fPORTER COUNTY COUNCIL
July 27, 2004

The Porter County Council met on Tuesday, July 27, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. in the County Administration Center, 155 Indiana - Suite 205, Valparaiso, Indiana.

Members present were Karen Conover, Carole Knoblock, Robert Poparad, John Ruge, Al Steele, Rita Stevenson, and President William Carmichael. Also present was Attorney David Hollenbeck, Auditor Sandra Vuko, Sheila Riley and Jan Noll.

The meeting was called to order with the Pledge of Allegiance.

Mr. Carmichael, You’ve all received a copy of the minutes from June 22nd. Are there any additions or corrections to those minutes? If not, I’ll entertain a motion to approve.

Mrs. Knoblock moved to approve the minutes of June 22, 2004 as received. Mrs. Conover
seconded, motion carried unanimously.

FIRST READING

Mrs. Vuko read the Notice to Taxpayers.

ANIMAL SHELTER 01.45
Transfer
$5,000 from 1110 Salaries to 1130 Overtime

Mr. Carmichael, The first item we will hear tonight is a transfer from the Animal Shelter. Good evening.

Sandy Ogle, Hi. I’d like to transfer $5,000 into overtime pay for my two animal control officers that are going to be rotating, probably until at least October, until I get another animal control officer trained, and one is on maternity leave right now.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay, any questions on this request? If not, I will entertain a motion.

Mr. Steele moved to grant the request for transfer of funds submitted by the Animal Shelter 01.45, $5,000 from 1110 Salaries to 1130 Overtime. Mr. Poparad seconded, motion carried on a unanimous voice vote.

Mr. Carmichael, Thank you, Sandy.

Ms. Ogle, Thank you very much.

VETERANS AFFAIRS 01.27
Transfer
$300 from 1120 Hourly to 2110 Office Supplies
$1,000 from 1120 Hourly to 3130 Training & Education

Mr. Carmichael, Veterans Affairs. Hi, would you introduce yourself to the County Council.

Jim Lynch, Yes sir, my name is Jim Lynch, and I’m the new Porter County Veterans Service officer.

Mr. Carmichael, Welcome aboard, Jim.

Mr. Lynch, Thank you.

Mr. Carmichael, What do you need?

Mr. Lynch, I’m requesting a transfer.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay

Mr. Lynch, Of $1,300 from the budgeted hourly salary to operating funds to allow the office to function to conduct some training that is required by law, and also to acquire some operating equipment for the office, such as computer cartridges to operate, etc.

Mr. Carmichael, Some office supplies.

Mr. Lynch, Yes, sir.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay, you’ve heard the request. What’s the Council’s
pleasure?

Mr. Poparad moved to grant the request for transfer of funds submitted by Veterans Affairs 01.27, $300 from 1120 Hourly to 2110 Office Supplies and $1,000 from 1120 Hourly to 3130 Training & Education. Mr. Ruge seconded, motion carried on a unanimous voice vote.

Mr. Lynch, Thank you, sir.

Mr. Carmichael, Thank you, and welcome aboard.

PROSECUTOR PRETRIAL DIVERSION 38.08
144 Form
Domestic Violence Prosecutor Acevedo from $32,941 to $41,002
Domestic Violence Prosecutor Gregg from $0 to $5,483
Additional Appropriation
$46,485 to 1110 Salaries
$3,557 to 1210 FICA
$2,440 to 1230 PERF

Mr. Carmichael, Prosecutor.

Brian Gensel, Good evening.

Mr. Carmichael, Howdy.

Mr. Gensel, Jim just got back from vacation, so he sent me alone tonight.

Mr. Carmichael, And what’s your request here, a 144 Form.

Mr. Gensel, Well, we have had some stop grants for domestic violence prosecutors cut back. I believe what our request indicates is by $16,000 for the period of July 1, 2004 through the June 30, 2005 period. So what we are requesting is that we be allowed to use the money, as indicated on the agenda, from $32,941 to $41,002 to make up the difference from our 38.08 pretrial diversion account. So it certainly wouldn’t be new money, it would money that’s in that account.

Mr. Carmichael, Bob.

Mr. Poparad, Are we taking the prosecutor--the domestic violence prosecutor--up in pay?

Mr. Gensel, Actually, we are. Each of the two prosecutors up the $1,000 that other county employees got last year that they did not get because the way the grant cycle works, there was no way to include that in, in that.

Mr. Poparad, Right.

Mr. Gensel, During that time period.
Mr. Poparad, But we’re going from 32 to 41.

Mr. Gensel, I think that the 32 to 41 is the 16, plus the additional $2,000. I think that’s how the numbers work out. Sheila, is that how it works?

Mr. Carmichael, Are there any other questions?

Mr. Steele, Did we have these people onboard before you got the grant, or were they hired with the grant?

Mr. Gensel, The way the grant worked is we, we got a grant originally, hired someone to do that work. We got additional grant monies, and brought in a second person. And the understanding with the Council always was that if the grants ever got depleted, we would have to make them up out of the either diversion monies or deferral monies. So in essence, that is what we’re trying to do, because we need to keep both of these people.

Mr. Steele, So the monies that we are using, you have those monies, but in another account?

Mr. Gensel, That is correct. Those are part of the self-generated funds. This is from the
pretrial diversion, the 38.08 account. It’s not new money.

Mr. Carmichael, Any other questions? What’s the Council’s pleasure?

Mrs. Conover moved to amend the 144 Form submitted by Prosecutor Pretrial Diversion 38.08, Domestic Violence Prosecutor Acevedo from $32,941 to $41,002 and Domestic Violence Prosecutor Gregg from $0 to $5,483, and grant the request for additional appropriations, $46,485 to 1110 Salaries, $3,557 to 1210 FICA and $2,440 to 1230 PERF. Mr. Poparad seconded, motion carried on a unanimous roll call vote.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay, you have a…

Mrs. Vuko, Bill.

Ms. Riley, Bill, this needs to be retroactive to July 1st.

Mr. Gensel, I think Kathy indicated to me to June 28th. Is that?

Ms. Riley, That first payroll in July.

Mr. Gensel, Right.

Mr. Carmichael, Let me check with the motion. Do you agree to include that? Does the second agree to include that?

Mrs. Conover moved to amend her motion, and include the retroactive date of June 28,
2004 for the 144 Form. Mr. Poparad agreed.

Mr. Carmichael, Roll call has been completed, seven to nothing.

PROSECUTOR DEFERRAL 12.08
144 Form
Victim Advocate Rohrich from $0 to $1,000
Victim Advocate Bastin from $0 to $1,000
Victim Advocate Shaner from $3,071 to $4,156
Additional Appropriation
$6,156 to 1110 Salaries
$471 to 1210 FICA
$325 to 1230 PERF

Mr. Carmichael, Prosecutor Deferral, the 12.08 Fund.

Mr. Gensel, Next up is basically the same thing, but this applies to our victims advocate portion of our office. They’ve had some grant monies reduced there as well. And this also would
include the $1,000. These people didn’t get it again with the same cycle on the grant, so we’re asking for these additional monies. I believe it’s $6,156 to Salaries; $471 to FICA; $325 to PERF. This would come out of the pretrial, the infraction deferral, which is the 12.08 account, which we
already have that money.

Mr. Carmichael, Are there any questions by a council member? If not, I will entertain a motion.

Mrs. Conover, Just a quick question. Brian, do you know why the grants have been reduced?

Mr. Gensel, They have been reduced statewide, and we’ve gotten the figures. Most of the, we’re one of the counties who has kept the highest, one of the highest percentages. They’ve reallocated some of the monies, and we don’t fully understand; some counties that didn’t get monies before are now getting more money. But most of the counties that were receiving money were cut back farther that we were, so, okay. There just apparently isn’t enough money to go around.

Mrs. Conover moved to amend the 144 Form submitted by Prosecutor Deferral 12.08, Victim Advocate Rohrich from $0 to $1,000, Victim Advocate Bastin from $0 to $1,000 and Victim Advocate Shaner from $3,071 to $4,156, retroactive to June 28, 2004; and grant the request for additional appropriations, $6,156 to 1110 Salaries, $471 to 1210 FICA $325 to 1230 PERF. Mr. Poparad seconded, motion carried on a unanimous roll call vote.

PROSECUTOR IV-D 182
Additional Appropriation
$12,000 to 4510 Data Processing Equipment

Mr. Carmichael, You’re looking for an additional of $12,000 to Data Processing Equipment.

Mr. Gensel, We are. This is for the child support office. I think a couple of months ago we came in and got some money. Since then, we’ve kind of went through the equipment needs, and I know that the data processing department has been onboard, and I believe that they’ve provided the approval letter to you folks. We just need some more money. Again, that’s going to come out of incentive money that is contained in the IV-D budget; it’s not additional monies. It’s money that’s already there. One of the things, and we asked a couple of months ago, and the same
issue comes up, that the ISETS computer system, which is the lifeblood of child support data keeping is requiring us to have new equipment to run it, and they’re taking back the computer equipment that totaled, that’s been running it for a number of years. So we just need to upgrade the equipment.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay. Data processing is aware of this?

Mr. Gensel, Yes.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay. Do you agree with the request?

Sharon Lippens, Yes.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay, Bob, did you have a concern about CCD funds that we talked about earlier.

Mr. Poparad, Well, yes, but.

Mr. Carmichael, Apparently you received an answer to your question.
Mr. Poparad, Yes.

Mr. Carmichael, The request then is for $12,000 to Data Processing Equipment out of the
IV-D 182. Is there a motion?

Mrs. Stevenson moved to grant the request for additional appropriations submitted by Prosecutor IV-D 182, $12,000 to 4510 Data Processing Equipment. Mr. Ruge seconded.

Mr. Poparad, I’ve got a question, Bill.

Mr. Carmichael, Question.

Mr. Poparad, How much is in that fund, Sheila?

Ms. Riley, $52,779.64

Mr. Poparad, That’s before these additionals?

Ms. Riley, That’s before the additional.

Mr. Poparad, Thank you.

Mr. Carmichael, I think last month it was 46 when we had asked about that, 52?

Mrs. Conover, Does that not generate monthly revenues.

Mr. Gensel, I believe it does.

Ms. Riley, No.

Mrs. Conover, No?

Mr. Gensel, No? Does it come quarterly?

Ms. Riley, It comes, we haven’t had anything since last year, I believe. We got money in December of last year, but nothing since.

Mr. Carmichael, Further discussion? Roll call.

Motion carried on a unanimous roll call vote.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay.

Mr. Gensel, Thank you very much.

Mr. Carmichael, Get out while you still have your hide.

HIGHWAY
Additional Appropriation
$140,000 to 20-00010-131 EDIT
$140,000 to 20-00010-230 EDIT
$140,000 to 20-00010-330 EDIT

Mr. Carmichael, Highway Department. Hi, how are you?

Al Hoagland, Good evening.

Mr. Carmichael, What’s your request?

Mr. Hoagland, Our request is for $140,000 in each district of the EDIT money. We’re finding ourselves with the shortfall in the budget this year, the other funds that weren’t available, and the delays in getting the additionals from the state, we desperately need some money. We’ve got some bridge projects that we planned, and we desperately wanted to try and get them in before school started. I’m not sure what the holdup is, but our money from the state is just not coming. We’ve got sufficient money earmarked in that account that if you allow us to have this money, there will still be money left in there. And we do have plenty of work for it to go around.

Mr. Carmichael, You’ve heard the request. Questions.

Mrs. Conover, The gas tax money, is that what you’re referring to, Al, and it hasn’t been
received?

Mr. Hoagland, The budget that was submitted last year, we had to pare down.

Mrs. Conover, Right.

Mr. Hoagland, And I’m really kind of at a loss as how much further it went down, but it took us considerably out of our LRS money.

Mrs. Conover, Local, Roads & Streets, okay.

Mr. Hoagland, That was one of the major funds that we normally would use. The additionals that we put in for bridge last year, what was it, January, they still have not been appropriated. We’ve received no money of all the times we’ve been before the Council; it just has not come back from the state. We’re basically running bare-bones right now. We’re trying to function, but we’re running out of construction time.

Mr. Carmichael, On those funds that they receive, there’s five different areas that contribute to that particular fund.

Mrs. Conover, Right.

Mr. Carmichael, I don’t know, of course, what the holdup is. Sheila, you told me two weeks ago, you said you were expecting it tomorrow.

Ms. Riley, I know, that’s what they keep telling me. I talked to Judy Robertson on Thursday of last week, she said her secretary would mail out all of the additionals, which are done for the whole year so far, we’ve mailed them out on Friday, and I would have them by today. I didn’t have them today. I called Judy Robertson, she won’t tell me what’s been approved, and what’s not been approved; I have to wait for the papers.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay, any further questions. You’ve heard the request, what’s your pleasure?

Mr. Steele and Mrs. Conover moved to grant the request for additional appropriations submitted by Highway, $140,000 to 20-00010-131 EDIT, $140,000 to 20-00010-230 EDIT and $140,000 to 20-00010-330 EDIT. Mr. Ruge seconded, motion carried on a unanimous roll call vote.

Mr. Carmichael, Nobody told you this was going to be an easy job.

Mr. Hoagland, I understand that. Thank you very much.

David James, Thank you.

PCADOS 34
Transfer
$10,000 from 1110 Salaries to 1120 Hourly

Mr. Carmichael, PCADOS is requiring a transfer of $10,000 from Salaries to Hourly.
Neil Hannon, Good evening.

Mr. Carmichael, Did you get all moved out of the Portage area?

Mr. Hannon, Yes, we did. Yes, everything is located in the lower level of this building now, and the rest is stored.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay.

Mr. Hannon, My request tonight is to take the $10,000, that happened, scheduled to be paid to the director of PCADOS, who has left us now two weeks ago. We’re not going to be replacing him. The PCADOS program is in the position right now of being outsourced PACT. So we’re in that period, and it may take place definitively sometime the first of October or it may
not take place until the end of the year. But we need to continue to keep the plates into the air, and keep the PCADOS program open until such time that transition occurs officially. So we are asking that we can employ some people part-time hourly in the interim. So that’s what this request
is tonight.

Mr. Carmichael, What do you pay them part-time hourly?

Mr. Hannon, $72 an hour. No, it’s $17 an hour. I knew I’d get your
attention right away though.

Mr. Carmichael, Hey, I’m the comedian here, not you.

Mrs. Knoblock, What is it?

Mr. Hannon, It’s $17 an hour.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay, and that’s all part-time.

Mr. Hannon, Yes.

Mr. Carmichael, No benefits.

Mr. Hannon, No.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay. I talked to you the other day about this situation.

Mr. Hannon, Yes.

Mr. Poparad, How much is in that category? Sheila, do you have enough, is there $10,000
there to transfer?

Ms. Riley, I don’t know what his cash balance is as far PCADOS goes. I have a balance of $415,928. That is not all PCADOS money.

Mr. Hannon, Those funds are commingled with the sheriff’s department, police education fund, and what I’m doing is, Craig Ingram’s salary was approximately $45,000 this year. He’s been paid through half of that time, so he has approximately $25,000 yet that would be budgeted for him. All of this is from client fees, it’s not from county tax dollars, so we’re using less than half of what was budgeted to his salary only for that purpose.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay.

Mr. Hannon, Does that answer it? Okay.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay, further questions? Do I have a motion?

Mr. Poparad moved to grant the request for transfer of funds submitted by PCADOS 34,
$10,000 from 1110 Salaries to 1120 Hourly. Mr. Steele seconded, motion carried on a unanimous voice vote.

Mr. Carmichael, Thank you, Neil.

Mr. Hannon, Thank you.

HEALTH BIOTERRORISM 238
Transfer
$710 from 3310 Printing other than Office Supplies to Data Processing Equipment
$6,200 from 4430 Other Mobile Equipment to 4510 Data Processing Equipment
$177 from 3340 Advertising to 4510 Data Processing Equipment
$215 from 3110 Legal to 4510 Data Processing Equipment
$1,000 from 2110 Office Supplies to 4510 Data Processing Equipment - Amended
to $500 from 2110 Office Supplies to 2420 Shop Supplies
$994 from 3130 Training & Education to 4510 Data Processing Equipment

Mr. Carmichael, Health Department. Good evening.

Connie Rudd, How are you.

Mr. Carmichael, How is everybody?

Ms. Rudd, Good.

Mr. Carmichael, Alright. It looks like you’re looking for some transfers.

Keith Letta, Yes. There is one change, if the Council would allow us to do so. It would be
one, two, three, four, the fifth item down; $1,000 from Office Supplies to Data Processing. Can I amend that to be $500 from Office Supplies to Shop Supplies? Shop Supplies, 2420.

Mr. Carmichael, Shop Supplies.

Mr. Letta, Shop Supplies, 2420.

Mrs. Conover, You’re reducing the $1,000 to $500.

Mr. Letta, $500.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay, this is out of the bioterrorism fund, which is not general tax dollars.

Mr. Letta, Right.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay, any questions on this request? No questions? Then I’ll entertain a
motion.

Mrs. Conover moved to grant the request for transfer of funds submitted and amended by
Health Bioterrorism 238, $710 from 3310 Printing other than Office Supplies to Data Processing Equipment, $6,200 from 4430 Other Mobile Equipment to 4510 Data Processing Equipment, $177 from 3340 Advertising to 4510 Data Processing Equipment, $215 from 3110 Legal to 4510 Data Processing Equipment, $1,000 from 2110 Office Supplies to 4510 Data Processing Equipment, amended to $500 from 2110 Office Supplies to 2420 Shop Supplies, and $994 from 3130 Training & Education to 4510 Data Processing Equipment. Mr. Ruge seconded, motion carried on a unanimous voice vote.

Mr. Letta, Thank you.

Mr. Carmichael, Thank you.

DRUG FREE COMMUNITY FUND 73
Additional Appropriation
$38,689.75 to 0001 Education
$51,726.63 to 0001 Treatment
$43,471.58 to 0001 Justice
$28,288.72 to 0001 Substance Abuse Office

Mr. Carmichael, Drug Free Community additionals. Do we have representatives here? In
reading all your requests, it looks like you’ve done a tremendous amount of homework.

Sharon Cawood, We’ve been doing…

Mr. Carmichael, You had an awful lot of requests.

Ms. Cawood, Good evening, I’m Sharon Cawood, the director of the Governor’s Commission for Drug Free Indiana in Porter County for the Substance Abuse Council. With me is Officer Pete Duda, who is from the Chesterton Police Department, and he’s our president this year. Just to remind you all that these dollars are not taxpayers’ dollars. They’re funds from the DUI arrests and drug arrests. And Officer Duda will tell you how we spend the dollars.

Officer Pete Duda, Good evening. They’re divided up into four categories; Our Prevention,
Education, Treatment/Intervention, Justice, and then the fourth category is discretionary, which handles the office funding. As you can see from the handout, unfortunately, the total requests far out exceed the amount of actual money that we have. So we have some work to do as far as trying
to figure out where to put those dollars where they will do the most good.

Mr. Carmichael, Who is on your board to discuss this, and make the decisions?

Ms. Cawood, We each have different people each year that sit on the allocation committee. They’re not always the people who are on our board of directors, and we usually try to pick as many people from our coalition to sit on that allocation committee, who do not have a grant turned into us. But we’re finding it harder and harder every year to find people who have not turned in a grant to us to sit on that group. So if their grant comes, if they do turn in a grant into us, and they happen to be on the allocation committee, they have to leave the meeting while we discuss their grant, and then we vote on it without them in the room, then they can come back. And that happens in many of the counties.

Mr. Carmichael, Has the full board approved this request?

Ms. Cawood, Yes.

Mr. Carmichael, From the committee?

Ms. Cawood, The committee approved it, they made the choices, and we’ve already taken it to our board and they’ve approved, and our whole coalition has approved it.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay. Now are there any questions concerning this request?

Mr. Ruge, Now this, is this money coming from fees that are paid in?

Ms. Cawood, From DUI arrests and drug arrests.

Mr. Carmichael, Yes.

Ms. Cawood, Not county dollars, tax dollars.

Mr. Carmichael, Karen.

Mrs. Conover, I just, I guess I’m just stunned that when, it says a dog is $8,000. Does that
include the training of that dog also?
Ms. Cawood, Yes.

Mrs. Conover, And I’m just looking, you’re helping our probation department, which is urine cups and alcohol sensor strips.

Ms. Cawood, And the alcohol sensor strips, actually Neil wrote that to help the health department because they need it for the Antabuse.

Mrs. Conover, Okay.

Ms. Cawood, Yes, and that was the first…

Mrs. Conover, Through the, for the Antabuse program.

Ms. Cawood, For Antabuse, yes.

Mrs. Conover, And also, just the Spring Valley Shelter, also purchases drug kits.

Ms. Cawood, They do test.

Mrs. Conover, They test their clients to make sure they’re living…

Ms. Cawood, Yes.

Mrs. Conover, A drug-free lifestyle.

Ms. Cawood, Right. They won’t let them stay there.

Mrs. Conover, I know they have, there are a lot of requirements there.

Ms. Cawood, Yes.

Mrs. Conover, It’s probably good then. Okay.

Mr. Carmichael, Do we have a motion, and a second?

Mr. Poparad moved to grant the request for additional appropriations submitted by the Drug Free Community Fund 73, $38,689.75 to 0001 Education, $51,726.63 to 0001 Treatment, $43,471.58 to 0001 Justice and $28,288.72 to 0001 Substance Abuse Office. Mrs. Conover seconded, motion carried on a unanimous roll call vote.

Mr. Carmichael, It’s seven to nothing. Alright.

Ms. Cawood, Thank you very much.

Mr. Carmichael, Thank you.

Mrs. Conover, If you had another $100,000, you could spend that easy, couldn’t you.

Ms. Cawood, That’s what we were talking about.

CORONER 01.07
Additional Appropriation
$300 to 3130 Training & Education
$2,000 to 3140 Medical & Hospital Services

Mr. Carmichael, Coroner. Roger.

Roger Kleist, Good evening.

Mr. Carmichael, You need an additional to Training & Education, and you need $2,000 to Medical & Hospital Services.

Mr. Kleist, Correct. This was an oversight on my part when I submitted the budget last summer. These two line items were left off, and it’s, the Training & Education, that’s a, what we use for our out-of-county mileage when we take a body to South Bend or Lake County. And the other is to pay for lab tests outside of Great Lakes, and x-rays, and things like that during an autopsy.

Mr. Carmichael, You’ve heard the request, is there any council member that has a question? If not, I will entertain a motion.

Mr. Steele moved to grant the request for additional appropriations submitted by Coroner 01.07, $300 to 3130 Training & Education and $2,000 to 3140 Medical & Hospital Services. Mrs. Conover seconded, motion carried on a unanimous roll call vote.

Mr. Carmichael, All set, thank you, Roger.

Mr. Kleist, Thanks.

PARKS OPERATING 127
Additional Appropriation
$700 to 3310 Printing other than Office Supplies
$770 to 3340 Advertising
$1,500 to 3980 Event Expenses
Transfer
$1,500 from 3950 Grants to 1121 Interpreter/Educator
$110 from 3959 Grants to 1210 FICA

Mr. Carmichael, Parks Operating, an additional request. Account 127.85, what and how does that account get its money?

Ed Melendez, That is our tourism grant that we receive that is not the general funds, so we use that for the festivals and events.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay.

Mr. Melendez, What we are asking is $700 into the 3310 Printing; $770 into the 3340 for
Advertising; and $1,500 into the 3980 for Event Expenses. This is for our fall events and the holiday light show that is coming up.

Mr. Carmichael, The question I have for you is, how much did it cost to get that sign changed out front? Was that at your request?

Mr. Melendez, Yes.

Mr. Carmichael, It was pretty humorous. Okay, you’ve heard the request, is there any
questions?

Mrs. Conover, No, I just like his opening line, not out of general funds.

Mrs. Conover moved to grant the request for additional appropriations submitted by Parks Operating 127, $700 to 3310 Printing other than Office Supplies, $770 to 3340 Advertising and $1,500 to 3980 Event Expenses. Mr. Poparad seconded, motion carried on a unanimous roll call vote.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay, you have an additional request for a transfer of $1,500 from Grants to 1121 Interpreter/Educator, and $110 to cover the FICA.

Mr. Melendez, That’s correct.

Mr. Carmichael, What’s the Council’s pleasure?

Mr. Poparad moved to grant the request for transfer of funds submitted by Parks Operating 127, $1,500 from 3950 Grants to 1121 Interpreter/Educator and $100 from 3959 Grants to 1210 FICA. Mrs. Conover seconded, motion carried on a unanimous voice vote.

PARKS 01.85
Transfer
$500 from 2210 Gas, Fuel & Lube to 3620 Buildings & Structures
$500 from 3650 Vehicle Repair to 3620 Buildings & Structures
$500 from 3950 Contractual Services to 3955 Compliance Testing - Amended to $1,000 $400 from 3130 Training & Education to 3710 Rentals

Mr. Carmichael, Parks, the 01.85 fund, you want a transfer of $500 from Gas and Fuel to Buildings & Structures; $500 from Vehicle Repair to Buildings & Structures; $500 from Contractual to Compliance Testing; and $400 from Training & Education to Equipment Rentals.

Mr. Melendez, I have one correction if I could make it, and that is the $500 from Contractual Services to Compliance Testing. I’d like to move that to $1,000. We’ve had some problems with one of our wells, and to meet the state approval for opening it up, we need to increase that.

Mr. Carmichael, Do you have sufficient money in that 01.85 line?

Mr. Melendez, Yes, I do.

Mr. Carmichael, You’ve heard the request, what’s the Council’s pleasure?

Mrs. Stevenson moved to grant the request for transfer of funds submitted and amended by Parks 01.85, $500 from 2210 Gas, Fuel & Lube to 3620 Buildings & Structures, $500 from 3650 Vehicle Repair to 3620 Buildings & Structures, $500 from 3950 Contractual Services to 3955 Compliance Testing, amended to $1,000, and $400 from 3130 Training & Education to 3710 Rentals. Mr. Poparad seconded.

Mr. Carmichael, Did you get the change, Sheila?

Ms. Riley, Yes.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay, those in favor of the motion, answer by the usual sign of aye.

Motion carried on a unanimous voice vote.

Mr. Melendez, Thanks.

Mr. Carmichael, Thank you very much.

COMMISSIONERS 01.30
Transfer
$819.17 from 3520 Water & Sewage to 3950 Contractual Services
$1,034 from 3520 Water & Sewage to 3930 Dues & Subscriptions
$3,479 from 1110 Salaries to 3976 County Property Assessed Benefits
$41,000 from 1110 Salaries to 1120 Hourly

Mr. Carmichael, Commissioners. Good evening.

Com. Dave Burrus, Good evening. If Ed’s opening remarks were a benefit, then none of these requests come out of the general fund.

Mr. Carmichael, Hey, I told you, I’m the comedian here, not you.
Com. Burrus, I’m sorry.

Ms. Noll, Well it worked earlier.

Com. Burrus, I didn’t mean to steal your fun from you. What we have is two requests for
transfers on the agenda that I have, and we have a third one that I’m not sure you can deal with, but it may be on your record. Okay. The first one is $819.17 from the Water & Sewage account into Contractual Services. The second one is $1,034 from Water & Sewage to Dues & Subscriptions. And the third one, I believe, is $3,479 from Salaries into County Property Assessed Benefits.

Mr. Carmichael, And the $41,000 from Salaries to Hourly. Is that one of your requests?

Com. Burrus, I may not have brought the entire stack here.

Mr. Poparad, It’s the last one.

Com. Burrus, Okay then, yes.

Mr. Carmichael, What’s that 41 from Salaries to Hourly for?

Com. Burrus, What has happened is that over the period of time in the past when we’ve had hiring freezes, we have used a number of part-time people--particularly in the custodian area--to help pick up the slack. Then at the same time, for an extended period of time--virtually a year-- we’ve had an opening unfilled as the maintenance individual. So I think that the request here is to transfer from that salary money into the part-time.

Mr. Carmichael, Why aren’t you hiring the salaried personnel?

Com. Burrus, Well we have since then, but at the same time we’ve got some excess money
that will take care of our, of our part-time requirements.

Mrs. Knoblock, So you went from nine down to four?

Com. Burrus, I’m sorry, Carole.

Mrs. Knoblock, Nine employees down to four?

Com. Burrus, Where are you reading from here, I don’t see any employee numbers.

Mrs. Knoblock, Oh, you don’t have it there, I was looking at this.

Com. Burrus, No, but the maintenance position has been filled, but it was vacant for at least six months, so we had the…

Mr. Carmichael, Well I did have a complaint about some of the grounds the county owns.

Com. Burrus, Right.

Mr. Carmichael, And I see some of it has been corrected now, and I was just wondering why you’re not, you don’t have full-time personnel in place.

Com. Burrus, Well, it’s, it’s beginning.

Mr. Carmichael, To fill those slots.

Com. Burrus, The first one has been filled.

Mr. Carmichael, You’re going through a training program with part-time hourly.

Com. Burrus, And if they turn out that we can keep them full-time, we will, but there’s quite a sorting process. A lot of them don’t last, so.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay. Alright. Okay, is there any questions concerning this request? Hearing…

Mr. Ruge, Is this.

Mr. Carmichael, John.

Mr. Ruge, What of this is, are you going to ask for the $50,000 again for support of the
Malden railroad?

Mr. Steele, John, that’s not now.

Com. Burrus, Not yet, John.

Mr. Ruge, It’s coming up?

Com. Burrus, Yes.

Mr. Carmichael, No that’s…

Mr. Ruge, Okay.

Mr. Carmichael, That’s coming up. Any other questions? If not I will entertain a motion.

Mr. Poparad moved to grant the requests for transfer of funds submitted by Commissioners 01.30, $819.17 from 3520 Water & Sewage to 3950 Contractual Services, $1,034 from 3520 Water & Sewage to 3930 Dues & Subscriptions, $3,479 from 1110 Salaries to 3976 County Property Assessed Benefits and $41,000 from 1110 Salaries to 1120 Hourly. Mrs. Conover seconded, motion carried on a unanimous voice vote.

CCD 132
Additional Appropriation
$115,592 to 4110 Land Purchase - Request withdrawn

Com. Burrus, The next item, I may need some help from Sandy on, I don’t know. But we have a discrepancy I’m told on our budget, our CCD budget. The issue is that the 2003 budget amount--total amount--was $1,314,426. The requested amount for 2004 was considerably less than that. It was $1,198,834. What was actually advertised and approved was the higher figure, and I’m told that we need to request an additional to make the actual budget request balance with what was approved. Is that not the way it is?

Mrs. Vuko, No.

Com. Burrus, Okay, can you tell me what it is?

Ms. Riley, It was advertised at $1,098,000, I think is what it was advertised at.

Com. Burrus, 198.

Ms. Riley, And then when you guys came in front of them at budget hearing, you changed it. You added Land Purchase in there, but because it was already advertised at $1,098,000 the state only approved, can only approve what it’s advertised.

Com Burrus, Okay.

Ms. Riley, So the $115,000 additional amount of money that they wanted could not be approved for that reason.
Com. Burrus, Okay.

Mr. Carmichael, Where do we go from here?

Ms. Riley, They have to do an additional, and hope the state will approve it.

Com. Burrus, Well, we have one other question. The intended purpose for that additional no longer exists. So if we could leave it at the original amount, is that acceptable to you?

Ms. Riley, The original amount was zero.

Com. Burrus, In that line item?

Ms. Riley, Yes.

Com. Burrus, Yes, that’s fine.

Ms. Riley, Then you don’t need to do the additional.

Com. Burrus, Okay. So then the bottom line of $1,198,000 can be accepted as is?

Ms. Riley, Yes.

Com. Burrus, Then that’s the end of issue.

Mr. Poparad, So you’re withdrawing this request?

Com. Burrus, We withdraw that request.

COMMISSIONERS’ CEDIT 257.30
Additional Appropriation
$50,000 to 00010 CEDIT Project #8

Com. Burrus, The next item is one that we want to revisit because through the newspapers,
we understood there may have been some confusion on it. At any rate, we would like to re-request an amount of $50,000 of the CEDIT account, Project #8, to go toward the local share of the proposed purchase of the CSX railroad in Malden. We have a couple of speakers who would like to try to clarify anything that might have been misunderstood, and if we could call on them at this time, I think the first one would be Mr. Dean Kaesebier.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay, let me tell you, Dave, the last time we spent considerable time on this particular issue.

Com. Burrus, Okay.

Mr. Carmichael, Now if we’re going to hear from the speakers, I don’t think the Council
wants to hear again the same things that were said at the last regular meeting. If he has something new to add…

Com. Burrus, Would it be possible just to make them available for questions? Would that be acceptable?

Mr. Carmichael, That might; it might be acceptable. Al?

Mr. Steele, That’s fine with me.

Mr. Ruge, I, I understand the $50,000 more. I voted against it. Remember? And I understand it more thoroughly now, that the County is not buying this Malden, part of Malden, the railroad. And that, does Mike Aylesworth want to speak?

Mr. Carmichael, Well, do you have a question you want to ask, Mike?

Mr. Ruge, I think I’ve asked them all.

Mr. Carmichael, Well we haven’t heard the answers yet, John, we’ll get to you. Andy.

Andrew Medema, Is it permitted for a discussion from the floor or just on the Council?

Mr. Carmichael, Anything new.

Mr. Medema, Thank you.

Mr. Carmichael, Do you have something new to add?

Mr. Medema, Yes.

Mr. Carmichael, We certainly will hear that. Did you want to ask Mike a
question? No?

Mr. Ruge, Yes, I, I, I do, I mean, I, this, the County is not buying this right-of-way? Is that
right?

Mike Aylesworth, That’s correct.

Mr. Ruge, And the right-of-way is being used right now.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay, John? We’ll get back to you, okay? Rita, you were mentioning
something earlier that you wanted to mention, since you’ve looked into and investigated the whole situation.

Mrs. Stevenson, I would like to read a statement: When I voted for the CEDIT tax, I thought the commissioners and the council would be working together to better our community. Instead, we were presented with a “plan” where we weren’t even asked for our opinion or input. I am happy that I had a second chance to research this matter further. I personally don’t feel the council was well informed at the last meeting or that maybe we didn’t ask the right questions. I want to thank Mr. Grieger for his information, which was one of the reasons why I voted no the last time. Since that time, I have gathered unbiased information from various sources, who have no financial stake here. I do feel economic development and keeping jobs in this community is important, but it comes with a price.
I resent the insinuations in the Herald Argus newspaper article that states “some officials were unsure exactly what the vote was for”. I was well aware of what the money would be used for, and the decision to vote no was hard for me because I know the loss of the rail would affect the farmers in South County. Once it’s gone, it’s gone. Does the County need to own a railroad, what about the liability, will this be a one-time deal? These were some of the questions I had, but after reading about the contingencies placed by the LaPorte County Council, I feel more comfortable that this could be a win-win situation. Should we approve this request, I feel Porter County also needs to make some contingencies of their own.

Mr. Carmichael, Andy, you had something you wanted to say?

Mr. Medema, Yes, my name is Andrew Medema. I’m from Valparaiso. What we have is
really the result of a mistake of having established a slush fund that the county commissioners are then required to dispense. This year from the tax that you passed July, they will have $3,000,000 that they need to find a home for. It is very difficult to believe that the county commissioners are in fact responsible for economic development of our county. They aren’t economists; they aren’t business men; they’re government. If we didn’t have a slush fund, we could still have the farmers have their railroad, and they should. If they think it’s important to them, and from what was described in the paper before, it was $.15 a bushel that they would lose if they didn’t have the railroad; $.15 a bushel is not very much money. That amounts to, I calculated that the State of Indiana had said that the average crop is 180 bushels of corn, used the figure of 165 bushels, and
it produces $25 an acre that it will cost them, if in fact they don’t have the railroad. To produce $50,000, requires only five farmers with 400 acres of corn to be able to use this extra expense that is theirs to buy themselves. They don’t need to come to county council with a cup, and say, please. Have the rest of the county kick in this money so that we won’t be penny- struck. In fact, since the entire railroad costs less than $2,000,000, you’re only talking about, according to my grade school arithmetic, you’re talking about 200 farmers who could put up the money themselves, and there are a lot more than that in the Valpo, the LaPorte Co-op. If they can’t put up the money or would be unwilling to do so, out of their own pocket, then it would be an enterprise that shouldn’t be entered into. I am not sure that I understand why when the railroad wants to get out of the business, then a bunch of farmers want to get into the business.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay, could I ask you a question, Andy?

Mr. Medema, Sure.

Mr. Carmichael, Your opening statement about the economic development tax and economic development in the county, who do you think should be in charge of that?

Mr. Medema, I think that it should; okay, let me speak for a few minutes about the community, the economic development tax. This year it produced $7,000,000 on 1/8 of 1% of income from the people in this county. Next year it will be ¼ of 1%, and will produce $14,000,000. That has left throughout all units in this county, been scrambling to find out what can we do to spend this money. It’s found money, and it’s something that, you know, must seem like a godsend, if you’re in government and looking for money to spend. It was not long ago that it was brewed into thought that it was Democrats who had idea that they should tax and spend.
We converted that into it’s Democrats’ and Republicans’ tax and spend. This money was put through at the 11th hour, when a county had made clear for more than 10 years that they wanted no income taxes, and nobody knew that the County Council had the power all on its own to tax us without any discussion. There was no previous discussion of something like this tax. The excuse given was that we wouldn’t have to pay interest to the state. don’t know how much interest the state was going to charge, but I’m going to assume that it might be as much as 10%.
Eventually the money that we would have paid the state in taxes would have disappeared. But this tax will never disappear. This tax will also not stay at ¼ of a percent. No tax ever stays at what it starts. The federal income tax started at zilch to start with, and look at what it is today. If we really had to pass this tax, and if we really have to keep it, it would be in the first place, my recommendation that the council repeal it. If we really have to keep it; if we’re really interested in the economic development of the community, then the Council has places to spend it through the commissioners. We have a bond issue on this building. We have a bond issue on the juvenile building. We have a bond issue on our new jail. You could pay off those bonds, and that would result in lower property taxes, if not immediately, eventually since we wouldn’t keep paying any more on bonds. So the recommendation I would make would be, first of all, let the farmers buy their own railroad. Secondly…

Mr. Carmichael, We’ve heard that, Andy. You didn’t answer my question.

Mr. Medema, Which was what?

Mr. Carmichael, If the commissioners don’t determine how this is spent for economic development, who should?

Mr. Medema, Well I’m going to tell who should be, because you’re the ones with the power to decide. You’re the ones who appropriate the money. You’re the ones that have a joint shared responsibility with the commissioners.

Mr. Carmichael, But the law doesn’t say we have the ability to administer, only appropriate.

Mr. Medema, That’s right. If you have the power of the purse, you have the power of
control.

Mr. Carmichael, Well okay. Thanks, Andy. Does anyone have a question of anyone in the audience?

Mr. Steele, Bill, I have no question, but I’d like to make a presentation with some new information.

Mr. Carmichael, Certainly, Al.

Mrs. Knoblock, I would too when you’re done.

Mr. Steele, I think that the LaPorte County Council was ahead of us in that at least they
were, they spent the time, maybe they had more notice than we did to protect themselves. I would like to present to everybody here tonight the contingencies that they write into their grant and those monies. And you’ve read this, and Rita just gave it to you. Number one, a one-time deal. No future requests for the project may be brought before the Council. Two, a contract from a soon to be formed intergovernmental entity that will oversee the line. Three--and this is very important--if the line goes bankrupt in five years or less, the County can recover its investment from the salvage value of the rail.
Something else has come to my attention is that there’s talk downstate in the Legislature of perhaps closing the line where it crosses Highway 30 near Hanna. We know that Highway 30 is almost akin to an interstate road today, and people are zipping along on there, a number of accidents at that line. I think we should investigate that before we do anything to see if that’s a possibility. Because if we give this money away to, let’s say, I understand now the city of North Judson would be the one to own the line and so forth. They could sell this to anybody or give it away. Our money is in there, and unless we have these stipulations to protect our investment, that money is gone forever.
So I think that tonight we have a lot of homework to do, and we have to make some calls downstate. We have to protect ourselves before we go ahead, and spend our tax money, and overall, this is $200,000 between the different counties, people’s tax money buying this railroad. We have one other thing--I won’t go into that because you said new things. So I’ll stop there. I have another point but it was discussed the last time.

Mr. Carmichael, David, you’ve heard the requests concerning the contingencies put on this
particular issue. Is that feasible for us to do that prior to any motions to approve?

Mr. Hollenbeck, Certainly, I think there’s nothing wrong with including in any motions…

Mr. Carmichael, Well I think that’s what Rita wanted…

Mr. Hollenbeck, Right.

Mr. Carmichael, In there, that these contingencies be in place prior to our approval or as
part of our motion.

Mr. Hollenbeck, As I understand it, the LaPorte County Council’s motion was their approval was conditioned upon the things that Al read. I don’t have any quibble with that process.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay. Carole.

Mrs. Knoblock, I asked a question the last time, and it was never answered. Who is responsible for the liability? I spent all afternoon, I got a Tom Livingston from Illinois, Steve Watson from Indianapolis, and a Larry Goode from Indianapolis, and they kept pushing me back from one to the other, and Larry Goode never did call me back. So I still want to know the answer to that. That is what?

Mr. Carmichael, David.

Mr. Hollenbeck, The answer to that, Carole, would be that liability issues and hold harmless considerations would be a component of that interlocal agreement that would be executed, as I understand it, a condition of any approval of…

Mrs. Knoblock, But we don’t have a contract or anything in front of us to sign. How can we vote on it tonight if we don’t know what we’re voting on really? There’s some answers…

Mr. Hollenbeck, Well, again, as the LaPorte County Council did, if you approve the money conditioned upon receipt and approval of an acceptable interlocal agreement, then in that sense you’re protected.

Mrs. Knoblock, Because…

Mr. Hollenbeck, The other answer to that is, that interlocal agency that’s going to run it, a
condition of any acquiescence in this payment--and they would do this anyway--would be to have whoever is going to operate on that line have proof of sufficient insurance and adequate insurance so that every entity would be covered.

Mrs. Knoblock, Because I won’t vote on anything that exposes the taxpayers, if we were in a
lawsuit or something.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay. Thank you, Carole.

Mrs. Knoblock, I’m not done.

Mr. Carmichael, Oh.

Mrs. Knoblock, I’m under the impression that there’s three short-line companies that want to buy the railroad, and I haven’t got a direct answer to that.

Mr. Kaesebier, Mr. Heim.

Representative Steve Heim, Mr. President, if I may. There are no other…

Mr. Carmichael, Would you identify yourself.

Representative Heim, I’m sorry, I’m State Representative Steve Heim, House District 17,
Marshall, Starke, and Lincoln, Johnson, Union townships in LaPorte.

Mrs. Knoblock, How do you spell your last name?

Representative Heim, H-E-I-M.

Mrs. Knoblock, Thank you.

Representative Heim, There are no other short-line railroad operators interested in purchasing this line. It’s open for anyone to purchase as long as you come up with the purchase price as determined by the Surface Transportation Board. We are the only organization--if you will- -that’s pursuing the purchase of this line.

Mrs. Knoblock, Where did that information come from?

Representative Heim, What information?

Mrs. Knoblock, Where did that come from, your information? Where did you get your
information?

Representative Heim, Ma’am, I’ve been involved with this project since October. There are no other companies bidding this…

Mr. Poparad, Can I jump in here?

Representative Heim, This railroad.

Mr. Poparad, There are no other short-line operators willing to pay 1.9. Are there any short-line operators willing to bid on this line?

Representative Heim, Bid the purchase?

Mr. Poparad, No.

Representative Heim, Or bid to run?

Mr. Poparad, No, bid a purchase; throwing out a number, not the 1.9, but let’s say they say its worth $500,000.

Representative Heim, No, because the Surface Transportation Board has selling price as determined by the federal government.

Mr. Poparad, So there’s no negotiation.

Representative Heim, No negotiation. That has already taken place from January, I think December through January is when that negotiation was taken place with the federal government. Surface Transportation said 1.9 million is the price, whomever wants it pays 1.9 million.

Mr. Poparad, And if nobody pays it, what happens?

Representative Heim, The rail line will be abandoned, the rails will be ripped out, and then Rails to Trails is waiting to come in and turn it into a trail.

Mrs. Stevenson, So the federal government is willing to either put the money towards CSX for the rail line or for the Rails to Trails. One way or another they’re willing to help.

Representative Heim, I don’t believe there has been any application for grant money to turn it into trails. The Indiana Rails to Trails organization is waiting on the sidelines. They have given us the opportunity to preserve the rail. If we are unsuccessful, then they are going to pursue a trail.

Mrs. Stevenson, Okay, thanks for clearing that up.

Representative Heim, Thank you.

Mrs. Knoblock, Is it true that Lake County or LaPorte County Co-op owns like 12 elevators? Some in Michigan?

Mr. Kaesebier, LaPorte County Co-op owns five grain elevators. There are, there’s one in
Michigan and four in Indiana.

Mr. Carmichael, This gentlemen, do you have some new…

George Warnock, I’m George Warnock, I’ve got a question. What is going to happen, okay, with the 1.9 million to buy the line? Now I’ve seen reports where in the next three, four or five years its going to need about well over a half a million dollars in maintenance right off the bat. Now what happens then? Where are they going to get the money for that? Are they going to come to you guys and say, hey we need a half a million bucks?

Mr. Carmichael, I think the conversation has been made very clear that this is a one-time request, and nothing additional will be requested of Porter County. We have no responsibility for this line as it will be put in the contingency plan, and we have no further requests for any additional appropriations. I think it’s pretty clear that we will not hear those requests.

Mr. Warnock, Okay, very good.

Mr. Carmichael, Yes, sir.

A gentleman from the audience, If everyone else is like me, in the past week we have received our personal property tax bills. If you calculate it out, I don’t know about you guys, but my property tax bills are up 62%--62%. That’s a whole bunch. Now there’s some drainage tax on that, but it’s still up 62%. I think this $50,000 that the Co-op and North Judson is asking for could serve a lot more people by taking that money and giving some relief to the taxpayers of Morgan Township in Porter County, rather than, sure, it will benefit 100 farmers, maybe. I think it would do a lot more to help more people.
Also, as Mr. Steele said, about the question about the Highway 30 crossing, I’ve also heard
that request as representatives in a proposal for a bill in the State of Indiana, to close it. Without that crossing that railroad is not very good. It won’t serve anybody, unless they put a million dollar spur on the Norfolk & Southern. I think the facts have been put on the table at the last meeting--the pros and cons. And there are good pros and there are good cons. But I think it’s time for
the Council to weight the facts and make a wise decision.

Mr. Carmichael, Well the answer to your one, the 30 crossing, in this contingency plan that we put on here, in the event that its abandoned, okay, then the money comes back to Porter County. Also, you may not live in the highest taxing district in Porter County. I do. Mid-town Chesterton, right down the middle, this year I got a little less of a jump. I only had a jump from $1,200 to $1,800. So I have $600 additional taxes, so you aren’t the only one. Of course, we live in the Bethlehem Steel territory, and we’re hoping next year with ISG coming online that we’ll get a bit of a break. But I’m retired, and I live on fixed income.

Gentleman from the audience, It’s a shock.

Mr. Carmichael, One, we have one question here.

Tim Stoner, I’m Tim Stoner. I live in Kouts, Indiana. I have a comment. I am in favor of
the proposal, and one of the main reasons, not just selfishly, I’m a farmer and I have the opportunity for the grain to move out, and the fertilizer to move in. But I also see this rail spur as an economic opportunity for the future. Perhaps there would be industry years down the road that we haven’t heard of yet that would need a rail line or rail spur located near the facility. If we lose this line it will gone forever, and it is the only rail line we have, really, south of Valparaiso, and it would be a shame to lose that asset to our community for the future, as well.

Mr. Carmichael, Well, I look at it on a 20-year plan. In 20 years where are we going to be with these highways and trucks.

Mr. Stoner, Absolutely.

Mr. Carmichael, Right now in the Town of Chesterton if you go to Porter Avenue and the 49-Bypass at 4:00 in the afternoon, there’s 100…

Mr. Stoner, So it’s not just…

Mr. Carmichael There’s 100 lined up waiting to get across.

Mr. Stoner, So it’s not just an economic issue for those of us involved in agriculture. It really is an issue that benefits our need to reduce pollution and emissions in north county; an opportunity to take trucks off of already roads that are well suffering; and an opportunity for us to have some economic potential to move freight in and out for any type of future industry that may want to come into our area.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay, thank you.

Mr. Stoner, Thank you.

Mr. Carmichael, This gentleman.
Cresley Walker, Cresley Walker, I have just two things. We have two representatives that might know, answer the question as far as the possibility of the…

Mr. Carmichael, Cresley, we don’t want to give them any more publicity than they’ve already gotten. We know their stamps.

Mr. Walker, They haven’t mentioned that there’s a possibility that the line will be closed on Route 30. They may know. And the second other thing is, when I’ve had to go use funds for a business, I’ve had to go get a loan. I went to the Regional Development Corporation out of Portage. I paid interest on a loan for a business. To me that’s, you know, it’s worth doing, you know, it’s worth paying interest off. That’s my business, as far as any business man knows it’s worth doing. It’s got to make economic sense.
Now we need infrastructure, and this may be an infrastructure-type thing where, you know, like roads and railroads are an infrastructure thing. But I think it needs to be looked at whether it’s an infrastructure thing or an economic thing. As far as serving a certain industry, then, you know, like stores that come in, they fund for the things like that. So to me it’s got to make economic sense.

Mr. Carmichael Okay, thank you, Cresley.

Mr. Poparad, Bill, can I…

Mr. Carmichael, Marg.

Marg Hefner, I’m going to start off by saying, I’ve sat here many, many times. Much money goes out for crime, for the courts, for the jails, and I have no question it’s needed, they should get it. This is nothing compared to what goes out for that, and that needs to be reformed too, and I’m not going to go into that right now. I just want to say a couple of things. I was at a meeting over at the Avalon this afternoon or this morning, early. Carole was there. About 100 people was there about high rail or fast rail or transportation or all this. It was an excellent meeting, and I just want to, I’m not going to repeat myself, but say a few things here.
Traffic is a problem, and it’s a decision quite often in our lives today. To buy land in the future would be an astronomical for public transportation, and I’d like to state a couple, a few facts here from over there, a book about rail. For freight carrying capacity equivalent to a four-lane highway, that’s trucks, must share cars. A railroad requires a double-track line consuming just one- fourth of the land needed for the highway. Building a double-track railroad costs one to two million dollars per mile compared to $10,000,000 per mile for highway construction, upgrading, enhancing and expanding capacity on the nation’s freight rail network could relieve congestion on the roads while improving efficiency and safety.
Another fact, a question if you want to, the cost to ship by rail from Los Angeles to Chicago, for example, is $.30 per mile compared to $1 per mile cost to ship by truck Another fact, EPA estimates that train locomotives emit three times less pollution than a typical truck. Also, locomotives are three times more efficient than trucks in regard to fuel consumption. The bottom line, investing in rail capacity will allow us to ship some of the expected increase in freight trapping lines from roads to trails. This shift would relieve highway congestion, and reduce the need to expand or build new highways, which we cannot afford. I am for keeping this rail. I think it’s very important that we keep this rail.

Mr. Carmichael, Thank you, Marg.

Mr. Poparad, Bill, may I ask a question?

Mr. Carmichael, Bob.

Mr. Poparad, Can I ask a question? This is more directed at Mr…

Mr. Steele, Kaesebier.

Mr. Poparad, Mr. Co-op.

Mr. Steele, Yes.

Mr. Poparad, There is supposedly the 10 to 15 cent a bushel savings by shipping by rail. So next, this fall, if this all goes through, and I get down that way a lot, I’ll check your grain price, what you’re paying that farmer, it will be 10 to 15 cents higher than what is being paid to Cargill. Is that a true statement?

Mr. Kaesebier, Not necessarily to Cargill, because they are…

Mr. Poparad, Well I just used Cargill as an example. Let me rephrase that. As a truck-
supplied elevator, you’ll be…

Mr. Kaesebier, In a normal…

Mr. Poparad, Paying more because you’re helping the guy?

Mr. Kaesebier, In a normal situation--over a crop-year--you’ll see a 10 cent increase. Average price over the year.

Mr. Poparad, But you say…

Mr. Kaesebier, Now you may not see that each day.

Mr. Poparad, You know, I’m not going to be facetious about this. I’m not going to belabor the point, but I’m assuming a little bit of this savings will go into the Co-op’s pocket. Is that a fair statement? I’m not saying it shouldn’t, but I’m saying a little bit of this money…

Mr. Kaesebier, I think there’s two ways, two ways that it could happen.

Mr. Poparad, Well no, I’m just saying the amount of savings that you’re going to save by having rail access will not be passed 100% onto the farmer that…

Mr. Kaesebier, I’ll phrase it another way. I said a 10 cent savings to the farmer.

Mr. Poparad, Well.

Mr. Kaesebier, I’m not saying that it’s only 10 cents to the Co-op.

Mr. Poparad, I’m not adverse to the Co-op making a little bit of money here, but we’ve got to get it out in the open.

Mr. Kaesebier, Well I wanted to make…

Mr. Poparad, I just wanted to make sure that farmer-x gets at least a better price, because you have got a lot of government money, and you’ve put up some of your own money--$335,000 or so--and you got all the municipalities to pony up to the bar, and let’s get this thing done, and you’re going to pass some of these savings on or maybe pay a little higher price.

Mr. Kaesebier, But yes, you will find it. I have one thing to add to that, if I could. For the
year 2000, LaPorte County Co-op, since we’re discussing taxes, paid taxes to Porter County of $68,183. In 2001 it was $73,864. In 2002 it was $77,606.

Mr. Poparad, And that raises this next question. Will they, the body that owns this will pay property taxes, correct?

Mr. Kaesebier, They will pay property taxes on equipment that’s used.

Representative Heim, The operator will pay property taxes on his engine. The rail, engines, any other equipment they have.

Mr. Poparad, But I mean on the actual land itself. Well you’ll pay taxes on the physical, your physical structure, but all the real estate, there will be no taxes paid on that.

Representative Heim, There’s taxes on the personal property, the equipment. Taxes on the
land, the real estate taxes are going away one way or the other. The rail is publicly owned or it’s turned into rails to trails, which also is not taxable. So we’re losing the property tax revenue entirely, one way or the other.

Mr. Carmichael, Sir, do you have anything new to add?

Elwood Grieger, Yes, I do.

Mr. Carmichael, If you’ll keep it…

Mr. Grieger, I’m going to follow up…

Mr. Carmichael, If you’ll keep it short.

Mr. Grieger, Elwood Grieger…

Mr. Carmichael, Last….

Mr. Grieger, Personal property tax, I don’t know if you know it or not, but if grain is loaded in rail cars and shipped out of state, like the Co-op does to southeast Indiana, you do not get any tax dollars back from that. That is not assessed in Porter County. I just wanted to let you know that. Another thing I wanted to say that, I wanted to ask a question, why Co-op pads their figures. They keep saying 600 railcars come out of Malden, it’s 232. I found that out from CSX. I spent a whole day with CSX, found the actual number to be 232. They say three to three and half million in grain on the rail between Union and Malden. No, it’s one million. I want to know, have they padded their application, and if, if that’s possible, to put in another stipulation if you’re going to vote tonight on this or if you’re going to hold it up, what are you going to do, that says that if on the application Co-op said there’s 600 railcars going to move on that per year, hold them to that 600. Hold them to that 600 railcars.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay. Thank you.

Mr. Grieger, And then I’ve got one more thing, I’ll try not to, Wanatah Mercantile hauls one million bushel of grain with two trucks; one full-time driver, and one retired driver.

Mr. Carmichael, Who is that, Mercantile?

Mr. Grieger, Wanatah Mercantile. Keith Gustafson, our manager could verify that. Two
trucks haul one million.

Mr. Carmichael, And who owns that?

Mr. Grieger, Wanatah Mercantile is a stockholder held elevator in Wanatah.

Mr. Carmichael, Are you a stockholder?

Mr. Grieger, Yes, I am.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay. Thank you. I think we will cut it…

Mrs. Knoblock, I’ve got one…

Mr. Ruge, Is my question…

Mr. Carmichael, We’ll cut it back to board questions. If you have a question you want to ask somebody, let’s do it now.

Mrs. Knoblock, I just want to make a comment.

Mr. Carmichael, We’re not going to be here another two hours over this particular issue. We went over it the last time pretty thoroughly.

Mrs. Knoblock, I just want to make one comment.

Mr. Carmichael, And we’re going to take a break right after this, so we’ll take it to the
board--the board members.

Mrs. Knoblock, I just want to make one comment.

Mr. Carmichael, You’re a board member.

Mrs. Knoblock, Okay--I hope. Now I lost my train of thought. I am not against the railroad staying there, but I’m against Porter County government paying for it. Since they have come before us, there’s been three more entities that are asking for money. And our CEDIT tax, they’re going to keep coming. If we do this, then we’re going to have more people wanting our added tax…

Mr. Carmichael, Who’s asking for more money, Carole?

Mrs. Knoblock, Porter Township is one of them.

Mr. Carmichael, Porter Township?

Mrs. Knoblock, South Haven.

Mr. Carmichael, I haven’t had a request from Porter Township.

Mrs. Knoblock, It was in the paper.

Mr. Carmichael, Have they made a formal request to us?

Mrs. Conover, No, not yet.

Mrs. Knoblock, I don’t know. I thought, it was in…

Mrs. Conover, He talked to the commissioners.

Mr. Carmichael, No, I don’t know about it.

Mrs. Knoblock, Bob Wichlinski.

Mr. Carmichael, I talked to Bob last night. I didn’t hear any such request.

Com. Burrus, He’s got a request for assistance, but we’re not requesting any additional appropriation.

Mrs. Knoblock, No, I know you’re not, but they’re coming to us to ask.

Com. Burrus, Well, we’re going to all the various fire departments to see if they will contribute into it. It hasn’t been resolved on how it’s going to be addressed yet.

Mrs. Knoblock, But once we give, they’re going to keep coming.

Mr. Carmichael, Well we can say no. Karen.

Mrs. Conover, I guess I just wanted to say, yes, we were, we’re criticized either way. If we had imposed a CEDIT tax, not for a slush fund for the commissioners, but to try to relieve our general fund, and when we do that, we’re criticized by the Chambers, because we’re not spending it on economic development. I believe this is an economic development request. It’s a good partnership between government and business. So in answer to your question, the CEDIT tax can’t go beyond a quarter of a percent. That’s a cap, it stays there. It’s an economic issue, it’s a safety…

Mr. Medema, Well that’s today.

Mrs. Conover, It can’t go up.

Mr. Medema, Today.

Mrs. Conover, It can’t.

Mr. Medema, Today

Mrs. Conover, Okay. There are so many of you that have spoken passionately the last time
and this evening. I received so many phone calls, so many emails, so many letters, and I’ve read every one of them, and I appreciate the time that everybody has put into trying to inform this board, and give us well-rounded opinion. I think we need to cover our liability issues here, and our attorney can do that. I’d like to call for the question.

Mr. Carmichael, Could I hear from one other fellow, just for…

Mrs. Conover, Sure.

Mr. Carmichael, For 30 seconds.

Lee Naigi, Okay, a couple of things. First of all, I’m a taxpayer here in Porter County and in Starke County, and I am also a member of the organization that directly competes with this cooperative that directly competes with the Porter County Co-op. Having said that, I’d like to ask you folks to strongly support this, and look a little bit globally here. Every stick of rail that gets pulled up, gets shipped to Brazil. Now you’ve got to ask yourself, why does Brazil want to build their infrastructure, and for millions and millions of dollars into their infrastructure, but we’re letting ours deteriorate and fall apart. So if nothing else, I ask that you be a little bit patriotic here, and keep the rail and the infrastructure advantage that we enjoy in this country here. That’s very, very important.

Mr. Carmichael, That’s important input. Thank you very much, I’m glad I heard you. The question has been called for by a council member, and I’m sorry about that, Karen, but…

Mrs. Conover, It’s okay.

Mr. Carmichael, I now honor that request. Do you have a…

Mr. Steele moved to table the request of $50,000 for CEDIT Project # 8, submitted by the Commissioners, and form a committee to establish Porter County’s own contingencies for protection, and designate someone to contact INDOT regarding the possible closing of the railroad crossing on Highway 30 in Hanna.

Mr. Ruge, I…

Mr. Carmichael, Wait, John, I have to…

Mr. Ruge, Can’t I ask Dave a question?

Mr. Carmichael, John, I have a motion on the floor. Could you hold it just for a moment?

Mr. Ruge, Oh, okay.

Mr. Carmichael, Do I have a second? Not hearing a second, the motion dies for lack of a
second.

Mrs. Knoblock seconded.

Mr. Carmichael, You’ll second that.

Mrs. Knoblock, Yes.

Mr. Carmichael, The motion’s been seconded. Those in favor of the motion, answer by the usual sign of aye.

Motion failed on the following vote:

Carmichael - No Conover - No
Knoblock - Yes Poparad - No
Ruge - No Steele - Yes
Stevenson - No

Mr. Carmichael, Okay, John, go ahead.

Mr. Ruge, Dave, is there any question this, this railroad, I guess it’s called CSX, would not close this portion? It’s still operating, isn’t it?

Com. Burrus, It is.

Mr. Ruge, Is there any possibility that they wouldn’t keep it, part of the railroad going? I
mean that would be a big solution.

Mr. Carmichael, John, they’ve already petitioned for abandonment. Okay?

Mr. Ruge, Yeah?

Mr. Carmichael, So that means they’re out of the business; that it will be abandoned at a set date, and they gave us the date last month. I’ve forgotten what it was. What is it?

Mr. Kaesebier, July 29th.

Mr. Carmichael, July 29th, it’s all done. The petition carries through. Now, as far as Al’s question, I’d like to have Ralph Ayres answer Al’s question with an answer from downstate. Could you possibly do that?

Representative Ayres, We could do that.

Mr. Carmichael, Would you restate the question that you want the State to answer, Al?

Mr. Steele, Is there legislation or is there a consideration among a number of people to close the CSX where it crosses Highway 30 in Hanna?

Representative Ayres, Not that I’m aware of.

Mr. Steele, No, we didn’t say that. We said would you investigate it.

Representative Ayres, We can investigate that, and also, by the way, I think on the 12th of August, INDOT will have its northwest meeting for all local commissioners, their short and long- term plans.

Mr. Steele, Great.

Mr. Carmichael, Maybe we have something additional from this other state representative.

Representative Heim, Thank you, Mr. President.

Mr. Carmichael, Did you have input to his question?

Representative Heim, Yes I do. There is no discussion at this point in time of abandoning the crossing over US 30. If INDOT was going to close that crossing, they would not contribute 1.5 million dollars to the purchase of this rail line.

Mr. Steele, May I say this. When you call down to the office--the particular number I had--
the person I asked for wasn’t there, but the secretary said, what do you want, I mentioned this fact, and he said, oh yes, there’s been some talk about this. The secretary.

Representative Heim, They may be talking about it at INDOT, but they're, I can guarantee
you since they've given us a 1.5 million dollar grant, they're not going to.

Mr. Steele, You can't guarantee us that, because you don't know what they're going to do. In government you can't, in politics you can never guarantee anything.

Representative Heim, If they close that crossing, INDOT would be throwing away 1.5 million dollars.

Mr. Steele, That doesn't, that is not the issue. The issue is, are they considering it, and Mr. Ayres is going to take care of that for us. Thank you.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay, thank you, Al.

Mr. Steele, And one more thing. Could you discuss among yourselves about stipulations. We have to protect ourselves tonight.

Mr. Carmichael, Right, there has to be, if you want me to confer with the attorney, and see
that all your stipulations are put in there.

Mr. Poparad, Why don't we just follow what LaPorte County did.

Mr. Carmichael, Well Al wants something else besides...

Mr. Steele, No, I do not. I thought we could discuss it.

Mr. Carmichael, LaPorte County's is sufficient.

Mr. Steele, If that's what Mr. Poparad wants, I'll...

Representative Heim, Whatever that was stipulated.

Mr. Hollenbeck, Now you indicated that we were going to take a break after this. Since this is important, can we take a break now so I can look at the LaPorte article, and we can put a list together, Bill.

Mr. Carmichael, Take five minutes.

Mr. Hollenbeck, Thank you.

At this time, there was a five-minute break.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay, we'll come back to order, and we'll take this strictly under the Board's advisement at this point. Karen has indicated to me that she wants to speak first.

Mrs. Conover, I just wanted to add that if we can help 100, 150 farmers, the federal government has been doing that for years, calling it farm subsidies. I think this is a good expenditure of our economic development money. During our break time, Dave Hollenbeck and a couple council people got together, and expressed concerns, and I would like to make a motion
subject to what David would like to put in an agreement.

Mr. Hollenbeck, My effort to capture your concerns would be as follows; that the motion to approve the $50,000 request would be conditioned by the following factors: Number one, as LaPorte said, this is a one-time deal, in the words of the LaPorte County Council. Secondly, that we receive an acceptable inter-governmental agreement, acceptability hinging on three considerations in that agreement. Number one, that the liability issues are satisfactorily resolved. Two, that what I'm calling a contribution recovery program of some kind is contained; that meaning, what happens if two years from now somebody decides to sell this railroad, what would we receive back into money there.
The LaPorte County Council, at least, and this is dangerous when you rely on what you read in the newspaper, but the LaPorte County Council condition is that if it goes into bankruptcy they get their money back. Well, if it goes into bankruptcy, nobody's getting any money back. So I'm not saying that. I'm saying, I'm calling it a contribution recovery program is in place, and then thirdly, an acceptable maintenance program for the line is a component of this. I'm led to believe that the grant application has already contemplated that issue, and is specifically assigned, I believe, to the Town of North Judson, the legal responsibility for coming up with that maintenance plan, and making sure that the right-of-way is properly maintained. But that's the kind of language we need to see in the interlocal agreement. So an acceptable interlocal agreement would include: resolution of liability issues; a contribution recovery plan; and an acceptable maintenance plan; and then finally, as council person Steele has indicated, satisfactory resolution of the Highway 30 closure issue. As I understand the concerns you've expressed, those conditions would capture your concern.

Mrs. Conover moved to grant the request for additional appropriations submitted by Commissioners 257.30, $50,000 to 00010 CEDIT Project #8, subject to the following conditions: an acceptable interlocal agreement that includes the resolution of liability issues; a contribution recovery plan; an acceptable maintenance plan; and satisfactory resolution of the Highway 30 closure issue. Mr. Poparad seconded.

Mr. Carmichael, Are your questions answered sufficiently, Al?

Mr. Steele, Yes.

Mr. Carmichael, Alright, the motion has been made and seconded. No further discussion?

Mr. Poparad, Can I ask one thing?

Mr. Carmichael, Bob.

Mr. Poparad, How did we arrive at $50,000 from Porter County? Who derived at that
number, and how was it derived at? Can anybody answer that question. I mean LaPorte did $75,000. How did Porter County arrive at theirs?

Representative Heim, When we were adding up the funding sources, 1.5 million dollars from INDOT, $360,000 from the Co-op, to make up the difference in the purchase price, we apportioned to each county. LaPorte County has $75,000, because I believe its 22 miles of...

Mr. Poparad, Oh, you went by track, okay. Okay, that's it.

Mr. Carmichael, No further discussion? Those in favor of the motion, answer by the usual sign of aye.

Motion carried on the following vote:

Carmichael - Yes Conover - Yes
Knoblock - No Poparad - Yes
Ruge - Yes Steele - Yes
Stevenson - Yes

Mr. Carmichael, One opposed, it’s six for. The next issue.

Mr. Hollenbeck, Before we go on, where do we go from here now? Do we need to communicate this to someone? Do I need to write a letter, or what's the next step?

Representative Heim, Write a letter to Guy Garden. I will you contact information.

Mr. Hollenbeck, Thank you.

COMMISSIONERS CEDIT 255.30
Additional Appropriation
$175,000 to 00010 CEDIT Project #6 - Amended to $77,278

INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT
FOR THE PURCHASE & UTILIZATION
OF CONSTRUCTION, SERVICES FOR MUTUAL BENEFIT CONNECTED WITH A
FEDERAL AID COMMUTER RAIL PROJECT

WHEREAS, Ind. Code 36-1-7, et seq., allows local government entities to make the most efficient use of their powers by enabling them to mutually purchase and utilize equipment, supplies and services for the mutual benefit of each other; and
WHEREAS, Lake and Porter Counties, Indiana, by and through their County Commissioners and Councils (hereinafter "Lake and "Porter"), the Towns of Cedar Lake, Dyer, Griffith, Highland, Lowell, Merrillville, Munster, St. John, and Schererville, by and through their respective Town Councils (hereinafter "Towns"), the Cities of Hammed, Hobart and Valparaiso, by and through their Common Councils (hereinafter "Cities"), and the Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District, by and through its Board of Trustees (hereinafter "NICTD"), are all political subdivisions authorized by the Interlocal Cooperation Act to enter into this joint agreement for their mutual benefit to provide better public services and facilities with
less expense than they could individually; and
WHEREAS, the Counties, Towns, Cities and NICTD now desire to enter into a joint agreement pursuant to I.C. 36-1-7, et seq., with NICTD as the part with the ability to provided Environmental/Engineering services for the mutual benefit of the parties to this joint agreement, with the cost for same being shared between the parties for the MOS-1 and MOS-2 segments associated with what is know as the "Westlake Commuter Rail Transportation Corridor";
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual terms, covenants, and conditions set forth herein, the Counties, Towns, Cities and NICTD agree as follows:
Section 1. DURATION. The duration of this agreement shall be from June 1,2004 through October 1, 2005, or such time that the engineering and environmental studies referred to in this agreement are completed, whichever is later. This agreement must be adopted by Resolution by each of the governing bodies of Counties, Towns, Cities and NICTD no later than September 1, 2004.
Section 2. PURPOSE. The purpose of this agreement is to authorize and allow NICTD to engage professional services on behalf of the parties here to acquire preliminary engineering and environmental studies associated with MOS-1 and MOS-2 segments of what is known as the "Westlake Commuter Rail Transportation Corridor", a Federal Transportation Project involving extension and improvement of commuter rail transportation services, all for the mutual benefit of the parties of this Agreement.
Section 3. ADMINISTRATION AND AUTHORITY DELEGATION. This Agreement shall be administered by a joint board comprised of one representative from each entity that is a part to this Agreement. This agreement gives the power and authority to the Joint Board to meet initially and authorize NICTD to engage professional services to provide preliminary engineering and environmental studies associated with the MOS-1 and MOS-2 segments which are part of the "Westlake Commuter Rail Transportation Corridor".
Section 4. NICTD TREASURER. This agreement hereby delegates to the duly appointed Treasurer of NICTD, the duty to receive, disburse and account for all moneys of this undertaking pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. The Treasurer may designate an alternative staff person to perform the duties outlined in this section. The Treasurer or designee shall perform all usual duties associated with the office as required by law.
Section 5. CONTINGENCY. The obtaining of the preliminary engineering and environmental studies referred to in this agreement is contingent upon NICTD receiving at least 1.5 million in Federal New Start funding. In the event NICTD receives the aforementioned funds, they will be combined with the contributions set forth in Section 5 of this agreement. In the event the Federal New Start funding is not received, this agreement will terminate and all of the contributions made by the parties to this agreement shall be returned to them by NICTD.
Section 6. TERMS. In consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, it is further agreed as follows:
(a) NICTD agrees that it shall engage the required professional services to carry out the purposes of this Agreement along with providing administration and supervision over the professional serves so engaged. NICTD further agrees to keep the joint board apprised at significant milestones during the conduct of the studies
and provide copies of all final reports;
(b) Lake County agrees to and shall contribute the amount of five hundred ninety-five thousand, four hundred forty-four dollars ($595,444) to NICTD, payable from the proper Fund or Funds of the County as it may identify to be payable in two equal installments, each installment to be in the lump sum amount of two hundred ninety-seven thousand, seven hundred twenty-two dollars ($297,7222), with the first installment due not later than September 1, 2004 and the second installment due not later than September 1, 2005;
(c) Porter County agrees to and shall contribute the amount of one hundred fifty-four thousand, five hundred fifty-six dollars ($154,556) to NICTD, payable from the proper Fund or Funds of the County as it may identify to be payable in two equal installments, each installment to be in the lump sum amount of seventy-seven thousand, two hundred seventy-eight dollars ($77,278), with the first installment due not later than September 1, 2004 and the second installment due not later than September 1, 2005;
(d) The Town of Cedar Lake agrees to and shall contribute the amount of forty-seven thousand, forty-four dollars ($47,044) to NICTD, payable from the proper Fund or Funds of the Town as it may identify to be payable in two equal installments, each installment to be in the lump sum amount of twenty-three thousand, five hundred twenty-two dollars ($23,522), with the first installment due not later than September 1, 2004 and the second installment due not later than September 1, 2005;
(e) The Town of Dyer agrees to and shall contribute the amount of fifty-two thousand, nine hundred fifty-eight dollars ($52,958)to NICTD, payable from the proper Fund or Funds of the Town as it may identify to be payable in two equal installments, each installment to be in the lump sum amount of twenty-six thousand, four hundred seventy-nine dollars ($26,479), with the first installment due not later than September 1, 2004 and the second installment due not later than September 1, 2005;
(f) The Town of Griffith agrees to and shall contribute the amount of fifty-seven thousand, three hundred sixty four dollars ($57,364) to NICTD, payable from the proper Fund or Funds of the Town as it may identify to be payable in two equal installments, each installment to be in the lump sum amount of twenty-eight thousand, six hundred eighty-two dollars ($28,682), with the first installment due not later than September 1, 2004 and the second installment due not later than September 1, 2005;
(g) The City of Hammond agrees to and shall contribute the amount of one hundred forty-one thousand, five hundred fifty-four dollars ($141,554) to NICTD, payable from the proper Fund or Funds of the City as it may identify to be payable
in two equal installments, each installment to be in the lump sum amount of seventy thousand, seven hundred seventy-seven dollars ($70,777), with the first installment due not later than September 1, 2004 and the second installment due not later than September 1, 2005;
(h) The Town of Highland agrees to and shall contribute the amount of forty-one thousand, eight hundred eighty-six dollars ($41,886) to NICTD, payable from the proper Fund or Funds of the Town as it may identify to be payable in two equal installments, each installment to be in the lump sum amount of twenty thousand, nine hundred forty-three dollars ($20,943), with the first installment due not later than September 1, 2004 and the second installment due not later than September 1, 2005;
(i) The City of Hobart agrees to and shall contribute the amount of seventy-three thousand, five hundred ten dollars ($73,510) to NICTD, payable from the proper Fund or Funds of the City as it may identify to be payable in two equal installments, each installment to be in the lump sum amount of thirty six thousand, seven hundred fifty-five dollars ($36,755), with the first installment due not later than September 1, 2004 and the second installment due not later than September 1, 2005;
(j) The Town of Lowell agrees to and shall contribute the amount of twenty-one thousand, three hundred thirty four dollars ($21,334) to NICTD, payable from the proper Fund or Funds of the Town as it may identify to be payable in two equal installments, each installment to be in the lump sum amount of ten thousand, six hundred sixty-seven dollars ($10,667), with the first installment due not later than September 1, 2004 and the second installment due not later than September 1, 2005;
(k) The Town of Merrillville agrees to and shall contribute the amount of eighty-six
thousand, twenty-eight dollars ($86,028) to NICTD, payable from the proper Fund or Funds of the Town as it may identify to be payable in two equal installments, each installment to be in the lump sum amount of forty-three thousand, fourteen dollars ($43,014), with the first installment due not later than September 1, 2004 and the second installment due not later than September 1, 2005;
(l) The Town of Munster agrees to and shall contribute the amount of ninety-two thousand, twelve dollars ($92,012) to NICTD, payable from the proper Fund or Funds of the Town as it may identify to be payable in two equal installments, each installment to be in the lump sum amount of forty-six thousand, six dollars ($46,006), with the first installment due not later than September 1, 2004 and the second installment due not later than September 1, 2005;
(m) The Town of St. John agrees to and shall contribute the amount of thirty-four thousand, one hundred seventy-six dollars to NICTD, payable from the proper Fund or Funds of the Town as it may identify to be payable in two equal installments, each installment to be in the lump sum amount of seventeen thousand, eighty-eight dollars ($17,088), with the first installment due not later than September 1, 2004 and the second installment due not later than September 1, 2005;
(n) The Town of Schererville agrees to and shall contribute the amount of forty-three thousand, five hundred fifty-eight dollars ($43,558) to NICTD, payable from the proper Fund or Funds of the Town as it may identify to be payable in two equal installments, each installment to be in the lump sum amount of twenty-one thousand, seven hundred seventy-nine dollars ($21,779), with the first installment due not later than September 1, 2004 and the second installment due not later than September 1, 2005;
(o) The City of Valparaiso agrees to and shall contribute the amount of fifty-eight thousand, five hundred seventy-eight ($58,578) to NICTD, payable from the proper Fund or Funds of the City as it may identify to be payable in two equal installments, each installment to be in the lump sum amount of twenty-nine thousand, two-hundred eighty-nine dollars ($29,289) with the first installment due not later than September 1, 2004 and the second installment due not later than September 1, 2005;
Section 7. METHODS FOR TERMINATION. This agreement shall be deemed complete upon receipt by NICTD of the preliminary environmental and engineering studies and distribution of same to the parties of the Agreement.
Section 8. COUNTERPARTS. The Interlocal Agreement may be executed in several counterparts, each of which when so executed shall be deemed to be an original, and such counterparts, together shall constitute but one and the same instrument, which shall be sufficiently evidenced by any such original counterpart.
Section 9. RECORDING. Before this agreement takes effect, it must be recorded with the Offices of the Porter and Lake County Recorder. No later than sixty (60) days after it takes effect and is recorded, the agreement must be filed with the Office of the State Board of Accounts for audit purposes, all pursuant to I.C. 36-1-7-6. Participating Counterpart.
EFFECTIVE DATE. This agreement shall be effective under Paragraph 1 of this Agreement after the same has been ratified by each of the participating entities by Ordinance or Resolution all pursuant to I.C. 36-1-7-2.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Interlocal Agreement to be executed in their names and on their behalf as of the date first written above.
PORTER COUNTY, INDIANA
155 Indiana Avenue, Valparaiso, Indiana 46383

Its Board of Commissioners
By s/David Burrus
s/John Evans
s/Robert Harper
Attest:
Its County Council
By _______________________
s/William Carmichael Its:_____________________
s/Karen Conover
s/Carole Knoblock
s/John Ruge
s/Robert Poparad
s/Al Steele
s/Rita Stevenson
Attest:
_______________________
Its:_____________________
Participant Executive Date:____________


Mr. Carmichael, Our next issue is the contribution for the Westlake Corridor Study.

Com Burrus, That's correct.

Mr. Carmichael, And I think Rita attended a meeting today with Mr. Visclosky. Is that
right?

Mrs. Stevenson, No, Carole.

Mr. Carmichael, Carole.

Mrs. Knoblock, Yes.

Mr. Carmichael, And what did you find out?

Mrs. Knoblock, I've got a pamphlet here if anybody wants to go through it--I could go on if you want to--anybody is welcome to read it.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay. Now, did you want to speak to this, Carole?

Mrs. Knoblock, He just talked, naturally for it.

Mr. Carmichael, What?

Mrs. Knoblock, He talked about the...

Mr. Carmichael, Did Visclosky explain what you wanted to know?

Mrs. Knoblock, What I wanted to know?

Mr. Carmichael, Yes.

Mrs. Knoblock, No, I just went, attended to listen. I didn't have any questions on it.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay. I'm intimately familiar with this since I've been working on this for quite some length of time. I know the outcome of the long-range study is going to be--from the preliminary study--that we're going to bring this line to Valparaiso, eventually. We have to complete the first leg, which is the Westlake Corridor. Valparaiso is number one on the priority list, and Lowell is second on the priority list according to the statistics and the figures that were gathered. Now I did want to hear from Jon, you had something you wanted to say, and we had a telephone conversation concerning this, and I know you support it. Would you like to say something?

Mayor Jon Costas, Very briefly. I want to thank you for this opportunity. Here with me is
Chuck Williams from our council. We are here to support the funding of this study. Valparaiso is one of the first cities to vote for their portion of the funding. This is a great opportunity to connect our citizens with the great economic engine they call Chicago, to offer more opportunities. It's also a great opportunity to reduce traffic congestion, and pollution. I think in terms of using CEDIT funds, it is a wonderful investment opportunity, because we need to take this study to the next level. We need to pay for this study so that we can get on the next level of funding. So our thousands of dollars that we invest--our CEDIT funds--could very well bring millions of dollars and great opportunity to the area. I think it's a rare opportunity for us, a great thing here for the county and the cities and the entities involved. So I urge you to support and become, now there's already 11 cities and counties that of the 14 that Congressman Visclosky has requested funding from. Eleven have consented, so you will be the 12th here today.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay, thank you very much.

Mr. Steele, Bill, to whom do we pay this money?

Mr. Carmichael, To whom do we pay, the interlocal. The agreement puts NICTD in charge, according to Visclosky, since they are operators of the current service. It puts them in charge of the, conducting the study and seeing that all the financial matters are taken care of, and the matching grant money is put in their special account--a separate account--and used only as a local match, the federal funds that Visclosky is having appropriated.

Mr. Steele, Thank you.

Mr. Carmichael, So it's in that entity's hands, not in the RTA of Gary or in Lake County or anything like that. It's put into NICTD as the local operating source.

Mr. Steele, Thank you.

Mr. Carmichael, Yes, sir?

Mr. Warnock, George Warnock, I've got a question. Now are you going, the paper said it
was going to be an extension of the South Shore. Are you going to electrify this thing like the South Shore?

Mr. Carmichael, No.

Mr. Warnock, Okay.

Mr. Carmichael, Not from its source up in Munster to Valparaiso.

Mr. Warnock, Oh wait, are you going to put overhead wire on it?

Mr. Carmichael, No.

Mr. Warnock, Okay.

Mrs. Knoblock, You can't.

Mr. Carmichael, It will be a, the cars will be a combination, diesel, electric. The law requires that the South Shore that runs into the Randolph Street station be utilized only by electricity.

Mr. Warnock, Okay.

Mr. Carmichael, And outside of that we can utilize diesel for a push-pull operation to Lowell and to Valparaiso.

Mr. Warnock, The reason why I brought that up is because if electrify it, okay, and National's, most of their business is auto traffic to Detroit, and they use oversized cars. And if you electrify it, they can't run that, they can't run any auto traffic. About 20 years ago, they was going to approach Conrail at the time to get traffic rights through Chesterton, South Bend, thus eliminating the hill. The hill out here, as everybody knows, is a big problem. At the time they were going to do it, for some reason they never followed through on it. The reason why I asked about the electric station is that if you did electrify it, the Canadian National might say, hey, guess what, we're out of here and you guys got to buy the whole thing.

Mr. Carmichael, No, NICTD's catenary is 19.6 feet in the air and...

Mr. Warnock, Yes, but...

Mr. Carmichael, With the pantograph contacting the catenary wire. But we will not be
using that on the line.

Mr. Warnock, Okay, I just wanted to make sure. Okay.

Mr. Carmichael, Yes, Bob.

Mrs. Knoblock, Has there...

Mr. Carmichael, Deb.

Deb Butterfield, If I could, just very briefly, I want to let you know that the Valpo has been
on the record since about last November supporting the setting for the extension of rail to Valparaiso. And for approximately the last year and a half, we've been working with our chamber colleagues on a regional chamber initiative throughout Northwest Indiana to identify areas that we
agree in common that will help support and expand the economic development opportunities for all of Northwest Indiana. Transportation and infrastructure is one of those, and we have agreed that this rail extension study is critical to our ability to continue our economic recovery. So we urge the support of Congressman Visclosky's leadership in trying to access these federal dollars to bring some money back to Northwest Indiana in order to get this done. Thank you.

Mr. Carmichael, Jon, I wanted to mention to you--the City of Valparaiso--with this coming
into the area of the old station that's currently in private ownership, the original station.

Mayor Costas, Yes.

Mr. Carmichael, You have some land beyond that, I believe, to the north of the railroad tracks that should be preserved for a station. You might look into that and see what's being, how that's being utilized at this point, and maybe make future plans for acquisition of that particular site.

Mr. Poparad, Is that where the old beach asphalt is?

Mr. Carmichael, Is that beach asphalt back there?

Mayor Costas, Yes.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay, you'll want to keep that in mind so that you'll have something
available when the time comes. It's going to be, probably beyond myself, but maybe not beyond you. But you want to look at that. It's not too soon to take that into consideration.

Mr. Poparad, Can I ask a question?

Mr. Carmichael, Bob.

Mr. Poparad, Mayor, has Valpo already committed, and how much?

Mayor Costas, Yes, we've committed actually about two months ago, and I believe it is two years at what, 30-some thousand some odd dollars. So it's a total commitment of 60-some thousand.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay.

Mr. Hollenbeck, It's at actually, Mayor, $58,578. It's $29,289 a year.

Mayor Costas, Okay.

Mr. Carmichael, Alright, thank you, Jon.

Mrs. Knoblock, Bill.

Mr. Carmichael, Carole.

Mrs. Knoblock, Has there ever been a study on this before?

Mr. Carmichael, Carole asked the question has there been a study on this before. Yes, the initial study was done on the corridor at the economic benefits, the number of passengers. I did supply you with that.

Mrs. Knoblock, Well I don't remember getting it. Just recently?

Mrs. Stevenson, A couple of years ago

Mr. Carmichael, Well I sent you, didn't I send you a ticket for a ride on the South Shore?

Mrs. Knoblock, No.

Mr. Poparad, I buy my own ticket.

Mr. Carmichael, I thought I sent you a ticket for a ride on the South Shore.

Mrs. Knoblock, No, I would have rode it.

Mr. Carmichael, Bob, did I send you one?

Mr. Poparad, No, I buy my ticket.

Mr. Carmichael, Oh come on. I did.

Mrs. Knoblock, No, you didn't send me one.

Mr. Carmichael, And in there was a...

Mrs. Knoblock, I'm too far south.

Mr. Carmichael, In there was the initial study, which showed the number of passengers over a period of time; the economic benefits to each one of the communities.

Mrs. Knoblock, Okay, I would like a copy of that.

Mr. Carmichael, Now this is a, this study here is what they call the MIS--Major Investment Study. This is going to tell us what it's going to cost to put this line into operation. This is called an MIS study, it's Phase 2, I think is what it is.

Mrs. Knoblock, I'm really all for it, but how are we going to pay for it?

Mr. Carmichael, Well, how are we going to pay for it?

Mrs. Knoblock, Yes.

Mr. Carmichael, Well the...

Mrs. Knoblock, Come on, how are we going to pay for?

Mr. Carmichael, There's a talk of an RTA. Lake County has currently formed an RTA, and has asked us to sit in as an ex-officio, I believe it was, something of this nature. Lake County was talking about imposing a one cent food and beverage tax to pay for it. So I don't know. That's not, it hasn't gone anywhere; that's failed. So right now they have no funding for operating.

Com. Harper, Bill, let me address that. I wasn't going to say anything, but I've got to say something. The 1% beverage tax, if I understand it correctly, was going to raise around $7,000,000, and the legislation they are going to get through required half of it to go toward buses. So it's about $3,000,000 a year. If I understand this project correctly, from the way it was explained to me, it's a $400,000,000 at least project, to complete this project. That's an estimate, and we aren't going to get, and if this agency makes them apply, and applies for federal money, we'll have to have an 80% grant--contribute at least 80%. Now Porter County, everybody involved in this will have to at least contribute 80% beyond the four, and it only requires 50, but Visclosky and the people said that at the meetings it's going to have to be up around 80. So we're talking about 200-some million, so that 1% sales tax is a drop in the bucket for what we would need. So that, and I just keep hearing that in the paper, and it's not, it is, it can't and it won't fund this project.

Mr. Carmichael, Well, I think those attending the meeting, we discussed this a little bit about bus systems and so forth. I did talk to Chuck; Chuck was at the meeting, and of course, we're not buying into that. We're just not buying into that.

Com. Harper, But I'm just...

Mr. Carmichael, We're just not buying into that. East Chicago is running a bus company at no cost for ridership.

Com. Harper, I just think that we should, if we're talking about where the money is coming, we shouldn't be talking about that 1% sales tax.

Mr. Carmichael, Well, your ridership on the South Shore...

Com. Harper, It's not going to touch it.

Mr. Carmichael, Contributes right now about 56%. The rest of it comes from the State of
Indiana. I mean definite excise taxes, and from the property tax relief program. Of course we get federal matching funds for major investment improvements and capital improvements. Okay? So there's many sources of funds, but yes, you are right, in the long run it's going to cost something, somewhere, somehow to operate this line. And somebody in the future is going to have to work that out, but you have to do all these studies, and jump through all the hoops to get this, even get your foot in the door.
Com. Harper, I understand that.

Mr. Carmichael, It's a major impact study that we're doing at this point.

Com. Harper, I just, it's that 1% sales tax.

Mr. Carmichael, But...

Mrs. Knoblock, At least 20 years ago we talked about the east/west highway, south.

Mr. Carmichael, Yes.

Mrs. Knoblock, And what happened to that study?

Mr. Carmichael, Well I'm one against it.

Mrs. Knoblock, You did?

Mr. Carmichael, Yes. Do you know why I'm against it?

Mrs. Knoblock, No.

Mr. Carmichael, Where I live in Porter County, it was a very quiet, one of the quietest subdivisions in this county, then the 49 Bypass went through. At night, those trucks hitting the jake brakes coming down the hill wake me up...

Mrs. Knoblock, Do you think all these trains...

Mr. Carmichael, Every night.

Mrs. Knoblock, What, their whistles are going to be quite?

Mr. Carmichael, Now I don't want to see south county destroyed in such a fashion. What it brings in to your area is the access for criminal activity, quick access, in and out, and I don't want to see south county interrupted in that particular fashion.

Mrs. Knoblock, Okay.

Mr. Carmichael, Okay?

Mrs. Knoblock, Okay.

Mr. Carmichael, Put a bridge over it, let them go on a bridge. Put a bridge out in the lake, I don't care, but don't...

Mr. Hollenbeck, It'll say, no exits.

Mrs. Knoblock, Then there's 149, what happened to that?

Mr. Carmichael, But don't tear up south Porter County...

Mr. Hollenbeck, Thru traffic only

Mr. Carmichael, It's too beautiful.

Mrs. Knoblock, I said there's 149...

Mr. Hollenbeck, If the Peotone Airport gets built, that south expressway will definitely be built.

Mr. Carmichael, Well.

Mr. Poparad moved to grant the request for additional appropriations as submitted and amended by Commissioners CEDIT 255.30, $175,000 to 00010 CEDIT Project #6 amended to $77,278, and approve the Interlocal Cooperation Agreement for the Purchase and Utilization of Construction, Services for Mutual Benefit Connected with a Federal Aid Commuter Rail Project, as submitted.

Mr. Poparad, It's 9:00.

Mr. Hollenbeck, And I...

Mr. Carmichael, Wait, let me have a second, until you get into discussion, David. Is there a second?

Mrs. Conover seconded.

Mr. Carmichael, Alright, David.

Mr. Hollenbeck, Can I further delineate council member Poparad's motion by indicating
actually what we are doing, in so moving is approving, and don't laugh at me because I didn't write this. The Interlocal Cooperation Agreement for the Purchase and Utilization of Construction, Services for Mutual Benefit Connected with a Federal Aid Commuter Rail Project, is what the agreement is called.

Mr. Poparad, Right, just what I said.

Mr. Carmichael, Just like you said it, huh, Bob. Okay.

Mrs. Stevenson, I would like to ask Sheila how much is in the account first.

Ms. Riley, $74,842.

Mrs. Stevenson, And they want $175,000, and how...

Mrs. Knoblock, That's what I was going to ask, it's half.

Mrs. Stevenson, In what period of time?

Mr. Steele, We just need half.

Mr. Carmichael, I think they want half to start with, yes.

Mrs. Knoblock, Then half next year?

Mr. Carmichael, Yes, that's a two-phase program.

Com. Burrus, This is for two years, so we can do it one year at a time.

Mr. Carmichael, Right now all it needs is half.

Mrs. Stevenson, And we won't get our next portion until November.

Ms. Riley, Correct.

Mrs. Stevenson, From the CEDIT money.

Mr. Poparad, So the 175 is...

Mrs. Knoblock, But you're...
Mr. Poparad, For two years.

Com. Burrus, Yes.

Mrs. Knoblock, But you're asking for 170, and I don't think it came to that. Did it, Dave? I think it's like 154.

Mr. Hollenbeck, The agreement says 154. Dave is there a reason for the...

Com. Burrus, It's just the amount that we have allocated for this year, so rather than, I guess split hairs on numbers.

Mr. Carmichael, Well they advertised the full amount just in case you wanted to get rid of the situation, but if, our obligation is for one half.

Com. Burrus, Right.

Mr. Hollenbeck, This year.

Mr. Carmichael, So whatever that figure is. What's that one half figure?

Mr. Hollenbeck, That one half figure is $77,278.

Mr. Carmichael, Do you understand the motion and the second? Further discussion?

Motion carried on a unanimous roll call vote:

Mr. Hollenbeck, David, that's a good point, this appropriation, if it's only half that's only going to be spent this year, you'll have to come back next year for the second half of the appropriation.

Com. Burrus, Well if the full amount is not good before the end of the year, we will.

Mr. Hollenbeck, But what I'm saying, the 154 is for two years.

Mr. Carmichael, Where are we?

Mr. Hollenbeck, They can't appropriate now, something for next year.

Com. Burrus, In other words, it's not acceptable to pay the total now due, when it's available?

Mr. Hollenbeck, Well the total amount due under this agreement is 77-thousand-something this year, and 77-thousand-something next year.

Com. Burrus, So we need to wait. We just thought since it was available.

Mr. Carmichael, Thank you very much. We appreciate it. Boone Township.

Mr. Poparad, Bill, Sheila's pointing at you.

Ms. Riley, May I have that figure one more time? What was actually appropriated.

Mr. Hollenbeck, Absolutely, $77,278.

Ms. Riley, That's the actual appropriation that we are doing for this year?

Mr. Hollenbeck, Yes. Now this is interesting because the agreement says that the first installment, due not later than September 1st. Is there going to be sufficient money in the EDIT account?

Ms. Riley, No.

Mr. Carmichael, They'll take it whenever you can get it.

Mr. Hollenbeck, Where did the commissioners go? David, you should know that this agreement provides that the first installment is due no later than September 1st of this year. You're not going to have $77,000 in the CEDIT account until November.

Com. Burrus, What's the balance right now, again?

Ms. Riley, $74,842.

Mr. Hollenbeck, And you just spent 50 grand.

Ms. Riley, No, that was a different fund.

Com. Burrus, But we have.

Ms. Riley, No, the $50,000 was in a different fund. We moved all that CEDIT money into eight different funds.

Mr. Hollenbeck, Oh, so that's not the total amount for CEDIT.

Ms. Riley, No, there's only $74,000 in just this plan.

Mr. Hollenbeck, Well, they've divided it out by each project.

Com. Burrus, I understand.

Mr. Hollenbeck, So, but you still don't have enough. You've got, you're $3,000 short.

Com. Burrus, We also have about 25% of the annual receipts unappropriated--undesignated.

Mr. Hollenbeck, So there is cash?

Com. Burrus, There should be.

Ms. Riley, There's cash in Number 9. CEDIT Plan #9 has unappropriated monies.

Com. Burrus, Right.

Mr. Hollenbeck, Well then use that. Because your designation by fund, that doesn't make
any difference. It's a pot of money, and they appropriate from it. I'm going to pass down the last page of the Interlocal Agreement for the County Council to sign. Then Dave, the commissioners have to sign this yet?

Mr. Carmichael, Sheila...

Mr. Hollenbeck, I can't hear you.

Com. Burrus, We will still have to.

Mr. Hollenbeck, Okay.

Mr. Carmichael, Write them a check, then ask for forgiveness.

BOONE TOWNSHIP 01.51
Transfer
$400 from 3130 Training & Education to 4440 Furniture & Fixtures over
$100 $90 from 3130 Training & Education to 2250 Other Supplies

Mr. Carmichael, Alright, the next item, and she's not here. Boone Township needs a transfer of $400 from Training & Education to Furniture & Fixtures over $100, and $90 from Training & Education to Other Supplies. What's the Council's pleasure?

Mr. Steele moved to grant the request for transfer of funds submitted by Boone Township 01.51, $400 from 3130 Training & Education to 4440 Furniture & Fixtures over $100 and $90 from 3130 Training & Education to 2250 Other Supplies. Mr. Poparad seconded, motion carried on a unanimous voice vote.

LIBERTY TOWNSHIP 01.53
Transfer
$150 from 1120 Hourly to 3950 Contractual Services

Mr. Carmichael, Liberty Township needs a transfer of $150 from Hourly to Contractual. What is the Council's pleasure?

Mr. Steele moved to grant the request for transfer of funds submitted by Liberty Township 01.53, $150 from 1120 Hourly to 3950 Contractual Services. Mrs. Stevenson seconded, motion carried on a unanimous voice vote.

SUPERIOR COURT 4 - CHIDESTER 01.37
Transfer
$100 from 3930 Dues & Subscriptions to 3130 Training & Education

Mr. Carmichael, Superior Court 4 needs a transfer of $100 from Dues & Subscriptions to Training. What's the Council's pleasure?

Mr. Steele moved to grant the request for transfer of funds submitted by Superior Court 4, 01.37, $100 from 3930 Dues & Subscription to 3130 Training & Education. Mr. Ruge seconded, motion carried on a unanimous voice vote.

SUPERIOR COURT 6 - THODE 01.39
Transfer
$75 from 3130 Training & Education to 3630 Equipment other than Vehicles

Mr. Carmichael, Superior Court 6, Judge Thode needs $75 from Training & Education to Equipment other than Vehicles. What's the Council's pleasure?

Mrs. Conover moved to grant the request for transfer of funds submitted by Superior Court 6, 01.39, $75 from 3130 Training & Education to 3630 Equipment other than Vehicles. Mrs. Knoblock seconded, motion carried on a unanimous voice vote.

ATTORNEY'S REPORT

Mr. Carmichael, Attorney's Report.

Mr. Hollenbeck, Very briefly, the only thing I have to add is, you may have seen as part of
the press conference regarding the new bridge into Midwest Steel, the Congressman has announced that an agreement has been reached between the National Park Service and the bankrupt assets of National Steel to acquire approximately 60 acres of the old National Steel property to make part of the National Lakeshore. It's part of the Congressman's Marquette Plan for the lakeshore. I've been contacted by the Congressman's office. We need to determine how much real estate property taxes should be withheld. That, it's going to close on Friday, and we need to determine how much property taxes should be withheld for that, and I'm in the process of working with the county officials to try to determine that amount. That will be escrowed for us, and then we'll access it after the