PORTER COUNTY COUNCIL
May 14, 2002

The Porter County Council met on May 14, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., in the County Administration Center, 155 Indiana - Suite 205, Valparaiso, Indiana.

Members present were William Carmichael, Karen Conover Carole Knoblock, Karen Martin, John Ruge, Leon West and President Barbara Stroud. Also present was Attorney David Hollenbeck, Auditor Sandra Vuko, Jamie Dziabo and Jan Balcerak.

Ms. Stroud, You should have brought with you the minutes from the March 19th and April 16th meetings. Does anyone have any corrections for the March 19th meeting.

Mrs. Knoblock moved to approve the minutes of March 19, 2002 as received. Mrs. Conover seconded, motion carried unanimously.

Ms. Stroud, What about the April 16th meeting?

Mr. West moved to approve the minutes of April 16, 2002 as received. Mrs. Knoblock seconded, motion carried unanimously.

FIRST READING

At this time Mrs. Vuko read the Notice to Taxpayers.

COMMISSIONER LARRY SHEETS TO ADDRESS THE HIRING FREEZE

Ms. Stroud, Thank you Mrs. Vuko. Commissioners Sheets and Burrus and Evans.

Com. Sheets, Happy birthday.

Mrs. Conover, Thank you.

Com. Sheets, The first item I want to address before the commissioners get into their official business is the hiring freeze. As I think, all of you know we lost a very good employee in Bob Thompson in the Plan Commission. Bob was not only doing the planning but he was looking to the future. He did the land use management plan. He did an excellent job of that. He was working with Com. Burrus and a committee working on zoning changes. We have a lawsuit now through the BZA. A lot of work that Bob was doing, he is going to be missed.
The reason I am here tonight is to ask you to consider allowing the Plan Commission to interview and replace Bob Thompson. My personal concern is that he is a department head and I don't think any department should run very long without a permanent department. That is why I am here to talk to you. I would be glad to answer any of your questions.

Mr. Carmichael, What is the current salary of Bob Thompson? Do you know?

Com. Sheets, I don't know but I think…

Ms. Martin, It's $45,000.

Mr. Carmichael, What do you recommend we hire a new person in at or do you have a recommendation?

Ms. Martin, We need to go down to the entry level. I think it was 41-something.

Mr. Carmichael, 41-something, do you agree with that?

Com. Sheets, Yes, I think the Plan Commission is in agreement with that to start them out at the low end.

Mr. Carmichael, Are there requirements for the director? Educational requirements?

Ms. Martin, We requested a planning degree; a degree in planning or an area close to. But that primarily is a degree in planning. It's a priority. I think Bob had a degree in urban planning, if I'm not wrong.

Mr. Ruge, This isn't a new hiring, it's just a replacement?

Com. Sheets, Yes, this is not new. I think the Plan Commission, maybe Karen would support this, I don't know, but if it was a clerk or somebody at that level, we might look at it differently. But in my opinion, this is a department head.

Ms. Stroud, Yes, you would have to look at it differently since we have a hiring freeze on with the people in the offices. But since this is a department head, then I think that it's imperative that we have someone in that position. I would like to say that since it is going back to the low end of $41,500, hopefully the notices go out in terms of, you are intending to interview people outside of the current departments here, especially to get people with degrees in planning and so on, I think you have to do that.

Com. Sheets, Yes.

Ms. Stroud, I don't know of anyone else…

Ms. Martin, I think initially you have to--we have to--post in-house for three days.

Ms. Stroud, Yes.

Ms. Martin, Then we post outside.

Mr. Carmichael moved to approve the Commissioner Sheets' request allowing the Plan Commission to interview and fill the Executive Director/County Planner position at $41,500. Mrs. Knoblock seconded, motion carried unanimously.

COMMISSIONERS 01.30
Transfer

$1,385 from account 3320 Legal Notices into account 3976 County Property Assessed Benefits
$3,000 from account 3130 Training & Education into account 3410 Official Bonds
$100 from account 3210 Travel into account 3410 Official Bonds
$2,000 from account 3120 Consultants into account 3440 Unemployment
$155 from account 3210 Travel into account 3440 Unemployment
$3,000 from account 3977 Appraisers into account 3430 Workers Comp
$1,000 from account 3923 Change of Venue into account 3430 Workers Comp
$1,000 from account 3320 Legal into account 3430 Workers Comp
$2,000 from 3340 Advertising into account 3430 Workers Comp
$853 from account 3710 Equipment Rental into account 3430 Workers Comp

Ms. Stroud, Next on the agenda will be the commissioners.

Com. David Burrus, We have three transfer requests. The amounts and line items are indicated. I would be glad to answer any questions on those three. One goes to Official Bonds, one goes to Unemployment Benefits and one goes to Workmen's Comp Insurance.

Mr. Carmichael, These are monies that are currently in the budget.

Ms. Stroud, These are in the budget at the present time. We're just transferring. Just so the audience knows, we're just transferring money that is already in the budget. I can go through the accounts if necessary, but they are going from like account 3320 to account 3976. They are all within general fund monies. They've all been approved so they are shifting them into a different one. Does anyone have any questions? Do we need to go through each one?

Mrs. Knoblock, No.

Mrs. Conover moved to grant the request for transfer of funds as submitted by the Commissioners. Mrs. Knoblock seconded, motion carried unanimously.

Com. Evans, Thank you.

Com. Sheets, Thank you very much. We appreciate it.

CIRCUIT COURT 01.81
Transfer

$25 from account 1240 Per Diem Fees into account 1310 Other Legal

Ms. Stroud, Next on the list is Circuit Court. They are requesting a transfer. I don't know if anybody is here from the Circuit Court representing the Circuit Court?

Ms. Martin, It's under $200, they don't have to come.

Ms. Stroud, Yes, they don't have to be. It's just $25--I shouldn't say just, because $25 is important--from account 1240 to account 1310.

Mr. Carmichael moved to grant the request for transfer of funds as submitted by Circuit Court. Ms. Martin seconded, motion carried unanimously.

ASSESSOR 01.09
Transfer

$27 from account 3130 Training & Education into account 3930 Dues & Subscriptions

Ms. Stroud, Again, it's from account 3130 to account 3930. It is of course under a couple of hundred dollars. It's $27.

Mr. Carmichael moved to grant the request for transfer of funds as submitted by the Assessor. Ms. Martin seconded, motion carried unanimously.

PORTER TOWNSHIP 01.57
Transfer

$85 from account 3210 Travel into account 3130 Training & Education

Ms. Stroud, The next one is for Porter Township; $85 to Training & Education. Again, it is a transfer from account 3210 to account 3130.

Ms. Martin moved to grant the request for transfer of funds as submitted by Porter Township. Mrs. Conover seconded, motion carried unanimously.

PUBLIC DEFENDER 01.84
Transfer

$2,343.92 from account 3420 Bldg/Liability/Comp Coverage into account 2110 Office Supplies

Ms. Stroud, The next one, the Public Defender, which I see in the audience. The Public Defender wants to transfer from account 3420, the amount of $2,343.92, which the account is Bldg/Liability/Comprehensive Coverage to account 2110. Is that correct?

Jim Tsoutsouris, Correct.

Ms. Stroud, For Office Supplies, would you like to make any comment?

Mr. Tsoutsouris, Well, when I submitted my revised budget in January, apparently it was inadvertently overlooked. So we're taking it out of my malpractice insurance and putting it into the Office Supplies. I'm going to be back next month because my malpractice insurance will be due, so I've got to get it put back from someplace.

Ms. Stroud, I guess we'll just have to approach that next month.

Mr. Tsoutsouris, Right, right, sure.
Ms. Martin, I guess I'm concerned, if this is for malpractice, but he's going to take it out then he's going to put it back. Where are you going to find to put it back in?

Ms. Stroud, Are you going to shift some other funds around so you can get money back in the malpractice, because honest…

Mr. Tsoutsouris, Yes, yes.

Ms. Stroud, Okay.

Mr. Tsoutsouris, Because money was not taken out that should have been taken out. We'll adjust that next month.

Ms. Stroud, Okay, because general fund money is…

Mr. Tsoutsouris, There will be no additional monies if that's your question. No I won't need it.

Ms Stroud, Okay, that's what we needed to know. We need a motion here.

Mrs. Conover moved to grant the request for transfer of funds as submitted by the Public Defender. Mr. West seconded, motion carried unanimously.

Ms. Stroud, Motion carries.

Mr. Tsoutsouris, Thank you.

Ms. Stroud, Thank you.

PARKS & RECREATION 01.85
Transfer

$50 from account 2110 Office Supplies into account 2120 Office Fixtures under $100
$1,336.91 from account 3920 Disposal into account 1130 Overtime
$2,150 from account 3950 Contractual Services into account 3951 Contractual Attorney

Ms. Stroud, Good evening, Ed. You have a couple of requests. One request is to transfer $50 from 2110 to account 2120. Do we want to address that one first or do you want to address everything as a whole? I'm asking the Council here. The other two are for different funds. I think maybe we should do this one first, then go on to the other ones. How's that? We need a motion to approve the first one.

Mr. Carmichael, Is that from Salaries to Hourly, is that what you are asking for?

Ms. Stroud, Let's do the first one, the $50 to Office Fixtures.

Ed Melendez, That's for a new set of headphones for the transcriber.

Ms. Stroud, Okay.

Ed Melendez, And that's for Office Fixtures less than $100.

Ms. Stroud, Right, so we need a motion here.

Ms. Martin moved to grant the request for transfer of funds, the amount of $50, as submitted by Parks & Recreation. Mrs. Conover seconded, motion carried unanimously.

Ms. Stroud, For Parks & Recreation, from account 3920, which is your Disposal, to Overtime, account 1130.

Mr. Melendez, It was brought to our attention that the secretary had a lot of hours that needed to be deducted besides her vacation time and her personal time. This was due to a lot of the time that I wasn't in the office and between the two positions that we finally got filled. This is probably been since the first time I arrived in the county that I have a full-time staff, so my time has been spent out of the office. Now we are requiring the secretary, at least on an average of taking her seven hours off and trying to reduce the remaining time down, so.

Ms. Stroud, Yes, I was going to say I would try to get myself out of the situation of any kind of overtime with the budget restraints being what they are. I don't think we have to explain what I mean. I would try and get away from this, but I think we talked about this before.

Mr. Melendez, Right.

Ms. Stroud, Okay, so you are saying that the money is available in this account in 3920.

Mr. Melendez, That's correct.

Mr. Carmichael, But you've got the situation under control at this point?

Mr. Melendez, Yes.

Ms. Stroud, Yes.

Mr. Carmichael moved to grant the request for transfer of funds, the amount of $1,336.91, as submitted by Parks & Recreation. Mrs. Conover seconded, motion carried unanimously.

Ms. Stroud, Okay, let's take the next one that you have.

Ms. Martin, I just had one question for discussion.

Ms. Stroud, Okay, I'm sorry.

Ms. Martin, You're not going to have any problem with Disposal being short?

Mr. Melendez, No, we're set.

Ms. Martin, Okay, I just wanted to make sure.

Ms. Stroud, For the next one you are requesting $2,150 to be taken from your contract services to your contract sources with your attorney. Is that what it is or is it the attorney fees?

Mr. Melendez, That's correct.

Ms. Stroud, So the money was approved under contract services and you're just transferring it again?

Mr. Melendez, Right.

Ms. Stroud, Okay. The same question would apply here. Do you think you can cover everything that you need here?

Mr. Melendez, That's true, yes we can.

Ms. Stroud, Okay. Motion?

Ms. Martin moved to grant the request for transfer of funds, the amount of $2,150, as submitted by Parks & Recreation. Mr. Carmichael seconded, motion carried unanimously.

Ms. Stroud, Thank you, Ed.

PARKS OPERATING 127
Additional Appropriation

$3,000 into account 1110 Salaries
$400 into account 1220 Medical/Life Insurance
$200 into account 1230 PERF
$200 into account 1210 FICA

Ms. Stroud, These are not general fund monies.

Mr. Melendez, No, this is money that we receive from Tourism.

Ms. Stroud, Just so the people in the audience knows this is not the general fund. You want to put $3,000 in Salaries, $400 to Medical/Life Insurance, $200 to PERF and $200 to FICA. Now your money is received from?

Mr. Melendez, Tourism and this goes for our programming in the 127 account.

Ms. Stroud, Okay. Does anyone have any discussion on this?

Mr. Carmichael, The money to Salaries is not for full-time employees?

Mr. Melendez, This is for the person whose running the festivals and events.

Mr. Carmichael, The event person?

Mr. Melendez, Yes.

Ms. Stroud, Yes.

Ms. Martin, And it's $6.75 an hour. They don't have any full-time in that budget.

Mr. Ruge, Is that hourly?

Ms. Martin, Yes, $6.75 an hour.

Mr. Carmichael moved to grant the request for additional appropriations as submitted by Parks Operating. Mrs. Conover seconded, motion carried unanimously.

Mr. Melendez, Thank you.

Ms. Stroud, You're quite welcome.

HIGHWAY 02
Additional Appropriation

$36,577 into account 3420 Liability Insurance
$25,000 into account 3730 Lease Purchase

Ms. Stroud, Good evening, Mr. Jarnecke. Just so the people know again, the Highway Department is not general fund monies. This is 02 monies, funds that are the Highway's funds. Jack is requesting from account 3420, $36,577 for Liability Insurance and he is also requesting $25,000 to Lease Purchase. Is that correct, Jack?

Jack Jarnecke, Yes.

Ms. Stroud, Does anybody on the Council have any questions or would you like to make some comments?

Mr. Jarnecke, The Liability Insurance, with this additional that will leave me a little over $6,000 to finish the year out in the account.

Ms. Stroud, I'm sorry, $6,000?

Mr. Jarnecke, Yes. I think we pretty well got all the mailbox damages taken care of from the winter. Then the $25,000 is towards a five-year lease purchase for a new lift, a hydraulic truck for doing tree work and taking care of traffic lights and so forth. Our old one is no longer certifiable so we cannot use it anymore.

Ms. Stroud, Does anyone have any comments?

Mr. Carmichael, Put it down in south county along side of that drop down there?
Mr. Jarnecke, Yes, I can just see it.

Mr. Carmichael, It hasn't moved since he's bought it.

Ms. Stroud, Does anyone else have any questions?

Mr. Carmichael moved to grant the request for additional appropriations as submitted by Highway 02. Ms. Martin seconded, motion carried unanimously.

SURVEYOR PERPETUATION 057
Additional Appropriation

$6,000 into account 1120 Hourly

Ms. Stroud, Next is the Surveyor's Perpetuation Fund money. You need money to pay your summer employees for section corner work. What is that for?

Kevin Breitzke, Correct. This is a very restricted fund. It's monies that come in from the section corner perpetuation. These are monuments that pretty much set up the network of control points for public construction and public land surveys as well as private land surveys. These are the responsibility of the land surveyor, that's why the Legislature set up this fund. What I'm asking for is to transfer the money from that fund for part-time help, which will be exclusively used for the section corner perpetuation. This is something we do basically every year.

Ms. Stroud, Okay, so this is an additional. Does anyone have any questions they would like to ask?

Ms. Martin, John does.

Ms. Stroud, Yes, sir.

Mr. Ruge, Instead of hiring new people, you know there's a freeze, enough people are just asking for more.

Mr. Breitzke, John, understand…

Mr. Ruge, Not getting around the…

Mr. Breitzke, I already have a part-time person that this will go toward, but with the budget being trimmed, in order to keep people on payroll that we have, this is why we are going forward with it.

Ms. Stroud, And this is not general fund money, John. This is a special fund that has been established by the State.

Mr. Carmichael, This is out of the perpetuation fund.

Ms. Stroud, Correct.

Mr. Breitzke, Yes, the section corner perpetuation fund.

Mr. Ruge, Oh, I see.

Ms. Stroud, Yes, the perpetuation fund.

Mr. Breitzke, This is one of the specific purposes that this can be used for.

Mr. Carmichael, What's your balance in there?

Mr. Breitzke, Off the top of my head I don't know. I think its around $26,000 or $27,000 right now. We also use that for replacing equipment. As you might know, surveying equipment is very expensive, its high-precision stuff. It costs into the 20-thousands or even more.

Mr. Carmichael, Do we store it in the garage?
Mr. Breitzke, Heavens no. I tell the boys to bring it in.

Mr. Carmichael move to grant the request for additional appropriations as submitted by Surveyor Perpetuation. Mr. West seconded, motion carried unanimously.

HOME DETENTION 41
144 Form

Home Detention Probation Officer York from $30,597 to $31,821
Home Detention Probation Officer Staresina from $27,366 to $28,461
Home Detention Probation Officer Taylor from $12,949 to $13,467

Additional Appropriation

$73,749 into account 1110 Salaries
$5,642 into account 1210 FICA
$3,503 into account 1230 PERF
$700 into account 3220 Telephone
$700 into account 2110 Office Supplies
$200 into account 3930 Dues & Subscriptions
$2,000 into account 3130 Training & Education
$4,229 into account 3210 Travel

Ms. Stroud, Next on the agenda is the Home Detention grant. Good evening, gentlemen.

Neil Hannon, Good evening.

Ms. Stroud, You need a Form 144 change. This is for Home Detention/Adult Probation Officers. You are taking the salaries up. Would you like to explain this?

Steve Meyer, Yes, the state grant that we've been getting for about 12 years now runs on a July to June fiscal year. So every year for 12 years we have to come in here about this time of year to establish these figures. Then this year there was surprisingly raises given for these people through the state grant. We're hoping that will still be in effect in a couple of months from now when they kick in. I don't know what's going on at the state level, but a couple of years ago they approved these raises to start July 1st.

Ms. Stroud, Let's just hope that the money is still in there since they started their special session today. So in the next few weeks it may or may not be there. I mean, I understand what you are saying to us and we will go ahead with this, but hopefully those funds will still be there. If they are not, then obviously. Just so the people in the audience know again, it is grant money, it is not general fund money. Okay, any questions from the Council?

Mr. Carmichael, It's a maybe.

Ms. Stroud, Okay, we have to do a roll call for the 144.

Mrs. Conover moved to amend the 144 Form as submitted by Home Detention. Mrs. Knoblock seconded.

Mr. Carmichael, I have a question.

Ms. Stroud, I'm sorry.

Mr. Carmichael, Are you passing this subject to funding?

Ms. Martin, Well if they don't have the…

Ms. Stroud, If they don't have the funding they can't do it themselves. We don't have it. I mean it's not general fund money. If the State calls them up in four weeks or whatever and says that it's been taken out of the budget…

Mr. Carmichael, When does this take effect?

Mr. Meyer, July 1st.

Mr. Carmichael, July 1st, subject to state funding.

Ms. Stroud, Correct.

Mr. Carmichael, As long as that is the motion.

Mrs. Conover moved to amend her motion, approving the 144 Form as submitted by Home Detention, subject to state funding. Mr. Carmichael seconded, motion carried unanimously.

Ms. Stroud, They have another request for an additional. Again, this is not general fund money. It is Fund 41.43. The amounts of $73,749 into account Salaries, $5,642 into account FICA, $3,503 into account PERF, $700 into account Telephone, $700 into account Office Supplies, $200 into account Dues & Subscriptions, $2,000 into account Training & Education and $4,229 into account Travel. Is that correct, the way I read it?

Mr. Meyer, Yes.

Mr. Carmichael, Is this out of the same pot of money?

Mr. Meyer, Correct.

Mr. Carmichael, This is all subject to funding?

Mr. Meyer, Correct.

Mrs. Conover, Was this not pre-approved by the State?

Mr. Meyer, Yes and our local Porter County Community Corrections Advisory Board also.

Mrs. Conover moved to grant the request for additional appropriations as submitted by Home Detention, subject to state funding. Mrs. Knoblock seconded, motion carried unanimously.

Mr. Meyer, Thank you.

Ms. Stroud, You're welcome.

JAIL 198
144 Form

Jailer Probationary from 0 to 4 at $23,630 each
Captain from 0 to 1 at $31,900
Lieutenant from 0 to 3 at $29,900 each
Administrative Assistant from 0 to 1 at $28,000
Sergeant from 0 to 2 at $28,557 each
Maintenance/Custodial from $0 to $30,000

Additional Appropriation

$89,178.53 into account 1110 Salaries
$6,822.16 into account 1210 FICA
$4,013.03 into account 1230 PERF
$11,123.46 into account 1220 Medical/Life Insurance
$208.80 into account 1220 Medical/Life Insurance

Ms. Stroud, For the federal government fund you are submitting a 144 for the following: Jailer Probationary from 0 to 4 at $23,630, a Captain from 0 to 1 at $31,900, Lieutenant from 0 to 3 at $29,900 each, Administrative Assistant from 0 to 1 to $28,000, Sergeant from 0 to 2 at $28,557 each and then a maintenance person from $0 to one at $30,000. Okay, let's take this part first. Questions?

Mrs. Conover, I guess my first question would be, are there any commissioners here?

Ms. Martin, Jan went to go get them.
Mrs. Conover, Okay. Are they relinquishing maintenance and janitorial when it comes to the new facility?

Sheriff Reynolds, Well, if they don't speak I can speak, I think, for them, but.

Ms. Stroud, Are they coming in?

Ms. Balcerak, Yes.

Mr. Ruge, This doesn't come out of the county general?

Ms. Stroud, This comes under the 198 Fund, which is the federal money. Karen, do you want to pose your question again? Mrs. Conover has a question for you.

Mrs. Conover, Are we not, the commissioners normally have the charge of custodial and maintenance for the county buildings. Are we not going to carry that policy over to the new jail?

Com. Burrus, It's our intention to. I understand Dave has offered a proposal, but I think that would probably be something that I personally would like to wait and see after a period of time operating it to see how much we really need out there.

Mrs. Conover, Is our new building guaranteed for a time when we open?

Com. Burrus, We have a one-year warranty on the majority of the mechanical equipment. I'm not sure whether we are talking maintenance or custodial. But the maintenance ought to be relatively light on the first year.

Mrs. Conover, Is there any reason why we can't provide the cleaning that we are doing with the other buildings with our current staff?

Com. Burrus, There's a very good possibility that we are going to be short-handed and have to deal with part-time people. I think the question probably really boils down to, is this something that should be dealt with under the commissioners' budget or under the sheriff's budget.

Sheriff Dave Reynolds, I mean it's my, first of all I want to make something clear. I'm not trying to take this, I mean if this position is granted, I believe it should be under the auspices of the commissioners. I mean I'm not trying, because I know by state, by statute, I think he, they, they are obligated to have the building.In just talking to the maintenance man, you've made it very clear to the commissioners that he doesn't think he can handle the excess of the building.

Ms. Martin, The current maintenance?

Sheriff Reynolds, Right. And there's no question that of Com. Burrus is right. There's a lot of things under warranty, but a lot of this, this is 170-some thousand square facility that involves a lot of preventative, preventative maintenance--if you will--and what we're looking at is someone that, that will also be involved with custodial and upkeep of the grounds outside. And we believe that, we'd rather be prepared and have it ready while we're, I mean, I know we'll keep this guy more than busy, than wait to, knowing that we have a problem and then going back to the commissioners and try to work it out. I just think its, I think its everybody's best interest to have someone on staff for us right now.

Ms. Stroud, But I would think that since this is a building that is owned by the County that if you felt that you needed a person out there that you should have gone to the commissioners and had it settled with them and not put it in this budget here.

Sheriff Reynolds, Well they had…

Ms. Stroud, Because first of all, you know, even $30,000 for a maintenance individual?

Sheriff Reynolds, You pay the other guy $35,000. I mean I'm just.

Ms. Stroud, I'm just saying that…

Sheriff Reynolds, I mean, I'm trying to get somebody that's good.

Ms. Stroud, I would think that this would go to the commissioners.

Sheriff Reynolds, Well if that's…

Ms. Stroud, Rather than in this budget.

Sheriff Reynolds, They had it in. That was our original intent, was to have someone in and then, then with all the cutbacks and all that it was, we lost it.

Ms. Martin, My only concern is this. We have the same scenario when it came to Data Processing where they put their own data processing person in the Sheriff's Department and now we don't have jurisdiction over it in data processing and we go in too many different directions. That's what I'm afraid is going to happen with the maintenance also.

Sheriff Reynolds, This is not about jurisdiction. If you want, I mean I'll give full clearance to whoever. I'm just saying you're going to go into a building of 170,000 square foot without a cus.., without a maintenance person. I mean I don't, to me.

Ms. Martin, I guess that's a commissioners' issue that needs to be addressed.

Com. Evans, You would approve the 144 though.

Ms. Martin, We understand that. But I think what you need to do, I think what we're doing is putting the cart before the horse. We have no idea what we are going into when we get in there and I have a problem with putting additional people on when we don't know what's going on.

Com. Burrus, That's kind of the caution that I'd like to express. I agree with Dave in the fact that I think we could sit here and we could probably anticipate pretty accurately that we're going to need some additional help out there. But I guess my own personal opinion would be, let's get some operating experience behind us to confirm that before we commit to a full-time position that would never be able to be rescinded if we commit to it.

Ms. Stroud, Okay. Other concerns, other questions?

Mr. Ruge, Is this from federal funds?

Ms. Martin, Yes. Which reminds me with reference to the federal funds.

Mr. Ruge, Not county?

Ms. Martin, Not, well it's not the general fund, but. It's my understanding that we've appropriated money from this fund already. My question is, the contract, was it already approved for the commissioners for building up the firing range and what's the liability on that since it's already been approved?

Com. Burrus, We have approved the design of it and we have since put that on hold. There's no obligation with respect to the firing range at this time.

Ms. Martin, Okay, but the 911 funds, was it $600,000 that we used out of these funds for the software?

Com. Burrus, Those funds represent collateral for the Tiberon software.

Com. Evans, I think it's around 389 that is 911's share.

Ms. Stroud, Say that again, John.

Com. Evans, I think it's around 389 that is 911's share.

Ms. Martin, Right, but theirs is like $600,000 or something?

Com. Evans, The sheriff has committed his federal money, unless he can find another pot.

Ms. Stroud, Other questions?
Mrs. Knoblock, Why do you need an administrative assistant?

Sheriff Reynolds, Why do I need one?

Mrs. Knoblock, Yes.

Sheriff Reynolds, Because I have, what we need in our present facility, we've needed one since I've been there. We just didn't have a room to actually put the person like that in there. We need one for, the job description of that person will be for, for the chief deputy, the major and myself and oversee all of the clerical people that we have.

Mrs. Knoblock, Are you moving somebody from your department to that?

Sheriff Reynolds, Well, we're going to op.., it's going to addi…, it's going to be at this point, at this time I can't tell you that, it's going to be an additional employee.

Mrs. Knoblock, There's a hiring freeze on.

Sheriff Reynolds, Well, but the thing is, this was, you know, this was approved before.

Mrs. Conover, This was approved at budgets.

Sheriff Reynolds, Right. We just didn't, we just lost the money I got, I'm using the money, so.

Mrs. Knoblock, I mean, it seems like everybody's got a rank out here and they're…

Sheriff Reynolds, Now what are you talking about? The jail?

Mrs. Knoblock, Yes.

Sheriff Reynolds, Well.

Mrs. Knoblock, I mean it, that means their salary goes up.

Sheriff Reynolds, You know, I'm going to be hiring ten additional people at a minimum, you know, at this time. We're looking at an operation of, you know, right now we have 250 employees. We have, I mean, if you, we have the operation that needs to have some structure and some accountability and with that you need, you need, you need rank within a police department, a jail. I mean, this is a ranking structure we have now is probably somewhat, somewhat consistent with what it was probably 20 years ago. I mean, we're not 20 years ago and we're looking at probably, this time next year, probably, you know, over 300 people, inmates and we need, I need to have the accountability to be able to operate that jail.

Ms. Martin, I guess my concern is this. Back in February I emailed Chief Deputy Lain and I talked to you a couple of times with reference to it about numbers and overhead costs and the fact that we need to meet with the commissioners so that we know what's expected from the commissioners with, outside that budget, whether it's water, whether it's electricity or whatever it is before we hire any additional personnel.
In February I emailed you about that and here it is May and it's my understanding that as of this point in time the request that I had made with reference to your department, the commissioners and the Council getting together so we would all be on the same page has still not happened. And here we are faced with this scenario again and it concerns me because of the fact that the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing. The commissioners are saying one thing. People want us to approve money for additional personnel. We have no idea because we've not gotten in there yet, what needs to be done and I'm concerned because of the fact that I don't know.
I understand the funding is coming out of 198, but my concern is, my understanding was this, these additional costs were supposed to come out of that other fund and we've only got like $80,000 in there. For six months you are talking about 400 to a half-million dollars in costs with benefits and we still don't know where we're going to cover those additional costs. So in my opinion we're lost because we still have not gone in the direction that was suggested, even during the budgets last year, of sitting down and finding out what exactly the commissioners expect to pay out of this fund. Because it was my understanding that until we had the full salaries including benefits, additional personnel was not going to be hired. So that, I guess, I need to know where you people stand on this.
Com. Burrus, Karen, our budget reflects the projected costs, the best we could estimate those for the full year of 2002, including six months of the new jail. Now to the extent that those are accurate, we should be on target. If our projections are off, then we're going to have a discrepancy somewhere.

Ms. Martin, And how are we going to make up the discrepancy? We're already 1.3 million short in the general fund.

Com. Burrus, The same way we were going to make it up in health insurance. We're going to have to do something serious about it.

Ms. Martin, Well I think we need to start seriously now. We can't wait until later.

Com. Burrus, You're exactly right.

Ms. Martin, The bottom line is, we keep on putting this off. It's already a half a year. We move in in a month to six weeks and we have no idea until that first bill comes and it's going to be six weeks later and we have no money for it.

Com. Evans, We did projections on the water and the electric and tried to incorporate those all into our 2002 budget, so they are in there as tools.

Com. Burrus, The best budgeting ability that we have has been done.

Ms. Martin, But I guess my concern is this, during that process you had requested that for the next year's budget that they cover some of those costs for the additional federal people and the state people.

Com. Evans, But we don't really know until the jail gets running how much of those costs are going to go to the maintenance side and how much we…

Ms. Martin, Well that's my point. I think we're jumping the gun because we're appropriating money that's going to be an issue later on.

Com. Evans, We've tried to guesstimate the best we could on our portion of the utilities, fuel and those types of things, so. We know there will be fixed costs or semi-fixed costs without having any estimates to work from.

Ms. Martin, And what you're doing and I know what you're doing, you're getting cost approximate for per square foot from the developers or the individuals for construction and getting an average of it.

Com. Evans, I actually contacted NIPSCO and the City of Valparaiso and the water and sewer for those estimates, with those people that would be providing the services.

Ms. Martin, But the building itself is not like any of those that they have. That's the situation that we have here. We're looking at pods. We're looking at open walls. We're looking at, you know, we're fully contained. We've got pods out there that are outside walls.

Com. Burrus, We understand that too.

Ms. Martin, So what are you suggesting?

Com. Burrus, We're suggesting that our budget reflects what our best calculations are to cover that for the calendar year 2002.

Ms. Martin, And what do you suggest if we're short?

Com. Burrus, We haven't any ideas. There might be an overage, but I don't know. This is as close as we could make it.

Ms. Stroud, I have some other questions and comments also. Some of us have worked with the Sheriff's Department down the line here. Originally you requested 20 jailers, then we took it down to ten--probationary--then we took it down to zero. Now you are requesting four, okay. The other ones, one captain, three lieutenants, two sergeants, can I ask you this? For those positions are you intending to promote from within to those positions?

Sheriff Reynolds, Yes.

Ms. Stroud, So if you promote from within, that would leave six--the magic number six--open out of what you already have, correct?

Sheriff Reynolds, It would be…

Ms. Stroud, That are in the general fund right now.

Sheriff Reynolds, Be in the general fund right now? It would be four, wouldn't it?

Ms. Stroud, No. If you have one captain, three lieutenants and two sergeants and you promote people from within. You promote them to those positions, correct? That's six. You would have six openings, correct?

Sheriff Reynolds, No.

Ms. Stroud, Then also, you know, here's my feeling, you know, in the area of public safety, we all know what the law would say, so then you've turned down or you've brought down the number of ten down to four for probationary jailers. If we were to vote for this and you promote from within, you've got six openings. What are you going to do, come back and say now you need six jailers for public safety? You know, that's how we're looking at it; I'm looking at it. I don't know about the rest, but. You know, you've got six there if you promote from within.

Mrs. Conover, We've sat here and we've debated this issue and we had special meetings. This has been downscaled from their original request and what was advertised.

Ms. Stroud, Right.

Mrs. Conover, How many people do we have to have to open the doors in July?

Sheriff Reynolds, I, you know, I believe that to feel real comfortable, I think I need 20 people and you approved it. All of you people approved 20 people and then, then we have a financial crunch, then I give it all back and I'm coming back and I'm saying of the four new people, there's going to be actually six of those people are going to be promoted, but we're having, we're having, to answer your question, what we think we have right now is what we need, we think, bare bones to get through.
Then we're not asking, we're not asking you to transfer money in from the general fund, we're just trying to transfer it, we're asking you to transfer the money that I got from the federal monies and then we'll hire these people in June and train them for five weeks, then after we get them in, then we're going to obviously get a line on the federal inmates.
And the thing is, what your concern is, Ms. Martin, you know, you're directing your attention to the commissioners, but we've been trying to talk to you. You're my liaison. I don't know what your concerns are. You're, you're, whatever the heating bill is, if I have 200 people in there or 400 people in there, your heating bill is going to be the same. I'm just, I'm just trying to work it out.

Ms. Martin, Well I sort of disagree with you, because none of these individuals were here when we went through this scenario with Juvenile Detention and it wasn't until we made Juvenile Detention, they were initially opened with 12 individuals or juveniles. It wasn't until we made Juvenile Detention go through and evaluate the cost per inmate to find out exactly what they had to charge that the county didn't cover it.
My concern here is, I'm not going to be covering out of the general fund, costs for federal and state prisoners. Our responsibility is to the citizens of Porter County. It's not to federal or state and until we have that number I feel uncomfortable.

Sheriff Reynolds, Well I could, I, I…

Ms. Martin, And I've not gotten any numbers from anyone with reference to this.

Sheriff Reynolds, What numbers do you want, Karen?

Ms. Martin, Well you need to have an overall. You know we talked about this during the budget. We need to have an overall cost of what it's going to cost for food, approximately per inmate, what it's going to cost for electricity, what it's going to cost for jailers, what it's going to cost for management.
I mean I look at this 144 and you've got six within the management process and four jailers, probationary. When I look at that it's getting heavy again. I mean we've gone through this same scenario with reference to the merit structure and here we are again putting six individuals--lieutenants, sergeants and a captain--then four probationary jailers. We have some issues that we need to resolve.

Sheriff Reynolds, I don't what needs to be resolved. That's how I got the 1.3 million dollars that we had, we paid, you guys paid…

Ms. Martin, Okay, you got the 1.3 million, but the problem is that you are only requesting three months and you're not going to have, you have no idea when the money is going to be coming in from the federal prisoners, number one. And it may not come in before the end of the year and we're not going to have that money available.

Sheriff Reynolds, That's not true.

Ms. Martin, Well, you can't tell me it's not true. You don't know. It takes two to three months approximately.

Sheriff Reynolds, Well you don't know either.

Ms. Martin, You can ask the Auditor how long it takes to get federal or state money in.

Sheriff Reynolds, Two weeks.

Mr. Ruge, Is there enough money in the federal funds to cover all these additional areas?

Sheriff Reynolds, Yes. You know, one other thing.

Mr. Ruge, Or there isn't?

Sheriff Reynolds, Yes, there is, there is, John. Another thing, Karen, you're not talking about, you haven't mentioned one thing about liability. What are, I'm sure you're concerned about liability. Are you asking me to go in there with the present staff that I have into a facility that's almost four times as big with the same staff I have and not…

Ms. Martin, We were told it could be done with indirect that way.

Sheriff Reynolds, Who said that?

Ms. Martin, I was on that committee and Sheriff Dembinski had stated that it could be done that way and proposed it that way. I thought we understood that initially we were going to go in there and then wait until we have the money.

Sheriff Reynolds, Then why would you approve 20 people and the thing is, what he approved, the j…, I mean I wasn't here so I can't comment about what, I mean I can't believe that I'm sitting here now trying to justify what we've been doing for two years trying to explain to you what we've been doing and now you're saying that you want me to see what happens and then come back and ask.

Ms. Martin, That's not what I am saying. The initial, Dave, you know the agreement was made, that until the money was in the fund from, not the 1.3 million, but the other line item, to cover salaries as well as benefits, no additional personnel would be hired and that was agreed upon. It's because you don't have the money item, you are now taking it out of the 1.3 million, which is not problem, but you have no idea what you're going to do after the three months to cover those other individuals. My concern is this. Come the first of the year, where are you going to get the money? $600,000 is going into that other. You're going to be taking $300,000 out of this now, that's $900,000. You've got $400,000. If you don't have the money in there, what are you going to do the first of the year? We still are not going to have the money in the general fund. I am tired of thinking about it after the fact. We've got a plan for it now and that's my concern, if the money was there.

Sheriff Reynolds, Yes, but I have planned for it and I have planned for it.
Mrs. Knoblock, $600,000 goes where, Karen?

Ms. Martin, Into the software for the…

Ms. Stroud, Software.

Mrs. Knoblock, I thought 911 was going to…

Ms. Stroud, No.

Ms. Martin, No, they're only covering $289,000 of it. $600,000 comes out of this 1.3 million, so we're down to $700,000 and $300,000, if you figure for the full year, we've only got $80,000. That's not even going to cover two employees out of the other line item, because of the fact, you have to take in consideration the base salary as well as the benefits. The problem here is not so much that he is taking it out of this fund, the problem is when this fund is gone and we don't have the money in the other federal and state monies, where are we going to get it?

Sheriff Reynolds, What are you talking about?

Ms. Martin, What's the liability?

Sheriff Reynolds, I'm, I'm, I, excuse me, but in all due respect I'm dense, I mean if you've been listening, I'm going to be bringing in federal prisoners and they're going to be generating monies.

Ms. Martin, Yes, but we don't know how much, Dave. And I'm sick and tired of people with these speculations of numbers when we don't have anything concrete in hand.

Sheriff Reynolds, Well.

Mrs. Knoblock, How much are you bringing in for the federal?

Sheriff Reynolds, Well we think we'll bring in 40 dol…, $40 a day when we open, they left the cap 80, you know, it's 80.

Mrs. Knoblock, 40 to 80?

Sheriff Reynolds, 80 a day.

Mrs. Knoblock, Because they couldn't even eat for $40 a day.

Sheriff Reynolds, Excuse me?

Mrs. Knoblock, You couldn't even eat for $40 a day or feed a prisoner.

Sheriff Reynolds, Oh yes, you can. Because, I mean, our…

Chief Deputy Dave Lain, Average cost per meal is roughly $.60, 40, potentially 80, 80 federal prisoners at $40 a day.

Ms. Stroud, But right now we're at 40.

Ms. Martin, Okay, there's another scenario. A year and a half ago we were promised if we gave money for software to track the gas scenario within the Sheriff's Department. We were promised we would have that. Here we are, a year and a half later we have no idea where that stands and I'm tired of speculation. I'm tired of advancing money and not getting any results.

Mr. Ruge, Could I say, would these additionals cover the whole rest of this year?

Ms. Stroud, That's what we're saying, we don't know.

Mr. Ruge, Or will you be back in a couple months for more?

Ms. Stroud, We don't know.

Mr. Ruge, Will these additionals cover the whole balance of this year?

Sheriff Reynolds, Three months.

Mr. Ruge, Do you hear me?

Ms. Martin, Three months, John.

Sheriff Reynolds, Yes, three months.

Mr. Ruge, What?

Ms. Martin, Three months.

Ms. Stroud, Three months.

Mr. Ruge, Not the whole rest of the year?

Ms. Martin, No.

Mr. Carmichael, Sheriff.

Mrs. Conover, I guess my concern is, we met last year previous to budget, we allowed 20 new probationary jailers to be hired six weeks before opening. With that said and done, we lost our major taxpayer--Bethlehem Steel--so we had to take that away. The original request was for 10 and now it's down to four. We've known this has been coming for years and we have to have the staff to staff it and this is just a pretty grim situation. We have this money available, but when this money dries up, you're only asking for three months and that is your, why, I mean, I…

Sheriff Reynolds, Well we think that by, you know, I mean obviously there's speculation involved of course, but we, we're very confident that we'll be able to generate enough monies from the federal by housing federal prisoners to supplement the cost of these additional employees.

Mrs. Conover, And if Karen's worse fears are true and we can't, can we come back to this fund for the balance of the year?

Sheriff Reynolds, Abso.., Absolutely. We have it, we have $100,000 in there right now, you know, that we've generated from the DOC. We've got, I mean, I've got assurances from the federal judge and the federal US Marshal that we can have as, we'll have, if we want to go 80, we probably won't go 80 the first day or week, because we have to probably bring them in slowly, but within a week or two we'll have 80, 80 inmates in there. I mean, you guys can figure the math. If you multiply 80 times 40 that is more than sufficient to, to supplement this additional cost.

Mrs. Conover, And that also includes mileage to pick up that inmate?

Sheriff Reynolds, That's, no, that's additional.

Mrs. Conover, And it also includes if an officer is running--a jailer officer is running overtime?

Sheriff Reynolds, That's additional.

Mrs. Conover, And that's additional money.

Sheriff Reynolds, They'll pay additional for that. They'll pay mileage and the officers' salaries for the hours, if it's two hours a day, four hours a day they'll pay that extra.

Ms. Stroud, You're also assuming that the commissioners would allow you to have 80 prisoners in there? Federal prisoners in there? You can't…

Sheriff Reynolds, They raised it.

Ms. Stroud, You can't…

Mr. West, They raised it.
Mr. Carmichael, Yes, they've already did.

Ms. Stroud, You've already raised it to 80?

Mr. West, Yes, 80.

Ms. Stroud, I didn't know that.

Sheriff Reynolds, Yes.

Mr. Carmichael, I have a question for you, Dave.

Com. Evans, I don't believe we've done that in a meeting. It's been discussed.

Ms. Stroud, That's what, thank you very much, I wondered if my memory was faulty here. I didn't think that it had officially been approved to have 80 federal prisoners in there. What do you want to do?

Ms. Martin, Mr. Carmichael had something.

Ms. Stroud, Mr. Carmichael.

Mr. Carmichael, I think in listening to Karen, what she would like to see is a complete listing of all the things you intend to take out of this particular fund. You know, I'm hearing rumors--and it's just rumors--that you are intending to buy a van out of this fund, out of the federal funds. Is that correct or is that not correct? I don't know.

Mrs. Knoblock, Its bought.

Ms. Martin, I think they already bought it.

Ms. Stroud, They've already bought a van.

Chief Deputy Lain, We bought a van last year.

Sheriff Reynolds, You guys approved it. It was last year in our last year's budget.

Mr. Carmichael, I thought there was a moratorium on all vehicles.

Sheriff Reynolds, That was last year before all that. It was probably last October or November.

Ms. Stroud, It was before the bankruptcy, just before all that.

Sheriff Reynolds, I know this, I know you guys been talking about this van for, it's May now, I mean at least five months, but that was bought from…

Mr. Carmichael, Well I just happened to hear it the other day. I was not aware.

Sheriff Reynolds, Oh, I thought that was mentioned several months ago, but I, that's a, that's a vehicle that we bought and you guys approved it through the…

Mr. Carmichael, That's already paid for?

Sheriff Reynolds, It was our. Right, and that came out of our line items.

Com. Evans, The moratorium went into effect in December and it was purchased before the moratorium.

Sheriff Reynolds, But to answer your question I'm going to tell you right now, if we have the money and we needed a van, I would say we would probably entertain the thought by going to you and ask for it. I mean, it's, you know, obviously, you know this is a big operation and it's going to, you might…

Mr. Carmichael, Wait a minute. I know we've got three buses. We've got three buses sitting out there, isn't there?

Sheriff Reynolds, I'm not asking for another van. I'm just saying.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay, I'm just trying to get my questions answered.

Sheriff Reynolds, Okay.

Mr. Carmichael, You know, as I looked at the budget today, you had in original appropriations back at budget time before the cash crunch came into effect, there was $110,000 for gas. When the cuts came, you cut that down in February to $90,000. Today you only have $38,621 left in the gas fund. At the rate its currently being expended and with winter coming on here the last couple or three months--whatever the case may be--where are we going to get that money? Of course you're on the spot, but it appears to me by the rate that it is being expended at that time that we're going to run out at least by November.

Sheriff Reynolds, You know, when we made those cuts to get to the 10%, we knew we weren't going to be able to get through the year. We're going to have to use whatever means we can.

Mr. Carmichael, Well, I think right at this time then if you've got some lead-time on it, now is the time to take corrective action, whatever that may be. Now a year ago, we sat down here and we talked about getting a printout from the gas pump, that new--what is it--Mechanical Engineering out in Portage? Was it something like that? They were supposed to deliver our software and we're supposed to be able to get a printout and readout.

Chief Deputy Lain, That's been, that's been installed.

Mr. Carmichael, Have we got a printout made available?

Chief Deputy Lain, That, I don't know that a printout has been generated to this point.

Mr. Carmichael, Would you…

Chief Deputy Lain, But it, it has been installed. Once again, that's, that being if there was one vendor that was capable of that, you know, we were, we were headstrong as anyone else in getting that project completed. Its been complete and, and a.

Mr. Carmichael, When can we expect a printout?

Chief Deputy Lain, I don't know. I would, I would think those are printed every 30 days, but. I think you could probably get one from, from the garage on a daily basis. But I'm not, I'm not certain that all of the cards have been made operable. I know we've had to send some back just for, for a, a, for a re-entering into the, into the system because they're not operating.

Mr. Carmichael, Do we get a printout from the Portage pump that we use?

Chief Deputy Lain, It would, it would be all-inclusive.

Mr. Carmichael, Oh, the two are tied together?

Chief Deputy Lain, The two are tied together. That was, that was the hold up.

Mr. Carmichael, Oh.

Sheriff Reynolds, No we had a, there's no question that you have a serious, I mean what you are saying, I agree. But we had a problem with the one vendor. I mean we were almost to the point of, of taking them to court. I mean we didn't know what to do. I mean unless we sent the SWAT Team over. He just kept saying he had problems with it. He had problems with. He had problems with, he kept having, you know, he had problems, he was busy and it went on for months and months and months. I mean, this is, it was like a broken record, but.

Mr. Carmichael, Well, this is approximately May 15th, tomorrow and we've got some time to take some corrective action here to cut down on this gas usage or find a place to find some money. There's none in the general fund. There's $50,000 left and we aren't going to be appropriating any more out of the general fund for the rest of the year.

Sheriff Reynolds, Yes, we know that.

Mr. Carmichael, It just isn't going to be. I also looked at the appropriation, we gave you what, $170,000 for Food & Groceries. Today, there's $73,000 left. We've spent $100,000, approximately, in the first four months here. I don't know whether all the bills are…

Ms. Martin, They get some of that out of the community corrections. They can use that.

Ms. Stroud, That comes…

Mr. Carmichael, Well that's what I want to know. Where is the money going to come from?

Ms. Martin, They have that other fund, the community corrections. They can take stuff out of there.

Mr. Carmichael, And what's balance in that fund?

Ms. Stroud, I don't know.

Sheriff Reynolds, Well we, we don't get that money until about October, I think, about $95,000 and it's something that, you know, Bill. I mean every year that, I think, in the last how many years, they've gone and asked for transfers of monies from that fund to gas. I mean they've been running out of gas for as long as I've been here.

Ms. Martin, There's $63,000 in there right now, Bill. $63,587.

Mr. Carmichael, 53?

Ms. Stroud, 63.

Ms. Martin, $63,587.56.

Mr. Carmichael, Well, that's going to have to be split between fuel and food.

Ms. Martin, Well they can't take the community corrections money, it has to be used primarily for the jail. He can't use it for fuel for the merit officers' cars.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay. Then I think at this point we better come up with a plan to see how we are going to meet that shortfall, whether it be by conservation or whatever it may be or however you may see that to be the solution to the problem. But I'd like to see that documented. Hand me a piece of paper or whatever the case may be and we'll see if I agree with your solution. But it's a fact of life there is no money. I would also like to see--as Karen pointed out, I'd like to see--a complete composite of the total number of dollars that we have on hand, the total number expenditures of those dollars and what they are earmarked for. Let's see if the plan is going to work. Let's see if we are going to balance, because when we are out of money--which we are--there is no more. We can't just pick it right out of the air.

Ms. Stroud, Okay, folks, we have before us a 144 Form. What is your pleasure?

Mrs. Conover move to take the Maintenance/Custodial off the 144 Form.

Mrs. Conover, Sheriff, you're to work with the commissioners so we have the building cleaned properly and anything fixed that would need to be fixed. We don't have the builder to bounce back to. We have got to staff this jail. We're opening up in what, two and a half months. If the federal monies aren't here, then we can bounce into this fund and if we don't have anything to bounce into, then I guess people will have to be laid off. But we have an obligation to open up a jail in less than three months.

Ms. Stroud, Do I hear a second?

Mrs. Knoblock, Do we have to open up all the pods?
Ms. Stroud, We have a motion on the floor and we need a second so we can have discussion.

Mrs. Knoblock, Okay.

Ms. Stroud, We have a motion on the floor. Do I hear a second?

Mr. Ruge, How about the next three months?

Ms. Stroud, Wait a minute. We have a motion on the floor. We need a second, then we can discuss it.

Mr. Ruge, Will that be reimbursed?

Ms. Martin, John, wait a minute.

Mr. Ruge, Will that…

Ms. Martin, Wait.

Ms. Stroud, We have a motion on the floor. Do I hear a second? For lack of a second, the motion fails.

Motion died for lack of a second.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay, now, John.

Ms. Stroud, What's your pleasure now, John? Go ahead.

Mr. Carmichael, Go ahead.

Mr. Ruge, How about, this covers three months, doesn't it? How about the next three months? Will that be reimbursed by the federal/state funds?

Sheriff Reynolds, That's what our, our plan is, that we will generate…

Mr. Ruge, Will it be or will it not be?

Sheriff Reynolds, Yes.

Mr. Ruge, What?

Sheriff Reynolds, Yes.

Mr. Ruge, And that will continue the rest of the year?

Sheriff Reynolds, It will continue as long as we have federal prisoners.

Mr. Ruge, That'll continue, that reimbursement? It will continue the whole rest of the year?

Chief Deputy Lain, Yes.

Ms. Stroud, Okay, what's the pleasure of the Council here?

Mr. West, You know, I agree with Karen. You know we built this jail out here and this Karen was on the committee that built this jail and we have to open it up. Now we have a, I remember when we opened the Juvenile Center up years ago, people forgot who would cut the grass or turn the lights on. The sheriff has tried to think of everything down to cutting the grass. He's got an innovative idea and I think in order to make this work, we've got to let him try it.

Ms. Stroud, Are you making a motion to approve the whole thing?

Mr. West, I'll make the motion, yes.

Mr. West moved to approve the 144 Form as submitted by the Jail 198 Fund.
Ms. Stroud, Do I hear a second?

Mrs. Conover, A second for discussion?

Ms. Stroud, I need a second for the motion.

Mrs. Conover seconded.

Ms. Stroud, Then we can discuss, then I have to take a vote.

Mrs. Conover, Again, I would go along with what has been submitted, minus the maintenance/custodial person. Is that what your motion is, Leon?

Mr. West, Yes, that's good with me. Take out the maintenance person.

Mr. West moved to approve the 144 Form, with the exception of the Maintenance/Custodial position.

Ms. Stroud, That was the motion that Karen made.

Mr. West, But approve everything else.

Ms. Stroud, Well that's what she had. She took the maintenance person out.

Mr. West, I'll second her motion then or she can second mine.

Mrs. Conover seconded.

Ms. Stroud, Okay, a motion has been made and seconded to accept what is here, except to take the Maintenance/Custodial person out. It's a 144 Form so we have to do a roll call. We have to do a roll call.

Mrs. Vuko, Sorry.

Motion failed on the following vote:

West-YesCarmichael-No
Conover-YesKnoblock-No
Martin-NoRuge-No
Stroud-No

Ms. Stroud, The motion fails at this point in time. Now I assume the additionals were to cover what was in this first part here, so we don't need to take action on this at this point in time. Am I correct in my assumption? Okay, let's go on.

JAIL 01.32
144 Form

Medical Director/Nurse from $30,786 to $33,957

Ms. Stroud, You do have another request here. A 144 for Medical Director/Nurse from $30,786 to $33,957. Is that correct?

Sheriff Reynolds, Yes.

Ms. Martin, If I'm not wrong that comes out of the general fund and I don't think we're giving any raises from that fund.

Ms. Stroud, No. Isn't that general fund money?

Ms. Martin, Yes.

Ms. Stroud, And we're not giving any raises this year at all. So we can't take action on that one. Am I correct in my assumption here?
Mrs. Knoblock, Right.

Ms. Stroud, And the other was a transfer.

Ms. Martin, I think we need to make a motion to deny the 144.

Ms. Stroud, Oh I'm sorry.

Ms. Martin moved to deny the 144 Form as submitted by the Jail 01.32. Mr. Carmichael seconded.

Mr. Ruge, Is this on this freeze for the salary?

Ms. Martin, This is a raise of salary in the general fund, John.

Mr. Ruge, We're supposed to take a cut instead of a raise.

Ms. Martin, Well that's what we're voting on now, John.

Chief Deputy Lain, The person who just left were, their work was making $35,000.

Ms. Martin, Well we take them to the low end.

Ms. Stroud, Low end usually.

Chief Deputy Lain, That's, well, that's.

Sheriff Reynolds, You guys are probably…

Ms. Martin, Call for the question.

Ms. Stroud, Roll call.

Motion carried on the following vote:

Carmichael -YesConover-Yes
Knoblock-YesMartin-Yes
Ruge-YesStroud-Yes
West-No

SHERIFF 01.05
Transfer

$167 from account 3130 Training & Education into account 3330 Photo & Blueprint

Ms. Stroud, Okay, one other thing was to transfer $167 to Photo & Blueprint from account 3130 to account 3330. Motion to approve?

Mrs. Conover moved to grant the request for transfer of funds as submitted by the Sheriff, the amount of $167. Mr. West seconded, motion carried unanimously.

Ms. Stroud, Motion carries.

LIBRARY CAPITAL PROJECTS PLAN

Ms. Stroud, Next on the agenda is the Library Capital Projects Plan.

Mr. Carmichael, Next. No monies are involved here is there, Don?

Donald Johnson, Nothing new.

Mr. Carmichael, How are you guys making out with all your reduced funds?

Mr. Johnson, We're cutting.
Mr. Carmichael, You're cutting?

Mr. Johnson, Yes.

Ms. Stroud, Okay. Would you like to explain, Don? Please.

Mr. Johnson, Yes. I sent packets over. If you turn to page 8, currently this year we have $1,213,132 that we brought forward in the Capital Projects Plan. We anticipate raising $497,495. That's with a 1.3-cent tax rate. $65,000 in excise tax and $10,000 in investments. Our plan calls for a budget of $250,400 for the year 2003.
As I've said before, the state has us do a three-year plan, but only one year at a time does the Council approve or deny. So we're looking at the 2003 year. We have $50,000 just sitting there if there is an emergency that arises. We have $40,000 for the purchase lease, repair and maintenance of the equipment--our computer equipment. Then we have $160,400 for purchase, lease, repair and maintenance of the hardware and software for the computer. I shouldn't say the $40,000, its for furniture and equipment.
We also have $1,535,227 that will be collected in this year for, to put towards the branch in Porter Township that we've been doing for a number of years now. If you turn this page, the 2003 year is there. Under B, the $40,000 for purchase of furniture and equipment, we are trying to replace the courier van. Its 14 years old. We are hopefully going to be able to replace our maintenance van that the maintenance department uses. That's 12 years old. Then 10 PC's to replace, outdated units. Those are in the various agencies in the library district.
On the next page, $90,400 for the salaries and benefits for the two automation maintenance staff that is allowed by state statutes; b, provide maintenance contract and upgrades of the Expitech computer system, that's $60,000. Then the purchase of 10 PC's to replace dump terminals. We replaced some dump terminals this year and we hope to replace the remainder of those next year.

Mr. Jim Cline, We'll still have some more to replace after that.

Mr. Johnson, Yes. Then basically to have the cumulative funds there for the branch in Porter Township. That basically is the plan for 2003 and that is a 1.3 cent tax rate.

Ms. Stroud, Okay, does anyone have any questions to ask Mr. Johnson?

Mrs. Conover, No, I just appreciate the various detailed reports that you've supplied us with every year. I know that you've had your struggles minus the two major taxpayers and that's about the best you can do.

Ms. Stroud, Okay, we need a motion to approve.

Mr. Carmichael moved to approve the Library Capital Projects Plan for 2003 as submitted. Mrs. Conover seconded, motion carried unanimously.

Mr. Carmichael, Don, I have just one question for you. Is Darla behaving herself?

Mr. Johnson, Yes.

Mr. Carmichael, She is.

Mr. Johnson, Yes.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay.

Ms. Stroud, I see a few others that could cause some trouble back there also.

Mr. Carmichael, I don't know when her appointment is up, but we want that report.

Mr. Johnson, I should mention that Mary Bradford, Darla Block, Gerrie Bowie, Judith Hanson and Myrna McMurtry are here from the library board and Jim Cline is the assistant director.

Ms. Stroud, Okay, thank you, Mr. Johnson.

Mr. Johnson, There are copies that have to be signed and there are four copies, then we'll come get those tomorrow.
Mr. Cline, Thank you very much.

2002 SALARY ORDINANCE

Ms. Stroud, We have in here our salary ordinance. As you all know, this year there is not going to be any increases in salaries. So this is our ordinance that we need to adopt for this year, which was 2002. With everything that was going on with the budgets and so on, we did not get this passed. I assume that everyone has looked through it. Does anyone have any questions? What is your pleasure?

Ms. Martin, My question is, people aren't getting paid because we didn't pass this?

Ms. Stroud, No, no, they are getting paid. Are you kidding, they'd be lined up. They would have been back; they would have been here. No, they are getting paid. Okay, does anybody else have any questions? Then we need a motion to approve this.

Ms. Martin moved to approve the 2002 Salary Ordinance. Mr. Carmichael seconded, motion carried unanimously.

PRESIDENT'S REPORT

Ms. Stroud, Under my report, just a couple of things we need to take care of. One of course is, we sent out notices or I had Jan send out notices as far as a couple of things. One, ideas as far as what you might have in areas where we can cut or save some money. Two, with the budget workshops, I know some of you have said that maybe we don't need to have budget workshops. My feeling would be that maybe we should go ahead with the budget workshops, to have the heads of the departments and so on come in just to ask them how they are doing under the budget cuts and some things that they may see that we haven't, you know, gotten a handle on or some suggestions that they might have before we have to adopt the budgets in August.
Obviously you have to go ahead, the department heads have to go ahead and make out their budgets and submit them to the Auditor so that they are certified, then we have to adopt them at the end of August. I need to know what your feeling is on that. We can have these in June. We can be flexible on the times. You know we don't have to stick to the schedule. I know some people have some obligations that are coinciding and making conflict in the middle of June. So if we have to push them back, we can have some. Mrs. Auditor, Mrs. Vuko.

Mrs. Vuko, Yes.

Ms. Stroud, Is there a date that we have to have the budgets into you to get them certified? Is there a date in the law that says we have to have them in a certain time?

Mrs. Vuko, I'm not sure about the date. Jan?

Ms. Balcerak, It's like June 30th, but it changes every year.

Ms. Stroud, But in all reality if they are turning in the same budget that shouldn't be a problem even if we want to go ahead and schedule a workshop with them, because they are going to be turning in the same budget they had this year. So we shouldn't run into a problem. So we could conceivably send a notice out saying for them to get their budgets submitted, but then sign up for times so that they could meeting with one or two of us at a time or the liaison to that department to see, you know, things that we want to go over and discuss. What is your feeling on that?

Mrs. Knoblock, I think we should get with them.

Ms. Stroud, You think we should get with the department heads? What about you, Leon, what do you think?

Mr. West, Yes.

Ms. Stroud, Does anybody else have something to say? Anyone? So it's agreeable then, we should go ahead and ask them to submit the budgets. There's not going to be any increases as we know. At the same time, we need to set up a time when some of us can meet with the different departments and see how things are going. Agreeable?

Mrs. Conover, Well, I think things are going kind of bad.
Ms. Stroud, Yes, I do too.

Mrs. Conover, From everybody that's been calling me.

Ms. Stroud, But, I think it's a time for them to come in and talk to us and we can get some feedback from them too. We need to. Is that agreeable with everyone? Speak now.

Mr. Carmichael, Barbara.

Ms. Stroud, Yes.

Mr. Carmichael, John has some input. Are you finished in that subject?

Ms. Stroud, Basically.

Mr. Carmichael, I don't think there's anybody that disagrees with it. We'll cover it the best we can.

Ms. Stroud, Okay.

Mr. Carmichael, John has something.

Ms. Stroud, Yes, John. Do you have a question?

Mr. Ruge, I'd like to nominate Dave Hollenbeck as a member of the study commission. He has the knowledge and background more than any of us really to serve on that study commission. And I'll agree, he's willing to serve.

Mr. Ruge moved to nominate Dave Hollenbeck as a member of the study commission.

Ms. Stroud, Do I hear a second to John's motion.

Mrs. Conover seconded.

Ms. Stroud, I think that we will have to have a roll call on this.

Mrs. Knoblock, How about discussion?

Ms. Stroud, I'm sorry. Discussion.

Mrs. Knoblock, Okay, I have something to say.

Mr. Carmichael, We're not appropriating any money are we?

Ms. Stroud, No. Go ahead.

Mrs. Knoblock, Mr. Hollenbeck, I think, is a wonderful person and an outstanding attorney, but he is an agent for the efficient government and not for government efficiency. I have a list I'd like to read to you and see if you know what I'm talking about.
I'm going to mention all boards: Porter County Board of Health; Valparaiso Lakes Area Conservancy District; Porter County Council; Lake Eliza Area Conservancy District; White Oak Conservancy District, Porter County Board of Parks and Recreation; Indian Boundary Conservancy District; Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Commission; Porter County Convention, Recreation and Visitors Center; Lake Michigan Marina Development Commission; Bass Lake Conservancy District; Porter County Sheriff's Merit Board; New Paris Conservancy District; Porter County Environmental Department; the City of Westville; the City of Valpo; Wanatah Plan Commission; Porter County Solid Waste Management District; the Valparaiso Community Schools; Simonton Lake Conservancy District; the Town of Porter; Twin Creeks Conservancy District; Nature Works Conservancy District; the Town of Merrillville; Furnessville Conservancy District; and Illiana Brunswick Conservancy District.
I personally, I think he's a very busy man and I'm sure he's doing a good job at all of them. But I think at this time, I don't think we should have anybody on the Council or Mr. Hollenbeck on the thing. I have a person to recommend. I know there's a motion on the floor, but.

Ms. Stroud, Yes, there is a motion on the floor.

Mrs. Knoblock, I think that we have five or six people on the government, from the government on this committee. I don't think any government, the League of Women Voters and the Chambers of Commerce and them, I know they picked their committees and I just at this time don't feel like none of us should be on it. I mean we can attend the meetings, but I don't think its right that we sit on it. Especially our attorney.

Ms. Stroud, Okay, but we do have a motion on the floor and the motion was seconded, so we must vote on that first.

Mrs. Knoblock, You don't want to hear anybody or any more recommendations?

Ms. Stroud, Yes, go ahead. I didn't mean it that way, but yes, go ahead.

Mrs. Knoblock, Well, like I said, we have approximately five to six government people, either elected or employees on the committee. Many people think this is a joke and think the Council has lost its credibility and is an excuse for a $30,000,000 county income tax.
I know a person that is an advocate for government efficiency. She is from Center Township, a homemaker, she is very fair. She is not beholden to any special interest groups and her name is Marilyn Nelson. There is a motion on the floor, so I can't make a motion for that. Can we just have one government efficiency person on this committee? I don't think we do have one and I'd like to see that. But I think we should've asked for more recommendations before.

Mrs. Conover, In reference to Mrs. Nelson, I had talked with her a couple of months ago and I asked her to submit her name--I think she'd be an excellent person too--and she had not done so.

Ms. Stroud, She didn't submit her name.

Mrs. Knoblock, I had talked to her and she's really interested.

Mrs. Conover, And we have the working committees and we have the process committee that they are going to process the information from the working committees, that I hope all of us will be a part of. I'd love to see Mrs. Nelson involved because she is for government efficiency and she's a wonderful person.

Mr. Carmichael, Point of order.

Ms. Stroud, Okay, for point of order, we have a motion on the floor and a second. We need to vote on this. All in favor of Mr. Hollenbeck.

Motion carried on the following vote:

Carmichael-YesConover-Yes
Knoblock-NoMartin-Yes
Ruge-YesStroud-Yes
West-Yes

Mrs. Knoblock, I don't feel right about this. I think it's a conflict. The last meeting I asked four or five times who picked the committees for these special meetings and no one would answer me. I didn't get one answer and I know all of you know who picked the committees. Mr. Hollenbeck, I think you picked one and you've been attending the meetings. Are we paying you for all these meetings, through the Council?

Mr. Hollenbeck, No.

Mrs. Knoblock, But I think it's unethical that you even sit on the committee. You're our attorney and our advisor. You're not a county council member and I'm sorry, that's the way I feel.

Ms. Stroud, Thank you, Carole.

Mr. Carmichael, Did you want to sit on this, Carole?

Mrs. Knoblock, No, I don't think any council member should. These people started these committees.

Mr. Carmichael, Well how do we get the questions answered?

Mrs. Knoblock, Well we can attend the meetings. What questions?

Ms. Martin, They're just a facilitation group.

Ms. Stroud, Yes.

Ms. Martin, And that's why I don't understand why it's imperative that a council member be on there, because if all they are doing is facilitating and forwarding the information to us, they are the fact-finding mission so I don't understand why a council representative needs to be on there. I guess that's the same thing Carole is asking. Why do we feel we need somebody on there if this process is just as a facilitory as well as a, it just doesn't make any sense. It's not a voting board. It's not, everybody in the lower subcommittees are the fact-finding people.

Ms. Stroud, Right.

Ms. Martin, So then, what's the reason that the Council needs to be represented?

Ms. Stroud, Well I think the idea when they put the committee together was that it would have a government representation from the Council and government representation from the Commissioners. Mr. Evans is the one that is serving on it from the commissioners and I think that was the idea behind it.

Mrs. Knoblock, And Mr. Hollenbeck is not a council person.

Ms. Stroud, Agreed.

Mrs. Knoblock, I am very disappointed in you, Dave, because I even called you on the phone and told you how upset I was and you didn't even speak up and say you did appoint people on it and I don't think that's your place to do that. But, you…

Mr. Hollenbeck, Carole, I'm not going to get into a debate with you.

Mrs. Knoblock, Okay.

Mr. Hollenbeck, We had that discussion and I told you what the facts were and the situation.

Mrs. Knoblock, Yes, well.

Mr. Hollenbeck, I can tell you, at your request as a council body, I did monitor that process. And Barb is right, Barb and Bill and Karen attended that first meeting. There was a consensus among the group that the County Council should have a representative in the process. There's nothing magical about that. If the County Council chooses not have a representative in that process, that's fine. I mean, then the process will go forward. There was a consensus among that group at that first meeting that the County Council ought to have representation on the process group. But if there's a feeling that somehow that's a conflict of interest or it shouldn't happen, then this body should tell the process group, 'thank you for considering us, but we don't think we ought to have a place at the table.' That is up to you.

Ms. Stroud, I think the motion was already made and second and it passed that you would represent.

Mrs. Knoblock, Well, I think he's our advisor and I think he's way out of line.

Ms. Martin, I don't know if the motion was made. I think what was decided by the three individuals on the Council at a meeting that other individuals did not know that that decision was made. I don't think it came before this body as to adopt it. I think it was, the motion was made to create an advisory board or create this committee and allow this committee to work with us. But I don't think we made a motion to adopt the committee as set forth. I could be wrong. I know we, like I said, we made the motion to allow them to go forward with this fact-finding situation, but I don't, I can check the minutes prior to this.

Ms. Stroud, So what we're saying, what you're saying is then, you don't feel that we should have any representation on the?

Ms. Martin, I guess we're double dipping, in my opinion. The bottom line is, there's a fact-finding mission, the subcommittees work together.

Ms. Stroud, Correct.

Ms. Martin, It goes to this 14-member committee that facilitates it to us.

Ms. Stroud, Correct.

Ms. Martin, Then we see it.

Ms. Stroud, Correct.

Ms. Martin, It seems to me that it's double dipping and saying, okay, now we're going to be represented on there and it's going to lean upon one way or the other and it defeats the purpose of having this body out there that is supposed to be.

Ms. Stroud, I don't think that was the idea. I think the idea as far as facilitating and getting the information into that committee was to put it all together and then they would present a final report back to us.

Mrs. Conover, Yes.

Ms. Stroud, So it was like a filtering committee--the process committee--of all the information from the different groups--subgroups.

Ms. Martin, So then what's the purpose of the Council being on there, I guess for clarification purposes.

Mrs. Conover, Well we didn't talk about the Council being on, because the Council is going to have a decision down the road.

Ms. Stroud, Right.

Mrs. Conover, That a council member should not be on, but we wanted someone who could answer questions from a government standpoint. For the committees that Carole has mentioned, you forgot one, Carole. Center Township Trustee.

Mrs. Knoblock, Okay.

Mrs. Conover, David can answer a lot of questions that may or may not need to be addressed.

Mrs. Knoblock, Well I'm sure he isn't going to work for nothing on this.

Mrs. Conover, Well I guess it's been my understanding that I volunteer my time to do this and David has also volunteered his time to do it.

Mr. Carmichael, Do we have a…

Com. Evans, When will the decision be made?

Mrs. Conover, They said six months.

Ms. Stroud, Six months.

Mr. West, I know, but why do you think there would be a decision to be made.

Mrs. Conover, If there was a recommendation.
Mr. West, If there was.

Ms. Stroud, Yes.

Mrs. Conover, This body would have to…

Ms. Stroud, Make it final. We make the final.

Mrs. Conover, Our recommendation.

Ms. Stroud, Their recommendation…

Mr. West, What did you call it? You called it an advisory group and we're going to, is it going to be a binding group?

Ms. Stroud, No.

Mr. Carmichael, No.

Ms. Stroud, Not in any way is it a binding group. The seven individuals that sit here make the final decision. We may take and filtrate their information in. It may or may not even have any…

Mr. West, We may or may not act on it.

Ms. Stroud, That's correct. And I think the misconception out there is some of the things that you just said. We are the voting body. It was set up to go out and see in the county what they may find, it might be something we may be overlooking and filter it through this top committee as far as a report to bring back to us. But we have the vote. They have no voting power whatsoever.

Mrs. Conover, From the first meeting, everyone, the working committees that are yet to be defined and the process committee, they wanted to learn more about where we receive our money, our various budgets. They wanted our budget and it was explained that the budget is this thick and we're trying to disseminate information, because they want a crash-course in county government in how its funded and how it operates and our different revenue sources and how big or little x-department is and y-department is. So we've taken a couple of steps back in other words, but they want to be up to snuff when they start to get into the operations of county government.

Ms. Stroud, And no way, you know, do they vote. I mean we have the final say.

Ms. Martin, I guess it's a moot point, because its already been decided by this board. So it's a moot point as of this point in time.

Mr. Carmichael, Could we move on and have the attorney's report at this time.

Ms. Stroud, Yes.

ATTORNEY'S REPORT
Real Estate Property Tax Collections

Mr. Hollenbeck, Are you ready for the attorney's report?

Ms. Stroud, Yes, we are.

Mr. Hollenbeck, A number of matters to bring to your attention. The first thing I'm passing down is a memorandum on the status of the real estate property tax collections. I would call your attention first to the last three pages, which is our printout provided to me today by County Treasurer Murphy. As of May 13th, which was yesterday, he has posted a total of $34,006,980.15 for all of the 29 units of local government shown on the first page of the printout or the second page of the material I've just given you.
He's made advances totaling $7,257,956. Of that amount, he's made one advance to the County. You can see that in the memorandum, consisting of the, an advance to the general fund to the county health fund and to the CCD fund, an amount a little over a million dollars.
He's indicated to me that he hopes to have all the posting done within the next two weeks, then we will be in a much better position to know exactly what the tax collection process has produced by way of revenue. He indicated as well that I think by the end of this week he's talking about making another advance to the Auditor's office to try to help with the cash-flow situation. So that brings you up to date on one leg of the problem and that's the real estate property tax collections.

Cash-Flow Statement

Mr. Hollenbeck, The next thing I want to handout is an updated cash-flow statement for the County.

Ms. Martin, Is that it, Dave. No cash, no flow.

Ms. Stroud, No cash, no flow.

Mr. Hollenbeck, The first page and H.J. Umbaugh and Associates has done this for us. The first page is the estimate, the revised estimate for 2002. A couple of things, I guess maybe the bad news first. If you look at the very bottom right hand corner here in the December column, you see the figure $56,988. That's our projected cash balance on December 31st of this year, with some assumptions. Those assumptions include not one nickel of additional spending. No additional appropriations. How realistic that is, is for you to decide.
You've already had discussions this evening about the jail. You've heard from the commissioners about the health insurance situation and I think as Barb alluded to, as you talked to the department heads and find out where they are. I'll just make the observation that there's an assumption here that there's no additional appropriations between now and the end of the year. You'll have to decide how realistic that is. On this, all I know is what I read in the paper, but I saw an astronomical number that is being thrown around for the Plan Commission cost to defend the lawsuit for the landfill and pay for that somehow.
But in any event, that's the first assumption and indeed, if you look at the 2003 and 2004 cash-flow statements you have on page 2 and 3, you'll see the exact same assumption, which would mean that spending levels would not increase one dime in 2003 or 2004, which obviously means no raises, no longevity, no increased spending on anything beyond the 10% cuts that you've made this year.
The other thing that you see on there is the need in November. If you look at the top, in November, you see $1,250,000. The only way we make it to December 31st is another borrowing from the bridge fund of $1,250,000. You'll see there's no payback of that in December. So our cash flow, we survive with a cash balance of $56,900. Remember we spend in excess, even at the reduced level, $2,000,000 a month. You can figure out how long $56,000 is going to last of cash into the new year.
If you turn the page the 2003, right off the bat you see $10,000,000. That means we're going to have issue new tax anticipations in January of 2003. Borrow more money to tune of $10,000,000 for cash-flow purposes in order to pay the bills in the first part of next year. You also see in May, $1,500,000 that's going back into the bridge fund again and not paying it back. Then on December 31st of 2003, again with keeping the reduced spending of expenses and no additional appropriations, the cash balance has dropped to $46,446.
Turn to the last page, you see the cash-flow analysis for 2004 and we begin to come out of the woods a little bit. We still have to borrow $10,000,000 in January in order to make it through the year. We still have to borrow from the bridge fund, that we do payback this time in December of 2004. Again, with this level of spending, no additional appropriations into December of 2004, the cash balance has grown to $197,000. Again, it keeps you running for a week.

Ms. Martin, I just have a couple of things here to take into consideration. Number one is, we are paying the $2,000,000 back to the bridge fund, correct, in June of this year?

Mr. Hollenbeck, In June of this year, but then we have to re-borrow $1,250,000 in November.

Ms. Martin, Right, but we're paying some of it back, number one.

Mr. Hollenbeck, Right.

Ms. Martin, Number two is, we're under the assumption that we're not going to get any money back from Bethlehem with this, correct?

Ms. Stroud, Is that correct? That was my same question.

Mr. Hollenbeck, No, the 2003 and 2004 estimates on property taxes include a 60% reduction, which is what their appeal is of the Bethlehem property taxes. It does include an assumption that Bethlehem will pay $.40 on a dollar. That is why the figure is up. See the figure is $8,747,700 in June of 2002, it grows to $9,010,000 and $9,280,000 in 2004. So it does project a growth in property tax revenue.

Ms. Martin, But that…

Mr. Hollenbeck, What it doesn't include, if I could.

Ms. Martin, Go ahead.

Mr. Hollenbeck, What it doesn't include is any contemplation of revenue from the bailout bill and that's borrowing again. Okay.

Ms. Stroud, It does not include that in here.

Mr. Hollenbeck, These cash-flow statements do not include income from the bailout bill or payback of the bailout bill. That isn't, when these, there was no presumption there would be any dollars available from the payback bill. So that now we're segueing into the better news. Okay.
The other good news is, if you look at December, you see a state loan repayment of $756,625. That's the first installment of our payback of the Department of Commerce loan that we secured in December right after the bankruptcy so we could pay our bills into January. As you'll recall, we borrowed a total of $3,000,000 from the Department of Commerce and that loan agreement provides that when and if, remember that was entered into in December before what we knew what would happen in the General Assembly. That loan agreement provides that if and when there is a bailout bill we must repay the Department of Commerce loan out of the bailout money.
So the $756,625 expense in December of this year, assuming you authorize me with the next thing we are going to do and that's the bailout bill situation, that won't be there in December. Because you're borrowing the money from the bailout bill and the bailout bill doesn't have to be paid back in December. So in theory, your cash balance could be about $800,000 on this cash-flow statement in December if we borrow the bailout money and pay off one loan with this other loan. Then what you've done is you've pushed in 2003 and 2004, the need to start repaying any of the bailout money.

Ms. Martin, We don't have to pay it back until we start getting money back from Bethlehem.

Ms. Stroud, Bethlehem.

Mr. Hollenbeck, Or ten years whichever comes first.

Ms. Stroud, Right.

Ms. Martin, And that's $813,000 that we would have, if we don't, if we take the next transaction.

Mr. Hollenbeck, I said 800, 813 would be your cash balance--that's the good news--on December 31st. If you'll look at the assumptions that Umbaugh has got, you can see what I've said. I guess the most striking of which is that all of this is on the assumption that you don't spend a dime more than you're spending on your 10% reduced budget and that's through 2004.

Ms. Martin, But we still have that $500,000 in operating costs per year that we calculate, correct?

Mr. Hollenbeck, Say that again.

Ms. Martin, A half a million dollars. We usually within our budget process we put aside $500,000. Remember?

Mr. Hollenbeck, For what?

Ms. Martin, Its for operating expenses. We put a half million dollars there every year. So in all actuality we'll have 1.3. The 813, plus the 500,000.

Mr. Hollenbeck, Well, I have to think about that. But anyway, this is food for thought, okay, and keep that in mind as we go forward.


Resolution 02-5-14

Mr. Hollenbeck, The next thing I'm going to pass out is, if you'll recall at the last meeting you were asked to approve a resolution that would access the first third of the bailout money. The way that Senate Bill 17 works is you are authorized to access the bailout monies from the rainy day fund as Bethlehem fails to pay its property taxes and they will not pay three property taxes. November of last year and May and November of this year. So when we did this last month we were authorized to access one third of the bailout monies for the November payment that wasn't made. You approved that resolution. I packaged it up with the rest of the application and sent it down to the State Budget Agency. It has been reviewed and it has been authorized for payment by the Board of Finance next Monday, May 20th in Indianapolis. I am going there, certainly any county council person is welcome to accompany me, although I am led to believe that this juncture that is will be approved by the Board of Finance on Monday.
There was a little discrepancy that I'm still trying to work out with the State Department of Local Government Finance. Our Auditor's office calculated a little over $6,000,000--and that's the figure we've been using all along--of lost revenue for the County from the Bethlehem Steel bankruptcy. The State's figure with the adjusted tax rate is closer to 5.5 million. So at that point, the State is only authorizing us to borrow 5.5 million, total. If you take one third of that, that's 1.8 million. So what we will be authorized on the 20th in Indianapolis is a borrowing of 1.8 million dollars.We will not see any of that money because we owe to 2.1 million to the Department of Commerce on our part of the $3,000,000 loan. So the first third of that bailout package will simply go right to the Department of Commerce and we won't see any of it.
The second third as of Friday, they didn't pay their taxes. So now the second third as of May 10th is now available to be accessed. What I've passed out is a resolution authorizing application for the second third. The State Budget Agency tells me that that will be processed and will be on the agenda of the June meeting of the State Board of Finance. The second 1.8 million--what--$300,000 of that we won't see either because that will go to finish off paying the debt that we incurred in December from the Department of Commerce. So we'll have approximately 1.5 million dollars available to us in June from the bailout money.
Then in November we can have as much as 1.8 million, which kind of segues into Barb's comments about talking to the department heads about where we are and what's going on. It seems to me that's a wise decision so we can get a feel. I mean, if we come to the conclusion that the status quo is not going to work. I mean, Bill talked to the Sheriff tonight about gasoline money. Barb and I have talked to the commissioners about the fact that the health fund--the health insurance fund--is going to be depleted come the fall. We've got a jail to open. It seems to me that we need to get a handle and picking up on Karen Martin's comments about planning, we need to get a handle on the kinds of dollars that we are going to need to keep the ship afloat between now and the end of the year. Then limit our borrowing from the rainy day fund to that amount, so we don't over borrow money that we don't need, but yet we have the cash to pay our bills. If the Plan Commission comes to us and says they need $50,000 to defend the landfill lawsuit, I would assume we want to be in the position to do that.
We do have a commitment. We made a commitment to the Interlocal Agency to pay our share of the cost of defending Bethlehem's appeal of their property taxes. That's going to be an expense that isn't in your budget right now. But in any event, that's where we stand in terms of the bailout legislation. I guess I would ask for your consideration this evening of the resolution you have in front of you. I forget the numbering system we. Where did Jan go?

Mrs. Vuko, Its 02-5-14.

Mr. Hollenbeck, 02-5-14. The year, the month and the day. I will answer any questions you may have, but in order to access the second third of the bailout money and realize some cash ourselves, this resolution needs to be adopted tonight so that I can get it on the agenda of the State Board of Finance at their June meeting.

Ms. Martin moved to pass Resolution 02-5-14 as submitted. Mr. Carmichael seconded, motion carried unanimously.

Mr. Hollenbeck, Okay, if I could get like two or three of these going around to be signed.

Ms. Stroud, We're already doing some, I think.

Mr. Hollenbeck, Okay, great.


Tax Anticipation Warrants

Mr. Hollenbeck, The other thing, and I'll let the Auditor pipe in on this as well. As you are aware of we borrowed $10,000,000 of tax anticipation warrants. $5,000,000 of which we used to pay off the bond bank tax warrants and give us $5,000,000 of cash for cash-flow purposes. In the cash-flow statement I gave you we can pay all that back in December. But at this juncture, we haven't, the auditor has only made one request for payment and that was $750,000 in order to pay our bills. So I think again, this is indicative of your actions of being as frugal as you can be is having an impact on the cash-flow situation.
I think we've impressed the local bankers that we're not coming to the well all the time. I think the department heads should be commended and the Council should be commended that we've been people of our word when we said we were going to do everything we could to cut expenses. So at this point, the cash-flow situation is as good as its looked in quite a while and its going to look better as soon as the Treasurer gets his counting done and we get some property taxes on. Madam President, that's the end of my report.

Ms. Stroud, Thank you very much. Okay, let's see. We need a second reading here, Madam Auditor.



Mrs. Knoblock, Can I say one more thing?

Ms. Stroud, Oh, sure.

Mrs. Knoblock, I really, I'm still upset over this appointment and I really think that Dave should take himself off of it. There's so many people that talk to me and I don't know. Dave, after serving on all these boards and everything it's a conflict to me and I feel like your resignation is in order.

Mr. Carmichael, Carole, do you have an attorney?

Mrs. Knoblock, Do I have an attorney?

Mr. Carmichael, Do you have an attorney that handles your affairs?

Mrs. Knoblock, Yes.

Mr. Carmichael, Do you think your attorney has one client?

Mrs. Knoblock, No.

Mr. Carmichael, Or does your attorney handle a hundred clients?

Mrs. Knoblock, This is all government though.

Mr. Carmichael, It doesn't make any difference.

Mrs. Knoblock, No, it is a difference, Bill. It is.

Mr. Carmichael, If your attorney had to live off of your fees alone, your attorney would be out starving. Attorneys have hundreds of clients at a time.

Mrs. Knoblock, But this Porter County government.

Mr. Carmichael, Well I'm just making out the point that attorneys have to have many clients in order to make a living.

Mrs. Knoblock, I know, but not Porter County government.

Mr. Carmichael, You've got an office and staff to support.

Mrs. Knoblock, Government is different, Bill.

Mr. Carmichael, To you it makes a difference. To me it doesn't.

Mrs. Knoblock, Yes, well, that's my opinion. I'm sorry you feel that way.

Mrs. Conover, I guess I just wanted to chime in and say that I don't think the intentions of this committee was to side one way or another. It was to truly study our government and our finances. We are in more than a crisis situation right here. Those of you who bothered to stay around for this whole meeting, I think understand.
We are kind of balancing the budget now on the backs of the county employees. We've lost some good ones. We've had some good ones we've had to layoff. With all that said and done, I guess I can go on and on and I don't feel that, I guess from my own personal standpoint I felt that David would be a good representative not only of county government but government in general, because he understands how government operates, where it receives its finances and could answer any questions.

Mrs. Knoblock, Yes, everybody's got their right to their opinion.

Mrs. Conover, I know and I love you dearly, Carole and I respect your opinion.

Ms. Stroud, I think we all do, Carole.

Mrs. Knoblock, That's my opinion. I'm sorry.

Ms. Stroud, And you're entitled to that opinion. Just like, you know, we're entitled to ours. That's the democratic process.

Mrs. Knoblock, That's right.

Ms. Stroud, We need a second reading.

SECOND READING

At this time, Mrs. Vuko read the second reading.



Ms. Stroud, Is there any other matter to come before the Council? Yes, John.

Mr. Ruge, I think John Aylesworth wants to make a statement.

Ms. Stroud, I'm sorry. Okay, John. John, would you like to come forward, please.

John 'Jack' Aylesworth, There is a glimmer of hope. I have in my hand and you have one too, the detailed explanation of what would happen if you adopt a 1% county adjusted gross income tax. I'm going to make some other statements, but let's look at the bottom of the first page.

Mrs. Conover, I don't have one.

Ms. Stroud, I don't have one.

Mr. Aylesworth, I gave one to everybody, but I have more if you like.

Ms. Stroud, When, did you just set them here?

Mr. West, No, he set them here at the beginning of the meeting.

Mr. Aylesworth, At the beginning of it.

Mr. West, I have one.

Ms. Stroud, Did you take mine, Leon?

Mr. West, No, I did not.

Ms. Stroud, Leon took mine. I'm going to blame it on Leon.
Mr. Aylesworth, I've got more and I can give some to you guys.

Ms. Stroud, You know, I have so many pieces of paper here. I'm sorry, John. I can't put my hands on one.

Mr. Aylesworth, Anybody, we shall furnish you another one.

Ms. Stroud, Okay, thank you very much.

Mr. Aylesworth, Does anybody else need one?

Mrs. Knoblock, I know he gave me one.

Mr. Aylesworth, As you may already know and probably do, the State back in the 70's authorized counties to supplement their property taxes with a gross income tax. There are two forms. One is called a county option income tax, which you couldn't adopt if you wanted to because it has to be a large committee of several government agencies. You can adopt CAGIT, which is county adjusted gross income tax.
I have done quite a little research in the last few days with the Legislature, with the county people at Farm Bureau. You all have this book that Farm Bureau puts out for county government. I've researched that. The estimated income from a 1% CAGIT per year would be $30,600,000, which would be for all taxing units in Porter County. The County's share would be approximately $12,000,000 per year or $600,000 for a half year if you were to adopt that tonight.

Mr. Carmichael, $6,000,000, Jack.

Mr. Aylesworth, $6,000,000. What did I say, $6,000?

Mr. Carmichael, $600,000.

Mr. Aylesworth, $6,000,000 for a half year. The rules for CAGIT are as follows: The first quarter of the 1%--in this case--would be $1,500,000 that goes to property tax relief. Any gain in future years also goes to property taxes relief. The second one quarter, which would be another $1,500,000 goes to property tax relief, but with any gain in future years, this would be available for new money. The third quarter percent, another $1,500,000 is available to replace lost dollars from federal revenue sharing at the rate of 100% of the amount. The taxing units draw it. The County, including Porter County could have received in 1985 the amount of $476,557, which would be available for use by the County. The balance of that third quarter percent would be $1,025,000, which goes to property tax relief. The fourth quarter percent of $1,500,000 is designed to be available for new spendable money. It becomes available over a three-year period. Half of that or 1/8% or $750,000 the first year, $375,000 the second and the third years while the excess balance goes to property tax relief. This is available new money. Any new money not needed by any unit its governing body can be used to further increase property tax relief.
Remember these estimates would be doubled after this year if you pass this. These figures only go from July 1st to the end of this year. Today or tomorrow actually is the last day you can authorize to pass this. Normally you have to have it by the 1st April, any changes. This can be changed at any time by this council. It can be modified, it can be dropped, again, before the 1st of April in the year.
I've got some other comments in there. I've been very disappointed that we haven't adopted this for many years. Property taxes are not fair and equitable. You all know that. People just because they have some property doesn't mean they are able to pay taxes. You ought to know that. If you've got a farm that doesn't mean that you make a lot of money so you can pay a lot of taxes. There are many people that are making lots of money that do not have much property; they don't pay much taxes to support the government. I think it's wrong and I think the schools suffer from that too.
So I brought this to you hoping that you would seriously consider adopting this tonight. If you wait until after tonight it's too late because the State gave you that privilege. A special privilege when they loaned the money to Porter County, the--what was it--$10,000,000, Dave?

Mr. Hollenbeck, I'm sorry, Jack.

Mr. Aylesworth, The $10,000,000 that the State has offered to let Porter County have.

Mr. Hollenbeck, Porter County's is 5.5 million. The total for the Porter County bailout package is about, as they calculated, about $23,000,000.

Mr. Aylesworth, Okay. But when they did that there was talk at that time in the Legislature of insisting that Porter County help itself by passing CAGIT. It was voted down, people said no. Let's see if they have the will to help themselves. This is the one chance to help yourself, to help Porter County and do something that is proper and right anyway. I may be able to answer other questions if you have some. I've spent about three days trying to get some figures and get them proper. If you have questions I'd be happy to answer them. John.

Mr. Ruge, I don't have a question, but I have a letter that sums up in a brief way from--can I read it--from Pamela Thurber: I urge you to pass a county income tax now. The State of Indiana has bailed out our county with a loan this time, but the State is suffering from its own financial problems and can't be counted on to help us in the event of a future crisis. The steel mills are dying and nothing has come to Northwest Indiana to take their place in providing tax revenue. It is far better to tax each citizen 25%, 1% of it is income to obtain the funds needed to run our local government than to depend upon a few industrial employers who own millions of dollars each. Especially when these, those employers, they cease to exist. By passing a county income tax now, the county will not have to pay interest on its loan from the State. Also, the county will begin receiving the monies on this tax in the summer of 2003, which is just a year away. At present we have schools threatening to lay off teachers, libraries with little money for new materials and the closure of our County Home. If we don't incline new revenue soon, will there be enough money to plow the county roads after the next blizzard or repair them the following summer. Also, a county option tax would bring in more money for all units of government. As a resident of Hebron I can tell you that my small town currently does not have the funds to do what it needs to do. I had to wait nine years to have my little street paved because of a lack of town funds. The quality of life, I don't think the County Council needs six months to form a committee to study the situation. Read your daily newspapers and think of it. Does the County has to fall apart before you act. In order to maintain the quality of life of Porter County residents have enjoyed in the past, please institute a county income tax now. Signed Pamela G. Thurber. And I agree with it.

Mr. Aylesworth, If there are no other questions for me, I've made my spiel.

Mr. Carmichael, Jack.

Ms. Stroud, Thank you, Jack.

Mr. Carmichael, I have a question.

Mr. Aylesworth, Go ahead.

Mr. Carmichael, My understanding is that CAGIT would not produce any money for schools. Am I misinformed in that?

Ms. Stroud, No, that's correct. Neither will the county option income tax produce any revenue for schools. Schools are not part of it.

Mr. Aylesworth, There is some money in the last quarter of a percent for schools. It's not huge. I think one school corporation, I believe--and I didn't bring the book here with me--it was over a million dollars.

Ms. Stroud, I have in front of me a document that was put out by the Legislative Services, May 6, 2002, where it has the estimated COIT and then the estimated CAGIT. The only thing that they have in the CAGIT has to do with what they call property tax relief over here. But as far as income for all the schools, zero, zero, zero, zero.

Mr. Aylesworth, No, not there, but there on the end there. You see there some pretty good size payments there to schools. And I don't, the State, I hope…

Ms. Stroud, Dave would have to answer that. Is that for property tax? They don't pay property taxes, but how does it work with that?

Mr. Hollenbeck, No form of local option income tax directly puts a dollar into any school corporation. What CAGIT does do though, is it gives property tax relief to people who pay school taxes, in the sense that the schools do get CAGIT dollars, but they are getting them in lieu of property tax dollars and it becomes virtually a wash. So in that sense CAGIT may not help the school, but it certainly helps the people who are paying the taxes to the school because the property taxes will go down. It does share in the CAGIT money to the extent that the property taxes that are funding schools go down.

Mr. Carmichael, Yes, that was my understanding, Jack, that the schools didn't get anything out that. I was talking to the superintendent up there, it doesn't mean anything to the schools.

Mrs. Knoblock, Yes, it says, no schools.

Mr. Aylesworth, Except that, well.

Mr. Carmichael, Except the tax rate for the property owners.

Ms. Stroud, Right.

Ms. Martin, It really doesn't go down.

Mr. Carmichael, It's replaced.

Ms. Martin, What it does is, you have a 1.5 million and if our taxes are $29,000,000, it's approximately 5% and each year we increase 5%, so we're offsetting by 5%, so it's a wash. Unless there's no growth in that year, then what would happen is, the assessed value would go down so the tax rate would go up to even out the.

Ms. Stroud, Yes, the tax rate would go up.

Mr. Hollenbeck, A 1% CAGIT presently would result in--the way the formula works--property taxes in Porter County going down approximately 35 to 40%.

Mr. Carmichael, And how much money would we wind up with to run county government?

Mr. Hollenbeck, New money?

Mr. Carmichael, New money.

Mr. Hollenbeck, Not much at all.

Ms. Martin, No.

Mr. Carmichael, Like?

Ms. Martin, About $477,000.

Mr. Hollenbeck, Yes, about $500,000.

Ms. Stroud, About $500,000.

Ms. Martin, So you're not, I mean, you're offsetting it, but the bottom line is you're not really offsetting it because it has to do sometimes with the assessed value and it has to do with the budget increase…

Mr. Hollenbeck, Yes, I think…