PORTER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REGULAR MEETING
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 1, 2005

The regular meeting of the Porter County Board of Commissioners convened at 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, November 1, 2005 in the Commissioners’ Chambers of the Administration Center.

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

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

CHANGE IN MEETING DATE FROM NOVEMBER 15 TO NOVEMBER 22

Com. Harper, “I want to announce that the next meeting will not be held on the 15th, it will be held on the 22nd.”

APPROVAL OF PAYROLL

Com. Evans moved to approve the payroll of October 31. 2005, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Com. Evans moved to approve the minutes of October 18. 2005, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

APPROVAL OF CLAIMS

Com. Evans moved to approve the claims of November 1, 2005, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A COUNTY I.D. SECURITY PROTECTION FEE AND FUND, 2ND READING
Linda Trinkler, Porter County Recorder

Com. Harper, “Do we have an ordinance number?”

Ms. Hartig, “05-18.”

Com. Evans, “This is the two dollar motion. I still believe that the state would have found it a lot easier just to direct the Recorder not to record things that had social security numbers on it. But they didn’t do that.”

Com. Evans moved to approve Ordinance No. 05-18 on second reading, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

ORDINANCE 05-18
PORTER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ORDINANANCE ESTABLISHING A COUNTY IDENTIFICATION
SECURITY PROTECTION FEE AND FUND
________________________________________________________________________

WHEREAS, the Porter County Board of Commissioners adopted the Porter County Municipal Code on Tuesday, December 2, 1997 pursuant to Ordinance No. 97-38; and
WHEREAS, the Porter County Board of Commissioners has deemed it necessary to pass a new ordinance for inclusion in the Porter County Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, IC 36-1-3-2 grants the Board of County Commissioners all the powers that they need for the effective operation of government as to local affairs; and
WHEREAS, IC 36-1-3-6 states that if there is no constitutional or statutory provision requiring a specific manner for exercising a power, the Board of County Commissioners may adopt an ordinance prescribing a specific manner for exercising a power; and
WHEREAS, IC 36-2-7.5-4 provides that as of January 1, 2006 no document can be recorded that contains a Social Security number, unless the number is required by law to be on the document; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to IC 36-2-7.5-5 effective January 1, 2006, any preparer of a document must fill out and sign the State Board of Accounts approved form (the “Form”) that: (1) They have examined the document for Social Security numbers; (2) They have redacted any Social Security numbers that were in the document, unless required by law; and (3) They perjure themselves if they represent they did this, but did not search the document; and the document does contain a Social Security number; and
WHEREAS, IC 36-2-7.5-6 provides that effective January 1, 2006, no document can be recorded without the signed “Form” from the State Board of Accounts being attached as part of the document; and
WHEREAS, IC 36-2-7.5-6 provides that a fee of Two Dollars ($2.00) shall be collected to record this “Form” as an additional page of the recorded document; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to IC 36-2-7.5-6(c) effective January 1, 2006 and ending June 30, 2011, the $2.00 from the recording of the “Form” must be deposited in a newly created County Identification Security Protection Fund, (hereinafter the “CISP Fund”); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to IC 36-2-7.5-6(c) effective July 1, 2011, the $2.00 recording fee shall then be deposited into the County General Fund, however, whatever money remains in the CISP Fund shall remain there and not revert to the County General Fund; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to IC 36-2-7.5-11 effective January 1, 2006, Porter County must establish a CISP Fund, which fund shall be administered by the Recorder and appropriated by the County Council; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to IC 36-2-7.5-11 the money deposited in the CISP Fund may only be used for the purchase, upgrade, implementation and maintenance of redacting technology and does not revert to the General Fund; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to IC 36-2-7.5-12 effective July 1, 2008, a County Recorder, or an employee of the County Recorder’s Office, who discloses a recorded document that contains a Social Security number without running it through redacting technology, to the extent technologically possible, commits a Class A Infraction.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT AND IT IS HEREBY ORDAINED THAT:
1. Title 3, Revenue and Finance in the Porter County Municipal Code is
hereby amended through the addition of Chapter 3.74 entitled Ordinance Establishing a County Identification Security Protection Fee and Fund;
2. That Section 3.74.010 is added to the Porter County Municipal Code to
read as follows:
3.74.010 Establishment of a County Identification Security Protection Fee and Fund
The Board of County Commissioners does determine that a need exists for the creation of a County Identification Security Protection Fee and Fund pursuant to IC 36-2-7.5 et seq.

The County Identification Security Protection Fund, (hereinafter CISP Fund) is created as a result of legislation that requires that no document can be recorded that contains a Social Security number, unless the number is required by law to be on the document.

That pursuant to IC 36-2-7.5-6 no document can be recorded without an approved State Board of Accounts Form referenced at IC 36-2-7.5-5 being attached as part of the document.

A fee of Two Dollars ($2.00) shall be collected for recording this Form and the Two Dollars ($2.00) from the recording of the Form shall be deposited into the newly created CISP Fund. Said Fund shall be assigned Number _____________ by the Porter County Auditor’s Office.

3. That Section 3.74.020 is added to the Porter County Municipal Code to read as follows:

3.74.020 Use of Funds
Commencing January 1, 2006 and ending June 30, 2011, all monies received pursuant to IC 36-2-7.5 will be received and deposited in the CISP Fund. The CISP Fund shall be administered by the Recorder and the monies appropriated by the Porter County Council.

The monies received and deposited in the CISP Fund can be used only for the
specific purpose as set forth in this ordinance. The funds received and deposited in the CISP Fund shall be used exclusively for the purchase, upgrade, implementation and maintenance of redacting technology.

3. That Section 3.74.030 is added to the Porter County Municipal Code to
read as follows:

3.74.030 Termination of Funds/Transfer of Funds
The CISP Fund shall remain in existence and remain perpetual in its terms until amended or terminated by subsequent ordinance enacted by the Porter County Board of Commissioners. Monies collected between January 1, 2006 through June 30, 2011 shall remain in the CISP Fund and money collected during that time frame shall not revert to the County General Fund.

If and when a subsequent ordinance is passed to terminate the life of this fund, the fund balance existing, if not otherwise provided for by ordinance, shall remain in the fund until expended by the County for the purchase, upgrade, implementation, and maintenance of redacting technology.

However, commencing July 1, 2011, the Two Dollars ($2.00) charged and collected for recording of the State Board of Accounts Form shall thereafter be deposited into the County General Fund.

This ordinance passed and adopted this ____ day of November, 2005. Its effective date is January 1, 2006.

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
PORTER COUNTY, INDIANA
s/Robert P. Harper
s/John A. Evans
s/Carole M. Knoblock

attest/s/Sandra K. Vuko


PORTER COUNTY WINS AWARD FOR HURRICANE DONATIONS AT AIC
CONFERENCE
Linda Trinkler, Porter County Recorder

Ms. Trinkler, “I went to the AIC Conference and as you know we had the collection for the hurricane victims, for the parishes, and we won.”

Com. Harper, “Okay, great.”

Ms. Trinkler, “There was ten of us and we went up and had out picture taken with the flag. They said it was the first time Porter County was ever been mentioned. I said I was glad they finally discovered us. Could we hang this in the hall or something?”

Com. Harper, “Sure, talk to Charlotte tomorrow. Thank you.”

APPROVAL OF VISITOR’S COMMISSION VENUE CONTRACTS-
Dave Hollenbeck, Attorney

Atty. Hollenbeck, “Lorelei is with me today. Annually the Visitor’s Commission commits a portion of its revenue to four Porter County venue projects. The money goes to the Porter County Park Department; and money goes to the Memorial Opera House, the Expo Center and the Jail Museum. Those revenues total $89,100.00 that are distributed. Those monies are distributed pursuant to annual agreements. Inadvertently it was brought to my attention that we had failed to do written agreements for ’05 so we are here needing your approval of the venue agreements for ’05, we’ll be back in January ’06 to do the ’06 ones. The distribution, which is an agreement reached with the County Council every year, is $22,275.00 to the Memorial Opera House to help them, $22,275.00 to the Expo Center and $8,910.00 to the Old Jail Museum and that has remained pretty constant.”

Com. Evans, “If we forgot to do the venue contracts but did we forget to do the distribution?”

Atty. Hollenbeck, “No, we’ve been doing the distribution. They have been getting their money, we just didn’t have the signed agreements. And the signed agreements are literally identical to what you’ve signed for the last number of years. We just didn’t get it done. We will do it now and then we will make sure we do it in a timely fashion next year.”

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

BOARD OF HEALTH MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENTS
Dave Hollenbeck, Attorney

Atty. Hollenbeck, “As I indicated to you in a letter that I wrote to you, Keith Letta from the Health Department and Greg Frye, the chairman of the Board of Health are with me tonight. As part of the ongoing effort of the Health Department to reduce costs and finding alternate revenue sources for their functioning, part of the regular review of the Health Department activity is revealed to the board and staff that the staff was spending an inordinate amount of time engaging in site reviews and plan reviews for new restaurants that were opening up in Porter County. The State Board of Health Regulations require us, as a Health Department, to have new restaurants bring in their plans and we do a table review of those to make sure they are in compliance with State Board of Health regulations. And then during construction or renovation we have to go out and inspect them. That process can become a pretty cumbersome and time consuming process for which there is no fee of any kind presently. With that in mind and in reviewing it with staff and board, the Board of Health voted unanimously to bring to you what you have before you which is a proposed amendment of the Board of Health fee portion of your municipal code, which would provide for the charging of a fee to a new restaurant for this review process on a sliding scale based on the square footage of the restaurant starting at $50.00 and going up to a maximum of $200.00 to help defray our costs of doing this. This is something that we checked and I can’t give you the number but there are a growing number of counties that are going to this as the amount of work that is involved with these new restaurants has increased to assess a fee for this work. We ask you for your consideration on first reading of this amendment to your code this evening. We would like this to be effective on January 1st.”

Com. Harper, “Is there anyone here tonight to speak on this? Then do I hear a motion?”

Com. Evans moved to approve the change in the ordinance and allow the fee to be established for restaurant inspections beginning January 1, 2006, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Com. Harper, “Second reading will be on November 22.”

NOTICE TO BIDDERS-COUNTY HOME DEMOLITION, NOTIFICATION TO VACATE COUNTY HOME
David Schelling, Porter County Engineer

Mr. Schelling, “I am ready to advertise for bidders for condemnation and asbestos abatement removal at the county home. We’ve got a revised Notice to Bidders here that has wording that Gwenn wanted and unfortunately we didn’t get a chance to get it to them so I would like to submit it subject to Gwenn’s approval. The contract is to advertise, starting tonight, before the bidders and the bid documents we are having being picked up at the Auditor’s Office starting this Friday on the 4th of November. We need to advertise this Notice to Bidders also on November 4th and November 11th. We have a mandatory bidder’s meeting, a pre bid meeting, and a walk through of the County Home, that’s set up for November 17th. This way, anybody that is involved in bidding will see the same thing and will be bidding apples and apples. Then after that, the bid documents or proposals, will be due on the third of January 2006. I also have a cover sheet to be signed by the Commissioners.”

Com. Harper, “Gwenn, what type of action is required tonight?”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “Just board action authorizing them to release these for bid.”

Com. Evans moved to approve the release for bid of the demolition of the County Home, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Atty. Rinkenberger, “The other thing we have a lot of people who have a lot of stuff in the County Home and I thought we should decide what is a good deadline for them to have the premises vacated and emptied. John suggested December 31st.”

Com. Harper, “When is Phil going to be out?”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “He’s getting out now.”

Mr. Shirley, “They are in the process now and they should be completely done by Wednesday of next week.”

Com. Harper, “Once he is moved is there any reason why the utilities can’t be shut off?”

Mr. Shirley, “Not that I am aware of.”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “I’ve got a list here that Emergency Management, Hazmat, Surveyor, Animal Control, County Maintenance, Opera House, Parks Department, Valpo Schools and Health Department all have stuff out at the County Home.”

Com. Harper, “What I am asking is can we turn the utilities off?”

Com. Evans, “If we bust the water lines it is not going to help in the demolition process, if they freeze and break, I think we need to keep the utilities on.”

Mr. Schelling, “Also when they have the walk through it would be best to have electricity in the building. If we had the water turned off, well, they need water (inaudible)….for the walk through. We probably should have electricity on at least through the 17th.”

Com. Harper, “Of course, our big cost is the heat.”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “We have that mandatory walk-through and then we also put in the specs they could go out and walk through any time for a date _____ after signing up at your office. We ought to leave it on until then. I don’t remember what that date was.”

Mr. Schelling, “December 16.”

Com. Harper, “John, what do you say we send a notice to everybody that are storing things there that they get it out by December 31st?”

Com. Evans, “I think everybody who’s name is on the list that Gwenn read should get a letter and advise them they need to have everything out of there by the 31st of December.”

Com. Harper, “Is there anything else we need to do on this?”

Mr. Schelling, “I do want to mention that this is in Valparaiso so we won’t have to…(inaudible)…the bidder is going to have to get a Valparaiso demolition crew. And since this building is on the Historical, well, it’s not a highly listed historical building, but it is listed on the 1991 document that was made so there is a ninety day period, they say after the building permit is issued before demolition can start. I talked to Erica Taylor from the Historic Preservation people plus Tyler Kent from the city of Valparaiso. There shouldn’t be any issue or any problems, I am going to be meeting those folks at the County Home this Thursday to walk through. The main purpose of that ninety days is primarily for them to look at the building to see if there is anything they felt should be salvaged and I don’t think there really is. I just wanted to bring that to your attention. I might have to go the monthly meeting on the 17th of November. My goal is to get that ninety day ___ right now.”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “Is there any way that is going to be a problem?”

Mr. Schelling, “When I talked to Erica . . . “

Atty. Rinkenberger, “With the time frame that we set?”

Mr. Schelling, “I don’t . . . “

Com. Evans, “We make the application for the county that wants to bid?”

Mr. Schelling, “The bidder was awarded project as ____. But I wanted to take care of the historic issues before hand and when I talked to Erica, it sounded like the ninety days would include that period of time, but I will know more Thursday, but I don’t think it is really going to affect.”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “Because we don’t award this until January 17, and there is a ninety day waiting period and the successful bidder has to apply, that is going to put us at April or May, starting in February like we are contemplating here.”

Mr. Schelling, “I know, this is something I told them, it’s not fair to the bidders if they are bidding something that they are planning to do during the wintertime.”

Com. Evans, “How do they have any jurisdiction over our building that is not even on their register?”

Mr. Schelling, “Well, it is in the city limits and evidently Valparaiso has some advantages. . . .”

Com Evans, “The city of Valparaiso has this restriction or the historical people you were talking about?”

Mr. Schelling, “Well, the Valparaiso Historic Preservation is part of Valparaiso’s government. They told me originally it was in one of their ordinances but I researched their ordinances and it didn’t come up. I don’t know what authority they actually have.”

Com. Evans, “I don’t anticipate any problems.”

Mr. Schelling, “I don’t either. The thing is we’ve had David Pilz, the city engineer, on board with this all along, he was on the committee that reviewed this, so I don’t anticipate any problems.”

Com. Evans, “We’ve had studies done that say it is architecturally sound but it is not anything of historical value and worth preserving.”

Mr. Schelling, “I just thought I had an obligation to mention that.”

Com Harper, “Keep us informed. Is there anything else?”

OFFICE HOLDERS/DEPARTMENT HEADS

Snow removal proposal recommendations

Com. Harper, “The first thing we have under office holders is the snow removal proposal recommendation and I think we are going to put that off because we need more information if that is all right with you, John, until the 22nd. Let’s hope it doesn’t snow before then. The next thing is Sandy is here from the Animal Shelter with proposals for the wall, floor and bathroom repairs. I have to say that these repairs need to be done.”

Proposals for wall, floor and bathroom repairs at Animal Shelter
Sandy Ogle, Director

Ms. Ogle, “Thank you for allowing us to get some improvements done.”

Com. Harper, “What is your recommendation on these, what are the recommendations and how are you recommending we do this, Sandy?”

Ms. Ogle, “I would like to get Tudor Floors for the whole floor area, the lobby, the break room and the bathroom and Joe Rennelman from Kouts to do the bathroom, actually remodeling of the bathroom and the walls in the lobby.”

Com. Harper, “Is that going to get done what needs to get done?”

Ms. Ogle, “Yes.”

Com. Harper, “And that would be about $5,700.00?”

Ms. Ogle, “Yes.”

Com. Evans, “We are not leaving anything out here?”

Ms. Ogle, “It is kind of approximate on both, obviously, the floor is in just terrible shape so Tudor said, they’ll just have to see once they pull everything up and the wallpaper has been on for about fifteen years, they really don’t know what is going to happen when they tear the wallpaper off.”

Com. Evans, “My concern is there is nothing in here for plumbing, is there going to be a problem with that?”

Ms. Ogle, “Not that I am aware of.”

Com. Evans moved to accept the recommendation for Tudor Floors and Joe Rennelman, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

COMMISSIONERS’ REPORTS

Center District: Com. Harper

1. Brooks Industrial Park has a Porter Bank Performance Letter Of Credit
32000645 10002 in the amount of $49,739 that expires on November 7, 2005. Jim Connors, Vice President at Porter Bank has indicated that the renewal is ready for Craig Brooks to sign. There should not be any problems, but I want to be authorized to file a claim against the Letter of Credit if for some reason we do not receive the renewal prior to the expiration date.

Com. Harper, “Do we have that yet, Dave?”

Mr. Schelling, “I don’t have it yet, but it shouldn’t be a problem.”

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

2. Pepper Creek Subdivision, Phase 1, Performance Letter of Credit # 1002106, from Mercantile Bank in the amount of $81,070.00. New expiration date is November 1, 2006. Recommend approval.

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

3. Hampton Manor Subdivision, Mercantile Bank Performance Letter of Credit MNB-2134 in the amount of $490,000 with expiration date of April 18, 2008. Recommend approval.

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

South District: (read by Com. Harper)

1. Supplemental Agreement #1 for Porter County Bridge #58, Baums Bridge Road (CR 50 West) over Kankakee River. This is for the completion of the design for the rehabilitation of the bridge, at an additional cost of $28, 600.00. The original agreement was for preliminary design work including survey, deck coring and a bridge inspection report for $28,000. The total for this bridge design therefore will be a very competitive $56,600. Recommend approval.

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

OPEN PROPOSALS FOR BID INSPECTIONS

The following proposals were opened and the names read by Com. Harper:

DLZ
WTH Engineering, Inc.
Frost Engineering
Beam, Longest and Neff
RW Armstrong
Butler Fairman and Seufert
USI Consultants
Fred Burroughs and Associates
Bonar Group
McDonough Associates
Farrar Garvey and Associates
Collins Engineering

Com. Harper, “These will be reviewed and come back with a recommendation.”

Mr. Schelling, “I would like to have them back to you by the next meeting. There might be some consultants in the audience, could you please acknowledge them.”

Com. Harper, “Next we have correspondence.”

CORRESPONDENCE

Clerk’s monthly report-September 2005 is on file.
Weights and Measures monthly report-October 2005 is on file.

Request from Daybreak Community Church to hold fund raiser at Opera House
Robin Hartman

Mr. Hartman, “I am Robin Hartman. Daybreak Church requests the use of the Opera House for a fundraiser relief for Katrina. The community churches in the area are going to put on a show as far as having bands getting all together and raising money for hurricane victims. All the money to go to the Salvation Army and Red Cross and Habitat for Humanity.”

Com. Harper, “Is there more than one church involved? Who all is involved?”

Mr. Hartman, “Right now we don’t really have all the names of all of them but right now its about four.”

Com. Harper, “Who are the four?”

Mr. Hartman, “I don’t have those written down. I know one was Daybreak, one was probably Vineyard Church on Route 30.”

Com. Harper, “When is this supposed to be held?”

Mr. Hartman, “As soon as possible.”

Com. Harper, “Have you talked to anyone at the Opera House about their schedule?”

Mr. Hartman, “We’ve asked them and after speaking with them they said we needed your permission since it was county owned.”

Com. Harper, “I think we should put this over until the meeting on the 22nd. Do they have your number?”

Mr. Hartman, “Yes.”

Com. Harper, “Will this be for a weekday or weekend?”

Mr. Hartman, “Weekend. Saturday night.”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “I think she should give you available dates and then you come to us and see if we will approve it.”

Mr. Hartman, “I guess what we are asking right now is, is it okay we use the Opera House and if yes, then we can give you more information as far as the date and time.”

Com. Evans, “I think there were two things that we need. One is for the Opera House to tell us the available dates and that it is okay for them to use it. Then the other thing we are going to need is some proof of liability coverage, insurance.”

Mr. Hartman, “All of the insurance can be provided by Daybreak as the event facilitators for the event.”

Com. Evans, “They need to name us as an additional insured during this event, I think it is going to be imperative.”

Com. Harper, “We will put you back on the schedule for the 22nd. Why don’t you get a hold of our office before then and let us know where you are at with your discussions with the Opera House.”

Mr. Hartman, “Okay.”
Com. Evans, “I think we are in favor of it, obviously we want to do it the right way.”

Mr. Hartman, “So, basically you just need insurance?”

Com. Evans, “Yes, we need to know that there is insurance coverage and then the Opera House needs to give you dates that are available. Then let us and you know that they have no problem with it and that the dates are available.”

Mr. Hartman, “That is not a problem.”

SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE CEDIT PLAN

Com. Harper, “This is the second amendment to the Capital Improvement Plan, this is a proposed amendment to the Economic Development Income Tax. It is to purchase document imaging equipment for the Clerk’s Office, Adult Probation, Prosecutor’s Office, Plan Commission, Building Department, Health Department, Treasurer’s Office, and to begin the process of outsourcing, scanning and indexing, CD mastering of documents for these departments. Sharon, do you want to come up? We had a joint meeting of the Council and Commissioners and various department heads going over this a few weeks ago. Sharon, you might want to state what the problem is and how to solve it.”

Ms. Lippens, “One of the main problems is storage. The Clerk’s office has to retain a lot of documents for an indefinite period of time. They do destroy documents as the law allows but there are a lot of documents they have to keep potentially forever and they are running out of storage space, as many departments are. So one of the possibilities for solving this problem is to go to document imaging. It has been approved by the court administrator and that way they can scan these documents and it will not only relieve the storage problem but also enhance the departments. They will be able to look up things and things won’t get misfiled. Things like that. It will also give multiple departments access to these documents instead of being in one place. The Adult Probation, Clerk, Prosecutor and Planning and Building were the four departments that were really pushing for this as they are having most of the problems with space.”

Com. Evans, “The proposal then is for $136,000 for this year to begin the process. In reviewing the whole concept, I was wondering and I think it is great and I think we have to do this. I think if we can get everybody up and running by the first of the year, to go from today forward, but our problem is obviously going to be today backwards. And to have each one of those departments try to do their individually I think is going to be a problem. Is there a possibility of putting another employee on the county’s payroll using the software in an office somewhere adjacent to your department and saying okay, they are going to go with the clerk’s stuff until they are done and they are going to go with the Recorder’s until they are done, then go to each one of the units. Do you think there is a cost savings doing it that way as opposed to outsourcing it as it calls for?”

Ms. Lippens, “Probably we would have to look at what the cost of that employee would be and if the Council would approve it and then take a look at the cost of outsourcing it would be and compare the two. I know that outsourcing the large books for the Clerk’s, which is just a part of it, is really not something that is cost effective because you would have to buy a specialized scanner as these books are extremely oversized and to buy that scanner is about $40,000.00 by itself. Then to just use to scan large books and then be done with it would not be cost effective. We would be better off outsourcing that.”

Com. Harper, “We’ve got some money set aside this year for the equipment plus some of the work which I thought we had talked about to keep on track to keep those big books and start working on them. I think what Commissioner Evans says is right that at some point, because we are running out of space and as we look at going back, we should do a cost analysis and see about hiring a person rather than outsourcing that.”

Ms. Lippens, “I can start looking into that and see what type of salary would be required for that type of position and we probably already have the equipment in our office that is necessary.”

Com. Evans moved to amend the EDIT contribution project to allow for the $136,000.00 expenditure for the document imaging system, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

PART TIME PAY INCREASES FOR 2006

Com. Harper, “We had a discussion with the Council for fifty cents an hour, I believe.”

Com. Evans, “I think that’s what it was. I know they are all worth more but I don’t think we can do that and keep with the rate increases that is prescribed by the Council.”

Com. Evans moved to approve an increase of fifty cents an hour for part time employees for 2006, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

COMMISSIONER EVANS’ COMMENTS

Com. Evans, “A few months ago I made some observations and expressed some gratitudes and wondered aloud why the towns of Chesterton, Porter and Burns Harbor didn’t emerge into one municipality. In the time that has lapsed, some of the responses I have received have been very interesting. People have generally said to me that they agree but that they doubt seriously it would work because there are too many personalities involved. Then they refer to the three town councils, the three clerk-treasurers, the three police chiefs, the three fire chiefs, the three street departments, the three park departments, the three utility board and on and on and on. This is exactly why I brought this up. The economies of scale of this plan should be as easy to see on Jimmy Durante’s face. Reactions from some of the town councils have been varied and some of the examples are “we’re not Chesterton, we’re Porter;” “Yes, it is a good idea but we already have enough on our plate” “Why do we want to open up old wounds” “We don’t want to incur their obligations because of their poor choices” “We don’t want their debt”; etc., etc., etc. Chesterton is discussing becoming a city, I mean no disrespect to the Chesterton Town Council, but having lived in that town all my life I think I am entitled to my opinion. I recommend not putting the cart before the horse. If Chesterton is to become a city, it should become a city of inclusion, not a city of exclusion. Yes, Chesterton has the biggest population, the biggest budget, largest area and is the seat of many of the north county area’s functions. But we all claim the same zip code, the same school system, the same Chamber of Commerce, the same newspaper, the same libraries, the same grocery stores, the same banks, the same bars and the same churches. We are one community. That would bring us to a merger into one city of all three municipalities, not one municipality trying to be first in order to dictate to the others. If we do merge, many are concerned with what the new name of the city would be. Why don’t we settle it by having the clerk-treasurers of the three towns judge entries which would be submitted by the citizens, select a name and be done with it. People will still refer to the areas as Chesterton, Porter and Burns Harbor. The other stumbling block seems to be the representation of the new government. All suggestions should be heard, but my suggestion would be to have a seven member council with one member from each of the old towns boundaries and four members at large, members from anywhere in the communities. Of course, a mayor would be elected and for those of you who wonder, I will neither seek nor accept the nomination of that post. I believe that our communities would do much better if we quit the bickering, joined forces, cut duplication of services, lower the taxes and create a better quality of life for everyone. Chesterton should not put the question of city status on the ballot before the merger in question is presented to the people. It should be a choice for the people not the town boards. Thank you.”

Com. Harper, “Thank you, John. Anything else?”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “I think Russ Shirley is here on that water issue with the city. At out last board meeting we approved the original agreement and we don’t have the original agreement, we have a different agreement.”

Com. Harper, “Do we have it ready for approval, a different agreement or not?”

Atty. Rinkenberger, “Yes, Russ has it.”

Com. Evans moved to approve the agreement for providing water services to the new Greg Phillips Memorial Building, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

PLAN COMMISSION SESSION
Robert Thompson, Director

Mr. Thompson, “This is Plan Commission Resolution No. 05-15, petitioner Todd Guyer and Colleen Guyer requesting an amendment from R1, Single Family Residential to C2, Offices and Institutions. The Plan Commission gave a recommendation at their October 12th public hearing of approval by a 7-1 vote and this also included an approval with the written commitments that were submitted by the petitioner’s attorney, Mr. Leeth, at that time.”

Com. Harper, “All right, this is a public hearing so Mr. Leeth, if you will.”

Atty. Leeth, “Good evening, my name is Todd Leeth. I am here on behalf of the petitioner, Todd and Colleen Guyer. The petition before you is one of a zone change. As Mr. Thompson indicated we appeared before the Porter County Plan Commissioner for a public hearing and received their favorable recommendation. The property in question is a two acre parcel and has 150 feet of frontage on the north side of US 30 just outside of the corporate limits of the city of Valparaiso. It is currently zoned R1, but I think from the staff report Mr. Thompson prepared for the Plan Commission in casual observance of the area, it is certainly not in a residential area. In fact, I would say it is not even in a transition area, it is already transitioned to a commercial area. We are seeking a zone change to the C2 offices and institutions zoning classification. The Guyers currently operate Attitudes Beauty Salon which is in the Wiseway Shopping Center. Their intention is to acquire the property and redevelop it, raise the existing single family home, and build a new beauty salon on the property in question. I provided to you and I think Mr. Thompson did earlier as well, a copy of the written commitments that we had first approached or proposed to the Plan Commission and then revised based upon some of their comments, wishes and desires to incorporate some additional commitments. First and foremost, Section 4 of the agreement strikes out or eliminates some of the uses that would have otherwise been allowed under the zoning ordinance in the C2 classification. Primarily first and foremost, gasoline stations, fueling stations would not be allowed. There are some others that we have stricken there as well as you can see. Secondly, Section 5 of the agreement provides that there are a list of five additional commitments that are being made. One of which is that the operation of the beauty salon would not be conducted on Sunday, it is Monday through Saturday. There would be a limit on the number of chairs in the beauty salon, not to exceed ten. That the parcel would be developed only on the southern half of the parcel, its narrow and very deep. At the northern end of the parcel is a subdivision, this will provide a buffer from that subdivision. Interestingly enough, no one from that subdivision appeared at the Plan Commission to voice any comments during the public hearing. If it is developed as a beauty salon we are committing to bring sewer and water to the property. We also, during the hearing at the Plan Commission, there was some concern over the overlay ordinance and the affect of parking and where we were going to put the building on the property. All the development style type issues. So, we took a break, if you will, continue the case, my client prepared a preliminary site plan. We have attached that to the written commitments and the last of the commitments in section 5 indicate that we will develop the property in reasonable conformity to that site plan. So we have shown you how we plan to do it, we showed you where the frontage road is going to go. That frontage road lines up with an existing frontage road that is two parcels to the east along some commercial areas in that vicinity. So it matches what is certainly the intent of your ordinance, in fact the letter of the law of the ordinance, as well as lines up with the practical extension in the future should the parcels in between develop in a commercial nature. As I indicated, I think this is a commercial area. If you look to the east of the property there are two parcels that are of similar size, one of which is vacant, one has a home significantly set back off of Highway 30 and very near the dental clinic. The next parcel to the east is the dental clinic. And then the next parcel is a larger parcel that has four commercial businesses on it and the significant frontage road that I referred to earlier. Those four businesses are zoned C4 under the county’s zoning ordinance. The county jurisdiction picks up at Hayes Leonard Road along the north, then the dental clinic is a use that was permitted by a permanent use variance by the Board of Zoning Appeals with the county. To the west of the property is a single family home and on the other side of that is a home and a sign business. With all of that you can tell I think this is very much a commercial area. There is nearly 30,000 cars traversing Highway 30 in this area and I think businesses ought to locate where we have traffic volumes of that nature rather than in more residential corridors off of those areas. Again, we think that the petition is well suited for the area and we look forward to answering any questions you might have.”

Com. Harper, “Is there anyone here to speak either for or against this petition?”

Susan Handshey, “We have the side business as to the west. We have no objection to the business. My situation is we have a ditch that has been there for years and it overflows and unfortunately our property gets, before it goes under the highway again to Sylvan Manor, it gets flooded. Here are some of the pictures. I talked to Indianapolis about their permit and they said for about ten shares, it would be about 1,000 gallons of water a day. It is flooded now.”

Com. Evans, “Is the drain under the highway open?”

Ms. Handshey, “Oh no, that’s why it floods. There is a weir on the other side of the highway to the other section of their development. So that means it backs up. When it gets full of water, then it is going to stay there, that ditch does not drain.”

Com. Evans, “These pictures are all your side of the road, right?”

Ms. Handshey, “Yes. I was amazed at all these years we don’t have a problem with _____________ because the subdivision has draining to the north. Also, their septics drain into that ditch. I have nothing against these people for having a beauty shop, that takes a lot of water. Then he was going to put in a driveway for their people to park, well, where’s the run off going to go?”

Com. Harper, “ I am glad you came in and brought these pictures. Let’s give them a chance to answer this.”

Ms. Handshey, “It stops at the culvert and goes under the highway, it doesn’t flow.”

Com. Evans, “I think Highway ought to see the pictures.”

Ms. Handshey, “It’s been that way for years and have gone to Breitzke’s office and complained and complained and there was money years ago to correct this problem but it was never done. I maintain the property so it is decent looking. We have a business but we were grandfathered in years ago. Its not a big corporation, but it’s not one of these big developments of business that create a problem.”

Com. Harper, “How long ago were these pictures taken?”

Ms. Handshey, “Three years, two years ago.”

Com. Harper, “But you say it is flooded right now?”

Ms. Handshey, “Well, we haven’t had that much rain. So it depends on what happens, because the property that is next to us going east, it will flood, too. And that is (inaudible)… so it sits there.”

Com. Harper, “Who lives in that house between your property and that property?”

Ms. Handshey, “The one house is vacant.”

Com. Harper, “The one that is directly west of the property we are talking about today, who lives in that house?”

Ms. Handshey, “I don’t know them.”

Atty. Leeth, “Between the Handset home and business and the subject property is a property that is a single family home owned by Mr. and Mrs. Mark Toth. In fact, we went to Mr. Toth with our site plan because if you recall, Mr. Harper, at the Plan Commission, there was concern with regard to lights going over and we showed him a copy of the site plan and he signed off on it with his signature. So he is in agreement with our petition.”

Ms. Handshey, “Well, yes he is because he is running some sort of advertising business. He also has a lot of trash, he’s got a car that is sitting on one side of the neighbor’s and it is sinking into the ground. He refuses to, he said he is entitled to one car.”

Mr. Thompson, “That’s true. You are allowed to (inaudible)…..”

Ms. Handshey, “But is it allowable to sink away, year after year?”

Com. Evans, “I think once the wheels get mired in the mud, it becomes a building. Before the subdivision was built, Sylvan Manor, did the water do that then?”

Ms. Handshey, “Actually it started with Westville’s. When KP and who is it from Chesterton that is the developer, and through the years it has bothered us because it just got worse. The lower portion was supposed to be let far apart. So okay, (inaudible) then after a couple years, they decided to put in more homes. And they are closer to the (inaudible)… We hired an engineer from Lake County and he said well how is it going to drain, it is like a bath tub, it has nowhere to go. Its been like that. I don’t know how many times I have gone to talk to the Commissioners about this. I am concerned about the health problem. I just don’t understand, I have nothing against the beauty salon, but I am (inaudible)… You have to have a place to park, where does it drain, again, back into the ditch?”

Com. Harper, “To the ditch that doesn’t drain.”

Ms. Handshey, “No. It’s weird, but behind this going under the highway, the culvert, it doesn’t permit it because that developer wanted to use that portion of the land for houses. Then that goes in and around the old Blachly home, goes out to Tanke’s house, but he is closing up. It goes out to Salt Creek.”

Com. Harper, “Okay, thank you very much. Todd, did you want to respond to that?”

Atty. Leeth, “I will. As I indicated at the Plan Commission, we have two levels of review assuming that we receive your blessing with regard to the zoning. Because this is a commercial enterprise we would have to go to the Technical Advisory Committee prior to receiving a building permit. At that time, they would look at drainage, ingress and egress and assure that we had all the proper developments type issue resolved. That would be required of any commercial enterprise. Because we are in the overlay zone, that scrutiny is heightened as well. Because we are in the US 30 overlay zone, the building style, architecture, frontage road, all of the issues that come up, because it is in the 30 overlay, also come onto to the table. The concern that Ms. Handset has is really a basic development issue with regard to drainage. As I indicated, one of our commitments is that we are only developing the southern half of the property. We still have a significant part of the property that is going to be left in its natural state that today can be developed in a residential manner.”

Unidentified male, (Inaudible)…

Atty. Leeth, “To tell you the truth, I don’t know. As you well know just viewing the property there is a significant fall off fairly close to the rear of the existing home. So there is going to have to be some fill and leveling of the area that we are showing on the site plan as the building area because we are trying to go back further to allow for that frontage road. It sounds like it may very well go to the Toth property and perhaps there to Handset and downstream to the south side of US 30. It appears from what I can orient myself from the photographs, it appears the problem is US 30. The water isn’t getting in that direction if in fact that is where it is going. Again, it appears as if that is the problem.”

Com. Harper, “Is that a regulated drain?”

Ms. Handshey, “We were (inaudible)….”

Mr. Thompson, “Right off hand, I do not know.”

Com. Harper, “If they get this zoning and our new ordinance goes in as far as drainage, how will they have to handle that drainage on that piece of property?”

Mr. Thompson, “If the ditch does go through, the property involved could be considered a ___ water way that is in there. But a couple things they are going to have to do is first put in a pre-pond to clean water out and try and get as much sediment out as they can. Dry detention facilities are kind of discouraged now with that as we are looking more towards possibly a constructed type of plan or a retention pond, something that would hold water in it and it would overflow into a waterway. Our conventional of what we have today is kind of thrown out. There are other . . .”

Com. Harper, “Let me ask you this. Over and above the zoning, this lady has come to us and she has got a problem. She has a problem whether this land gets zoned or not, she’s got a problem that apparently she has had for years. What is the answer, Dave, can you tell me what the answer to her problem is?”

Mr. Schelling, “It sounds like an issue with the structure under US 30, I have no idea though.”

Ms. Handshey, “They have tried to clean it, you can’t clean it because the Highway put in their, well the county has been out there but you can’t clean it. The highway is up here, the county was supposed to, when they put the development in with the subdivision, they were only supposed to put in two big pipes on each side of it so it could drain. They never got, they only had the one. Then the one drain plugged up all the time because the weir behind this main culvert that the state put in is still too high.”

Com. Harper, “I have a suggestion. Tonight is first hearing on this. There has to be another hearing and I think we should allow public hearing at the other hearing because I would suggest, and also what they are telling you is true, is tonight isn’t a final approval because they have to have the drainage approved before they can do anything. We do have a new drainage ordinance that hopefully is going to help out with some of these problems. I suggest that we ask Highway and Plan Commission to be ready to tell us two weeks from tonight at least what the problem is. Someone has got to be able to.”

Com. Evans, “Maybe if Dave could get with the state.”

Com. Harper, “And even if the state won’t get here by this time at least go out and look so we know next time we are here what the problem is. I don’t understand what the problem is. We can’t address it if we don’t understand what it is.”

Com. Evans, “I think you exactly right. There are measures in play that if we approve this tonight there has to be another reading on it as well. Then the Technical Advisory Committee has to give their recommendation as to what has to be done to the property so that not only for their sake but yours as well.”

Ms. Handshey, “It goes down and makes a turn through Sylvan Manor and then back into Salt Creek.”

Com. Harper, “Is it moving when it goes through Sylvan Manor?”

Com. Evans, “From the pictures, it doesn’t look like it is moving at all.”

Ms. Handshey, “Not on my side. But the only thing I found out when the man came in to give us his opinion, the engineer, we said it is not going to go because you have the weir.”

Com. Harper, “Let me ask you something, is it all right if you leave those pictures for our Plan Commission.”

Com Evans moved to grant approval on first reading with continuing to have the public hearing portion open until the next meeting, Com. Harper seconded, motion carried.

Com. Harper, “Is there any other Plan Commission business?”

Mr. Thompson, “I am still not comfortable on this but I will work with Mr. Leeth.”

With no further business to conduct, the meeting was recessed.

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
PORTER COUNTY, INDIANA

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

Attest: Sandra K. Vuko, Auditor