28,000.00.”

Com. Knoblock moved to approve the agreement, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Com. Knoblock moved to approve the license and escrow agreement, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

CORRESPONDENCE

Treasurers monthly report for November 2004 is on file.
Weights and Measures monthly report for December 2004 is on file.
Building Dept. monthly report for November 2004 is on file.
Court Security Activity Report for November 2004 is on file.
Veteran Service Officer monthly report for December 2004 is on file.

Waste Transfer Station, Pine Township report
Al Hoagland, Highway Superintendent
Dave Schelling, Highway Engineer

Com. Harper, “There is a request and zoning issue in LaPorte County on a waste transfer station on County Line Road on the LaPorte County side in an area that is somewhat residential on the Porter County side. It has been approved by the LaPorte County Commissioners and is now going downstate in front of IDEM and it is going to impact this county in more ways than one because it is in an area that is not residential in their county but borders on a residential area in our county. Also, on a road that we are responsible for so I have asked the Highway Department to bring us up to date on where we are on that.”

Mr. Schelling, “First I will give you a couple maps. This site is located on the LaPorte County side of County Line Road. As you know, we maintain at the east and south border and so basically we have to get a _____ before _______. The site is a wooded site. This is between US 20 and US 12, that first half mile north of US 20 is under jurisdiction, north of that is the Pines’ jurisdiction. There is two sets of railroad tracks at that location. There is CSX which is north of US 20 and farther north which is about a half mile north of 20 is Amtrak. We maintain up to Amtrak. This JAYCO Recycling, also known as Great Lakes Transfer, Shawn Bline is the owner of the company and he is the one that has contacted LaPorte County about getting permission for a waste transfer site at that location. This is just south of the Amtrak tracks in a wooded area. I am not sure how many acres he has, I don’t have any information as to their layout of this site or anything else. I do have some photographs that I took yesterday, there’s some of the county road plus some of the surrounding area.”

Com. Knoblock, “We drove up there Sunday and it is completely wetlands up there where they are going to put this. I don’t know how they could possible put anything in there. The road doesn’t have anything underneath it to hold all that traffic.”

Mr. Schelling, “That’s correct. There is _____ soils which is very severe for frost action and its low spring. Theoretically, they could beef up the road to handle the traffic during normal periods but as we know in the spring, or late winter, many times we put frost law in effect, and that would shut them down.”

Com. Harper, “This almost looks like it is under water.”

Mr. Schelling, “The water table is really high.”

Com. Harper, “Is there residential near this on our side?”

Mr. Schelling, “On one of the photos I took there is a house pretty much directly west of the site. One of the photos shows a drive towards the east, that is actually for a cell tower that is going to go up in that location and I understand this location is just north of that.”

Com. Harper, “Well, I am looking at this aerial photo you gave us and what is in the area where the Amtrak crosses County Line Road, what is that area in the northwest corner?”

Mr. Schelling, “There are several houses in that area. There is a house south of this kind of in the wooded area. It is part of the Pines.”

Com. Harper, “So they really put this transfer station right up to a residential area.”

Com. Knoblock, “This is going to be way back off the road and they really are going to dump garbage there and they are telling the people there won’t be any smell or no dust. They said if there is, they are going to keep it watered down and then they’ll come and wash the houses. I am not concerned so much about that, I am concerned about the Pines people. They have had a lot of problems up there with the water, and where is the water going to go?”

Com. Harper, “Where is that church located? How far is it?”

Mr. Schelling, “About a half mile.”

Com. Harper, “Well, what is happening, the people in Pine Township are adamant, even though this doesn’t come in front of our Plan Commission, are asking for our help and we want to help them. Com. Knoblock is keeping track of that IDEM, but what can we do, apparently we have a highway, if they get this in we are going to have to take care of that road. It already went before the LaPorte County BZA and they approved it.”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “We could have done a resolution and given it to the BZA.”

Mr. Hoagland, “My main concern is if this is approved, the surrounding area, even though they’ll designate a route, we are all adult here, but not everybody is going to stay on the same route and these areas are particularly narrow roads up there. What we have run into in the past were the other areas was full, people would bring debris in and find out the facility is either closed or wont accept it from a private area, will literally wander out in these wooded areas and dump truckloads. We had a situation a few years back where the Hazardous Materials Team had to be called in to clean up.”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “Is the next step of approval in front of IDEM?”

Com. Harper, “Yes.”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “I would suggest you make a motion to write a letter with the county’s objections, including the water table, entrance way, residential, have the commissioners sign off on it and send it to IDEM.”

Com. Knoblock, “They promised these people that they will not go north, that they would go south of 20, but once they get ______.”

Com. Knoblock moved to draft a letter and send it downstate objecting to this and further that Dave Schelling contact IDEM and see what type of presentation will be made at that hearing, and will the County be allowed to speak to make our concerns known,

Mr. Schelling, “Yesterday, I did talk to Larry Mansure from IDEM, he is the one that is involved in this situation. He said he would be willing to come to Porter County to discuss it if we would like him to, or the at the Pines. He did request that if he did come up it would be fairly early in the morning. I did chat with him about the soils and I faxed him a copy of that letter I wrote to Sam Dryden with minimum requirements that the county would have for utilizing that road. This would be the rebuilding of almost 6 inches of bituminous mix and it would be at a cost of about $60,000.00 and what I was proposing too, was to have a $50,000.00 bond. Then again, that would still not cover the frost law.”
Com. Harper, “We have these citizens in Pine Township that have their homes there within how many feet, lets talk about that little subdivision. Less than 1,300 feet. They are talking about all these semi’s going up and down the road. Carole has made the motion on the letter. We shouldn’t be telling them what we would be willing to do on the road, I think we should be taking a stand against this and get down there and if I am available I am going to try and get down to IDEM. I think we should ask this guy to come up here some evening when the people from Pines come in and express their feelings. Early in the morning is fine but everyone is going to be at work. If he wants to hear what the citizens have to say, he could come up here some time in the evening.”

Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Com. Harper, “If you could get us some information so that we can draft a letter.”

Mr. Schelling, “Presently we have this posted at 10 tons for a long time. Maybe if we had a resolution stating we were not going to change the posting, that would eliminate everything.”

Com. Harper, “We could try it.”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “I think the smart thing to do is compose a letter stating all the grounds including the posting and that it has been posted for 30 years.”

Mr. Schelling, “We cant deny access to the property but we can certainly limit it. Up in that area it is out of the water a little bit.”

Com. Harper, “Can you get us the information so we can draft a letter and talk to this guy about coming early in the morning is fine but I think he should come here some evening when we have a meeting and put out a notice or we can do it at our meeting two weeks from now. If he wants to listen to those people in the Pines, I think it is terrible.”

Mr. Schelling, “Al did start a letter.”

Com. Harper, “Lets put this on for another discuss for two weeks to see where we are at.”

Update amendments for Employee Personnel Policy Manual

Com. Harper, “We have done this in the past year and past years amendments to the Employee Manual. We want to put together a new manual with all the amendments.”

Com. Knoblock moved to have the amendments put into the Employee Personnel Policy Manual, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

RECEIVE HIGHWAY BIDS FOR SLAG AND FUEL

Mr. Hoagland, “If you just open them and announce them we will take them back to the Highway Dept.”


SLAG:
Whitcomb Trucking #53- $ 8.50 per ton north of Highway 6
8.45 per ton south of Highway 6
8.75 per ton south of Division Road

Ralston Paving north of Highway 6: $ 10.50
North of Division: 11.00
South of Division: 11.50

Levy Company: Chesterton $ 8.10
Valparaiso 9.60
Hebron 10.80
FUEL: #2 Diesel
Barren Marine $1.2415 per gallon
Triple J Mar 1.36
Petroleum Traders 1.3096

Com. Harper, “So the Highway will take these back to their office for advisement.

PETITION TO VACATE FORMER STATE ROADS 49 AND 30, COMEFORD RD.
Todd Leeth, Attorney

Atty. Leeth, “Good morning, I am here on behalf of Porter County Development. Joining me is Doug McCurran, representative of the company. The property in question is south of Valparaiso on Sturdy Road. I think we are all familiar with the curved off to the east, Comeford Road, intersection. The property we are talking about is on the east side of that intersection and actually Comeford Road intersects with Sturdy Road, bisects with my clients’ property. Essentially we are talking about Woodside Medical Building which is on the northeast corner of that intersection. Mr. Schelling and Mr. McCurran have been in discussion with regard to this property and the petition that has resulted was filed in the middle of last month and we did not publish notice because we wanted to appear before you with the Highway Department and visit with you based upon the discussion we had here today and then publish notice and proceed with the hearing. What I have given you on the 8 ½ by 11 sheet is a drawing of the property with the northern portion of Comeford Road that we are seeking to be vacated cross hatched which is about 26 foot strip that runs through the property on the north side of the road, which would be the side of the road where the medical building is. The right of way that cuts through this property is 85 feet wide. I assume because at one time this was a state highway the right of way was extraordinarily large, of course through the development of Highway 30 and 49, which is no longer a state highway is under the county jurisdiction. So we are seeking to vacate the north 26 feet. That does two things. The medical building actually encroaches in the right of way on the north part about three feet. The second thing it does, is the existing pavement of the road is still centered in what is left of the right of way and the balance of the right of way after we subtract out the 26 feet. Obviously we used the county with a considerable amount of right of way left; the pavement is centered in the right of way and our existing building in the encroachment is removed. That is the first part of the petition. The second part relates to what I am referring to as the cross over road and part of the 4.3 acres that lies south of the intersection. As I glanced over the partition distributing my exhibit I noticed that Mr. Schelling has provided you a drawing as well. I think he has highlighted in blue what I am referring to as the cross over road. That road has existed there by permission for a number of years, but is not a dedicated right of way at all. So what we are proposing to do is, and we don’t have this finalized just yet, but what we are proposing to do is reconfigure that with, I assume, somewhat of a car, to allow for westbound traffic on Comeford Road to make a left turn to go southbound on Sturdy Road and place that newly configured road slightly north and then dedicate it in the right of way so it is protected. Then, with that vacate the eastern 10 feet of Sturdy Road.”

Com. Harper, “Whose land would this new road be located?”

Atty. Leeth, “Porter County Development, the petitioner. The existing cross over road is there now on our land without a right of way. How it got there, I don’t know there is nothing recorded or dedicated to protect that right of way. So what we want to do is . . we are suggesting that with permission, and I am not sure about the public to gain access to an easement.”

Com. Knoblock, “So is you are north on Sturdy and you want to turn on right on Comeford . . . “

Atty. Leeth, “You would take the same right of way as that cross over as I call it.”

Com. Harper, “Where would it be, in a different spot?”

Atty. Leeth, “We are going to slide it further north. That allows us to create a buildable site in that odd shaped triangular piece. If we slide it further north, that gets us more . . . . it would be a shorter road.”

Com. Harper, “Who is paying for this?”

Atty. Leeth, “Those are the details we haven’t worked out yet. The location hasn’t been finalized but that is kind of like why we are here today. I guess my thought was why we brought this petition before you is to see if we had some interest in trying to reach a consensus as to what we would do in regard to the location of that road before we finalized our request and published notice.”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “If you put the road north, the next road is going to be shorter.”

Mr. Schelling, “You don’t want to make it too much shorter because we would have some stacking of vehicles.”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “What is this about vacating a portion of Sturdy Road?”

Atty. Leeth, “The eastern portion of Sturdy Road we are seeking to vacate as well.”

Mr. Schelling, “By definition, Sturdy Road is on a half section, 150 East and by definition is a corrector road and that would require an 80 foot right of way, 40 foot on each side of the center of the road. Which really is excessive and when you put the railroad tracks to the south and the underpass south of there.”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “So if they were asking to vacate a portion of Sturdy Road, it would contain a portion of an easement that we are not using because the easement is too wide?”

Mr. Schelling, “Yes, it is a defined right of way by the master plan. I am not in agreement with vacating that. It is also in accordance with the ____ road would be, to remain a 60 foot total right of way.”

Com. Knoblock, “Is it in city limits?”

Mr. Schelling, (Inaudible.)

Atty. Leeth, “How does it hurt the county? It benefits my client, that he could develop his property especially getting it on the tax rolls. That’s number one, number two, working with the county to relocate and create the cross over road. Put that on a right of way.”

Unidentified male, “We are willing to do what it takes to give that land to you so you have a benefit.”

Com. Harper, “Lets take a couple weeks and give the Commissioners a chance to go out there with Dave and discuss this. It makes sense to me to get it back on the tax rolls, I also realized that particular area, there is a question about the design of the whole thing. Lets give us a couple weeks to think this through.”

Com. Knoblock moved to wait two weeks and bring it back before the Commissioners, Com. Harper seconded, miotoin carried.


CORRESPONDENCE, PART 2

Com. Harper, “Before we break, I know there are a lot of department heads here today and I just wanted to make it clear that we felt going through these appointments legally was not required, but we are retaining all department heads and we are happy they are willing to stay and work for Porter County, so all department heads that are here, we want you to know that. So with that, we will take a five minute break.”


GET OPINION ON PORTER HOSPITAL BOND FROM BARNES AND THORNBURG

Com. Harper, “I have been contacted and some of the other people on both the Council and the Commissioners, with information regarding whether or not that the bond issue by the hospital is going to require approval by either the Council or the Commissioners. Everyone that is and has been under the assumption that it does not; however, it appears pretty clearly that there are two views on this. I provided some of the materials to the county attorney and she and I both agree that it is a very, very technical area and for us to get an opinion on that we will probably have to go downstate. She has already made some preliminary inquiry of Barnes and Thornburg in Indianapolis. I would like to entertain a motion that we request that the county attorney get together that information that we have questions about and the members of the Council, and that she go and take further steps with Barnes and Thornburg and the Commissioners pay for getting this opinion.”

Com. Knoblock moved to request the county attorney get information from Barnes and Thornburg and the Commissioners to pay the fee for that, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Approve 2005 Expo Center Mangagment Agreement for Lonnie Steele

Atty. Rinkenberger, “That is a one year contract that is approved annually. It provides for a thirty day written termination notice. The contract amount is $38,808.00 and this is exactly $1,029.00 over what Lonnie was paid last year in compliance with the $1,000.00 raises that the Council put out. Lonnie is not excluded from accepting any other employment, he is a contractor with the county. That is because he does work with both the AG society and the County at the Expo Center.”

Com. Knoblock, “There needs to be some changes.”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “Exhibit A, which is the job description, but is not attached to this so if you are interested in some changes in that area. We could approve this on a month to month basis.”

Com. Knoblock moved to approve the Expo Center Management Agreement for the duration of one month starting January 1, 2005 until February 1, 2005, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Approve Official Bond for Porter County Highway Superintendent

Com. Knoblock moved to approve the official bond for Al Hoagland, Highway Superintendent in the amount of $8,500.00, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Approve Official Bond for Porter County Auditor

Com. Knoblock moved to approve the official bond for Sandy Vuko, Auditor, in the amount of $15,000.00 Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Approve Official Bond for Porter Township Assessor

Com. Knoblock moved to approve the official bond for Catherine Hall, Porter Township Assessor in the amount of $8,500.00, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Approve position changes on bond for part time secretary in Plan Commission

Com. Knoblock moved to approve the name change bond to executive assistant to part time secretary for Plan Commission, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.
Approve contract for Animal Shelter Services with Town of Ogden Dunes for 2005

Com. Knoblock moved to approve the animal shelter services contract with Ogden Dunes for 2005 in the amount of $558.00, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Approve contract for Animal Shelter Services with Hebron for 2005

Com. Knoblock moved to approve the animal shelter services contract with Hebron for 2005 in the amount of $2,015.00, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Approve contract with Matthew Solidly and Animal Welfare Board

Com. Harper “I don’t think we should hear these, we have one for the Animal Welfare Board and one for the Drainage Board for attorneys contracts. I think the correct way for this to be done is to have both those boards to appoint their attorneys and once the new boards appoint their attorneys, then they bring those contracts to us. I suggest we continue this until those boards meet. Do you think they will meet by the 18th of this month? Why don’t we continue them until the 18th and then we will see. Is that okay with you, Carole?”

Com. Knoblock, “Yes.”

Com. Harper, “Why don’t we continue this until the first meeting in February?”

Com. Knoblock moved to continue the contract approvals until February 1, 2005, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Request to transfer funds –Commissioners

Fund 01.30 $175.00 from acct 2110 office supplies
Into acct 2410 medical and dental

To cover the cost of reimbursing Juvenile Detention employees for TB tests.

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

Request for Additional Appropriation—Commissioners

Fund 01.30 $177,515 acct 3964 Toxicology lab

To cover increase of 2005 contract with Great Lakes Laboratories.

Atty. Rinkenberger, “This needs to go before the Council to ask for an additional appropriation from them for $177,515.00 to cover the lab costs. I think John has been negotiating this, so if we get on the Council agenda . . .”

Com. Harper, “Did we sign this contract already? I mean, where does this money come from? I want to know why this increased so much for this year.”

Com. Knoblock, “How much was it last year?”

Ms. Hartig, “It was $194,031.00 and I believe it has been that way for 4 to 5 years. We had budgeted $194,000.00, but it wont cover the increase.”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “This contract, which we have not approved, says here in the amount of $371,546.00 so if we add the two.”

Com. Harper, “How can we sign this contract before the Council has approved the money?”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “We’re not. We go for the appropriation first and then if the Council gives us the money we need, we’ll sign the contract. So we have to go to the Council first and explain to them, I am assuming John Evans will since he is the one working with Juvenile Detention and Adult Probation on these tox reports. He will go and appear before the Council and explain to them why the contract has gone up and ask them to appropriate additional funds and if they say yes, the Commissioners will come back and we approve this contract. If they say no, there is no contract.”

Com. Harper, “I have a problem with that. I want more information before myself, “

Atty. Rinkenberger, “My concern is, and I don’t know what the circumstances are that to get this going, and on the agenda, the next thing you know, they won’t have the ability to take toxicology and urine samples.”

Ms. Hartig, “When Shelly from Great Lakes Lab called she said they wouldn’t be able to get their testing supplies out to Juvenile Detention, Adult Probation, without some . . .”

Com. Harper, “We are going to stop right now. How can nobody know and all of a sudden this contract is going to double and it’s a big emergency.”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “I think John knows. My only thought is if there is a big emergency is that without a contract moving forward, Adult Probation and Juvenile Detention cannot take urine samples to toxicology and I am just suggesting we approve it to get on the Council agenda and then if you find out it is not what you want, we can withdraw from the Council agenda after we take action today. But that would keep the project going and then if a red flag comes up we can withdraw from the Council.”

Com. Harper, “As far as I am concerned, a red flag has already come up. I don’t understand how we have a budget that we have submitted and that this county is supposed to act on and all of a sudden in the first meeting of January, we are going to double some of the budget and I am not going to do it if it shuts down everything, I don’t care. I do not understand why that has happened, I think we should continue this for two weeks, and we should tell the Council about it tonight so they understand that here we come for $200,000 more; it has to come out of some fund. That’s what gets this county in trouble time and time again.”

Com. Knoblock, “So, set me straight. $371,546.00 is in the budget for 2005?”

Com. Harper, “No, apparently, $194,000.00.”

Ms. Hartig, “What happened was when I did the budget last year, they sent the contract after I turned in the budget.”

Com. Harper, “What did you base the budget on last year?”

Ms. Hartig, “I based it on keeping it the same as what we had in 2003.”

Com. Harper, “That makes sense to me but what doesn’t make sense to me is how it could double in one year and I think we better get some bids out and find out what we are doing. I am going to the Council tonight and report to them just to give them a heads up.”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “You might want to beep John, I think he has more knowledge about this than us because he is the one who has been working on it. You might want to have Adult Probation and Juvenile Detention at the next meeting to tell us what they are doing.”

Ms. Hartig, “I think that is what John was going to do.”

Com. Harper, “We better get to the Council because the Council has to figure out, you know we have $200,000.00, if you give each employee who works for the county a raise, that is half their raises right there gone.”

Com. Knoblock moved to table this until the next meeting, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.


PLAN COMMISSION

Rezone PUD to C4-NSP Trust No. 1-2004, 1st reading

Com. Harper, “This is 1st reading, continued from last meeting. Is this a public hearing?”

Mr. Thompson, “I don’t know. I thought the present ___ at that time was the first meeting in December closed the public hearing and opened it up for board discussion.”

Com. Harper, “Is there anyone here that wants to speak on this? Then we don’t need to discuss it if there is no one here to speak on it. I have heard this, can you bring Commissioner Knoblock up to speed on what this is all about?”

Mr. Bengel, “First of all the petition is that repeal the PUD from the _____ in this position because a PUD could ___ a bigger piece and all we asked for is what we own. Then at the same time, that same description was for a sports recreational complex, with basketball, ice hockey, and volleyball. This ground is part of the PUD that included a large residential community that was going to be done by Liberty Center which is a church related deal, it is not Liberty Bible Church, that is a separate entity. Liberty Bible Church is the nearest neighbor to this parcel on the east and the south. The neighbor on the west is the 49 Bypass, on the north is Robert Rhoda, and to the southeast is a tower that has been there forever, next to that is the warehouses, then the gas station at old 49 and 6. This will produce taxes for the county, it will be a taxpayer. Should serve many people; we got a letter before from Mr. Osborn who is the athletic director at Ben Franklin says that there is a real need for this because there is absolutely no facilities for the kids. The only objection that I recall was Mr. Tim Cole, who seems to object to everything in the township and I don’t think he represents anybody but himself. In fact, he doesn’t live adjacent to this property, I don’t think he can even see the building. Again, it will bring wholesome activity center into Porter County and we have a need to add to that use not permitted would be multi family. (inaudible). It would be well water. Storm water would go through the drainage, this is all designed for a big high density complex. (inaudible).”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “We are going to need a proposed ordinance and written commitments to take action. Is that something the Plan Commission prepares?”

Mr. Thompson, “The petitioner needs to present this to the Plan Commission so we can review them and attach them to the ordinance. Our ordinance language states that if it is so approved with written commitments then they have to have them recorded together.”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “So they are responsible for the written commitments, to get them to you, so you can attach them to the ordinance to present them to us.”

Com. Harper, “So what action do you need today?”

Mr. Thompson, “Generally, I cannot present the ordinance with written commitments until second reading.”

Com. Harper, “Are there any neighbors that want to speak about this? I have some real concerns. The church was here last time and indicated they didn’t have a problem with this. I still have concerns because of the multi family and I want to see the project; it is a good one that is going in there. By limiting that multi family makes me feel better about it.”

Com. Knoblock, “I would like to see that taken off.”
Com. Knoblock moved to approve on first reading with multi family taken out, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Atty. Rinkenberger, “We need to talk about the bill from Sommer Barnard. What is holding up on is we need a copy of the Council minutes meeting. My recollection and Bob’s recollection is he asked the Council at the time if they would be willing to make an additional appropriation from the general fund to pay for these appeal attorneys and they said yes. We cannot take $28,000.00 out of our building and maintenance departments.”

Com. Harper, “We went before the Council so we are waiting to get the minutes. We came before the Council and asked for approval to hire these attorneys so what we need to do is get on the Council agenda, get the minutes, and . . “

Atty. Rinkenberger, “Jan doesn’t have them done and I wanted to make sure before we did that. . . . . then we can have Melissa do the paperwork to go for an additional. But our fear and hope is to protect our building fund and fee ordinance from a $28,000.00 expenditure because we are spending that on salaries and did not expect to pay additional attorney fees out of that. I think we told the Council that and they just made a motion; they said we’ll take an additional appropriation out of the general fund money to pay for these fees. Now the commissioners have to go back try and get that $28,000.00.”

Mr. Thompson, “My next concern is if the Council is going to meet.”

Com. Harper, “We’ll find that out tonight if they are going to have any meetings in February or March. Last year they didn’t, remember? We’ll know by 5:00 tonight.”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “Well, this is a new Council. Our recollection is we asked them if they would support us for an additional appropriation for general fund money for these expenditures. We said it could be up to $30,000.00.”

With no further business, the meeting was recessed.

Com. Knoblock moved to recess, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.


BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
PORTER COUNTY, INDIANA

Robert P. Harper
John A. Evans
Carole M. Knoblock

Attest: Sandra K. Vuko, Auditor