Tuesday, October 30, 2007


Council At Large of Aurora

Richard Ullich, Jr.

Richard Ullrich, Jr. Aurora, IN $ 917

Brett Fehrman

Bob & Jan Fehrman Aurora, IN $ 400
Lighthouse Point Yacht Club Aurora, IN $ 50
IN Realtors PAC Indianapolis, IN $ 655


Mayor of Aurora

Donnie Hastings Incumbent

Keith Rhodes Aurora, IN $ 50
Wayne Kinnett Lawrenceburg, IN $ 50
Renee Bedinghaus, Visual Impact
Aurora, IN $1000
Scott Hensley Aurora, IN $ 50
Dennis Nutley Dillsboro, IN $ 200
Steven Hedges Aurora, IN $ 220
Donald McIntosh Aurora, IN $ 100
Kenneth Birk Carmel, IN $ 150
Tom Ward Aurora, IN $ 25
Charlotte Fry Aurora, IN $ 20
Norman Carpenter Aurora, IN $ 100
Bill Yelton Lawrenceburg, IN $ 200
Irene Hicks Aurora, IN $ 20
Martha Lindgren Aurora, IN $ 300
Senator John Nugent Lawrenceburg, IN $ 100*
Millard Rullman Aurora, IN $ 25
Don Hastings, Sr. Aurora, IN $ 50
Dan Carter Aurora, IN $ 50
Joan Ruehl Aurora, IN $ 100
Jeff Bittner Lawrenceburg, IN $ 400
Bob Lischkge Aurora, IN $ 25
Aaron Negangard Lawrenceburg, IN $ 100*****
Dellas Ross Dillsboro, IN $ 50
Ruth Janbrink Aurora, IN $ 25
Gary Withered Aurora, IN $ 10
Frank Linkmeyer Aurora, IN $ 100
Martin Hon Moores Hill, IN $ 25
Dorothy Mohlenkamp Aurora, IN $ 20
John Wolterman Cincinnati, OH $ 500
Brett Fehrman Aurora, IN $ 100***
Jen Awad Aurora, IN $ 25
Joe & Carla Walter Aurora, IN $ 100
Fred & Sandy Schmitz Aurora, IN $ 50
Steve Trotto Aurora, IN $ 100
Don Centers Aurora, IN $ 50
Cary Pickens Guilford, IN $ 100**
Chris McGraw Aurora, IN $ 25
Earl Bratfish Aurora, IN $ 100
Joyce Witte Lawrenceburg, IN $ 25
Tim Weber Aurora, IN $ 200
Dennis Kinnett Aurora, IN $ 50
Charles Ashley Aurora, IN $ 50
Jeff Steigerwald Aurora, IN $ 50
Bill Barrott Aurora, IN $ 100
Roger Rullman Aurora, IN $ 25
Larry Giffin Aurora, IN $ 50
Bige & Connie Couch Aurora, IN $ 100
Doug Denmure Aurora, IN $ 25
Cindy Rottinghaus Aurora, IN $ 25
Keith Lochmueller Evansville, IN $ 500****
Linda Smithers Aurora, IN $ 50
Ken Peters Aurora, IN $ 100
Bob Hastings Aurora, IN $ 750
Tom Cicero Scottsburg, IN $ 500

* Indiana Senator
** County Auditor
*** Fehrman Realty
**** Benardin Lochmueller
***** County Prosecutor

Nancy Turner

Dana Canfield Westerville, OH $ 400
Craig Fowler Aurora, IN $ 200
Keith Mosier (Rohe Paving) Aurora, IN $ 300
Richard Ullrich Aurora, IN $ 250
Nancy Turner Aurora, IN $ 610
Scott McCabe Aurora, IN $ 200
Anonymous & Misc $ 795
(should be unitemized – is there anything over $100 in this?)


Mayor of Lawrenceburg
reported through Oct 19th

Bill Cunningham Incumbent

Matthew Schantz Westfield, IN $ 250
Amy Stewart Indianapolis, IN $ 250
Paul Consaro Greenwood, IN $ 250
Steven Cracraft Zionsville, IN $ 250

Heat & Frost Insulators& Asbestos Workers $ 300
Lanham, MD
Political Action Fund Anderson, IN $ 100
Operating Engineers Henderson, KY $ 300
Boilermakers Hammond, IN $1000
Sheet Metal Indianapolis, IN $ 100
IBEW Cope Washington, DC $5500
Liuna Local741 Bloomington, IN $ 250
IN State IBEW Cope Indianapolis, IN $ 500
Indiana Drive Indianapolis, IN $ 500
Indiana Coun. of Carpenters Indianapolis, IN $1000
Plumbers & Pipefitters Cincinnati, OH $2000
Carpenters Local 1142 Lawrenceburg, IN $ 250
Dearborn Riple B/T Lawrenceburg, IN $ 500

Chris Pruitt

Fred Schmits,City Judge Aurora, IN $ 50
Melissa Davis Verona, KY $ 75
Bob Hrezo, Mayor candidate Greendale, IN $ 85
Kenneth Birk Carmel, IN $ 235
Vic Fuller Greendale, IN $ 285
Doug Holland, Atty No address listed $ 100
Meet the Candidate Lawrenceburg, IN $1048
(shouldn't this be listed under unitemized- are any of these over $100?)
BP Lawrenceburg, IN $ 150
Borar Scottsburg, IN $ 100
Walmart Aurora, IN $ 275
Necessary Solutions Lawrenceburg, IN $ 775*
Indiana Realtors Political Action Committee $ 655

* Chris Pruitt's Company


Mayor of Greendale
REPORTING PERIOD- through October 19th

Doug Hedrick -Incumbent

No contributions
No expenditures

Bob Hrezo

Virginia Beyer Lawrenceburg, IN $ 500
Susan Meierjohan Cincinnati, OH $3000*
Hrezo Engineering Lawrenceburg, IN $2500
Alternative Plastics Erlanger, KY $3500***
APIC dba Fehrman Realty Lawrenceburg, IN $1000
Bittner Technologies Lawrenceburg, IN $2000
Yelton's Auto Sales Lawrenceburg, IN $ 500
Anonymous $1080 (should this be under unitemized or are any of these $100 or over?)
William Yelton Lawrenceburg, IN $ 320
Mr. & Mrs. Kennett Lawrenceburg, IN $ 100
BR Willis Enterprises Lawrenceburg, IN $ 300
Indiana Republican State Committee $ 130
Jack Wellman Lawrenceburg, IN $ 40
Robert Johns Greendale, IN $ 100
Wilma Holden Greendale, IN $ 30
Bob Aikins Lines, Inc. Lawrenceburg, IN $ 500
DMS Investment Mgmt. Not Available $ 600
C&C Lawncare Lawrenceburg, IN $ 100
Lawrence Higdon Lawrenceburg, IN $1000**

* Wife of Ralph Meierjohan, Ameritek Homes

** Vice-Chairman & COO,OMNI POINTE, LLC per their website they have:
Multi-Use Assemblage in Greendale, Indiana: A development adjacent to the Argosy Casino in Lawrenceburg, Indiana is in the preliminary stages of planning and due diligence. This project will include the assemblage, development, design, and construction of:
 Approximately 100 acres of land to be assembled from six (6) different parcels.
 Potential mixed-use retail and residential that will be anchored by factory outlet retail with 24/7 shuttle service to-and-from the Argosy casino.
 Restaurants, health club, and residential condominiums and high-end rental apartments to accommodate the influx of Argosy employees pursuant to the casino’s expansion plans.
Commercial & Residential Development in Greensburg, Indiana: A development of commercial and residential real estate located in close proximity of the newly announced Honda automotive plant is in the preliminary stages of planning and due diligence.

*** Isn't this the company that had the fire in Greendale at Schenley Place?


29 October 2007 Special Dearborn County Plan Commission Meeting Notes


Members present: Mike Hall, Chairman, Ken Nelson, Tarry Feiss, Ralph Thompson, Bob Laws, Dennis Kraus, Jr., and Patrick DeMaynadier (arrived at 7:30 prior to public comment).
Absent: Tom Cheek and Nick Held.

Also present: Mark McCormack, Planning Director, Kate Rademacher, Enforcement Officer and Planner, and Mike Ionna, Assistant Planner.

No police officer was present. The room was full with citizens standing inside as well. Register Publications and WSCH also covered this meeting.
The microphones are still not transmitting sound through the speaker system very well.

Mark McCormack gave a detailed overview of the master plan process and stated this land use map was a component to be added to the current master plan already adopted. The map does NOT stand alone- but is to be used in conjunction with text and other planning principles as stated in the document that is approved along with the map.
H e outlined the legal process and state codes (IC 36-7-4-500 series) outlining how the plan will be adopted. Plan Commission holds the public hearings and makes a recommendation to the commissioners- the commissioners do the formal adoption. (If they choose to accept the recommendation) Even if they do not accept this – the master plan and guidelines are still in effect as before. This map is more of an enhancement and additional tool for the plan Commission.

McCormack also outlined the numerous advisory board meetings, focus groups, and public workshops and meetings to get to this point. He stressed that this master plan is to be a document of the COMMUNITY’S values, goals, and objectives. It is the community’s preferences, their blueprint of how they want the community to grow. It considers economic, social, and environmental impacts. The plan is a living document to be revised periodically and should last about 15-20 years with revisions. McCormack also noted that revised census data after 2010 would affect this plan.
Pace and place concept was mentioned again as a guide.

PUBLIC COMMENT: 7:45- 8:20 Public asked to limit to about 2 minutes each so all could be heard. Mike Hall also stressed respect when disagreeing.

[NOTE: The public comments came from a wide geographic distribution- I have noted their 7 different townships as a demonstration of this fact]

MARK HALL- YORK TOWNSHIP- member of advisory board. Commended staff and PC for their work and noted the very involved PUBLIC process. He thinks we have a good plan developed in the proper way with public input. He felt a little insulted by the comments submitted by DCEDI- and Hall noted that the plan is about OUR COMMUNITY and commented that the citizens were here. He commented further that only Jim West was present from DCEDI. He wondered where the rest of the DCEDI leadership and board were, as he didn’t see Bill Ritzmann or John Maxwell present. He urged the PC to pass the plan on to commissioners and move forward.

SANDY WHITEHEAD- JACKSON TOWNSHIP- read a prepared statement: My name is Sandy Whitehead, and I live at 29370 Blue Creek Road in northern Dearborn County. Thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight.

My comments this evening are in response to Jim West’s letter to the Dearborn County Plan Commission dated September 1, 2007. The bulk of the letter written by Mr. West stresses that Future Land Use Concept Maps A and AA do not reflect long-term growth and prosperity for Dearborn County, and that the maps were created using emotional issues tied to preserving our agricultural industry. It seems to me that DCEDI has missed the big picture. If the citizens of this county want agriculture, why aren’t more efforts being made to promote agriculture? Why is manufacturing and industry being pushed as the answer to the fiscal disparity of the County?
Until a plan is derived that reflects the needs and wants of the citizens of this county, the debate for how and when growth will occur will continue. The Future Land Use Concept Maps have been in the works for a long time. They are certainly not a reflection of a knee-jerk reaction to the Northwest Quadrant debacle. It would be a terrible slap in the face to the many people who have put a lot of time and effort into the creation of these documents.

As I looked over DCEDI’s website again last night, I saw much of the same thing that I saw 8 months ago when preparing to speak to the Dearborn County Council regarding related issues: there were many vacant buildings and developable sites available for sale. There is no palatable reason to fill the real estate market with more developable sites when many still stand vacant.

The entire Fall 2007 issue of The Hoosier Farmer magazine, a publication of Indiana Farm Bureau, was devoted to Rural Development, and I have included copies of the more pertinent articles for your reference. Six entities were listed as resources for rural development projects, including the U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Development and the Indiana Office of Community & Rural Affairs to name a few. Which, if any of these offices, have been contacted for input and counsel by DCEDI?
Please accept Future Land Use Concept Maps A and AA as drawn. Thank you for your time and consideration.

BOB GAYNOR- KELSO TOWNSHIP- thinks that Ag is getting a bum steer losing 19% of their acreage for a loss of 29,803 acres. He wasn’t thrilled with the idea that a lot of it was going to residential with all the current issues with schools lately.

HELEN KREMER- LOGAN TOWNSHIP- Advisory member- noted that care has to be taken with Ag having only one designation for all sorts of uses. She has issues with flood plain development and wanted that wording changed to just RESTRICTED on pa 147. Kremer further complimented the staff and PC on their efforts and hard work.

JIM WEST- DCEDI- MILLER TOWNSHIP- noted that his letter was already well-circulated and wanted to make it official tonight by reading it into the minutes:

The Board of Directors of the Dearborn County Economic Development Initiative (DCEDI) recently reviewed the latest version of the proposed future land use plan. Our interest in this document is not limited to but lies primarily in the sections that address the future economic development potential of this county.

DCEDI is the primary economic development marketing agency and the primary entity for the retention and expansion of existing businesses in Dearborn County. DCEDI markets and promotes Dearborn County, on a national and international basis, as a location for new or expanding manufacturing projects; office projects; large commercial and service projects; and, large retail and recreation projects. DCEDI also provides assistance to local companies that are expanding their operations. DCEDI works with the local communities to develop the resources and infrastructure to support its economic development programs. The primary goal of DCEDI is the creation of new "wealth" in Dearborn County through the creation of new, diversified job opportunities; the creation of new revenue opportunities for local governments and the general growth and expansion of the area economy.

From the above perspective, DCEDI must take exception to the Future Land Use Concept Maps Alternative A and Alternative AA due to the self-limiting acreage and locations that are designated for future economic development. Given the current and future fiscal needs of this county, our findings are that the two alternative land use plan maps:

1. Do not inure to the long-term prosperity of Dearborn County that would be derived from quality growth and development.

2. Do not provide opportunities for Dearborn County to generate economic development activity with significant fiscal returns and positive impacts on the local property tax structure.

3. Do not recognize the physical and transport limitations of Dearborn County, such as topography, flood plains and developmental highways that restrict significant economic development to only certain areas of the county.

4. Do not provide the physical site location requirements of new and expanding companies considering this community, thus creating a non-competitive situation for the county in comparison to other southeast Indiana and Greater Cincinnati communities.

5. Do not serve the best interest of those property owners in Dearborn County who have expressed their desire to sell their agricultural property for its highest and best use.

6. Relegates significant economic development activity to areas of the county viewed as less desirable by recent corporate prospects in terms of infrastructure, access and topography.

7. Were created in response to ‘no-growth’ rural residents using the emotional issues related to the preservation of the agricultural industry in Dearborn County to serve their cause.

8. Do not reflect the input and counsel of economic development specialists provided for previous versions of the concept plans.

DCEDI encourages the Dearborn County Plan Commission to re-evaluate the commercial and industrial sections of the Future Land Use Plan in terms of creating the most beneficial returns for the long-term growth and prosperity of the county. Status-quo is not an acceptable response to the fiscal issues facing Dearborn County in the very near future. (End of letter)

West said they want to see a strategic economic development plan to see what the marketplace requires and DCEDI is willing to pay part of the cost to do that. [NOTE: Taxpayer money goes to DCEDI and funds at least half their budget] Purdue and IU would help with the PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT part of the plan.
Thompson reminded West that he and the Rozow and Rosenberger had met with Planning staff and were supposed to give some positive response on changes they’d like in the plan. West replied that he had- it was a strategic economic development plan. So we know where it’s likely to happen and where we need it to happen. Thompson asked where? West said- the I-74 corridor- we only have US 50 and I-74. We’ve ignored I-74. West wanted the plan to WAIT till the strategic economic development plan was completed before deciding on the maps.

DeMaynadier suggested they amend the plan perhaps after the study is completed. Would you put a moratorium on development until this study is done? West wasn’t in favor of that.

Feiss- said this is a living document- what you could add to this might be a supplement.

DeMaynadier- we have momentum- all these people are here- we do not want to shelve this now and wait. It demoralizes people. There is never a certainty- but we can start with some clarity. He didn’t want to wait as there really was never certainty- so waiting is fruitless.

JOHNNY SCHOTT-MANCHESTER TOWNSHIP- With all due respect to the Chamber and DCEDI- they have it backwards. The development group is not driving what should happen in the county- the CITIZENS drive what should happen. Development folks are paid to be at these meetings. It pays for them to be here to look out for their interests. He’s not sure the 50/50 split on the advisory board was fair but at least it was a public process. For DCEDI to say the hell with you wait till we tell you what to do is wrong.

NICOLE DAILY- SPARTA TOWNSHIP- stated she was a resident and advisory board member. She’s also an urban planner and works with development. “I don’t get paid to be here- it’s beneficial for us to be in the know about what’s going on in the county.” She found some of the recent comments about being paid to be there “hurtful.”
Daily said this plan is a good start but there is a lot more work to do on the maps. It loses the ability to help plan infrastructure without more detail. We have ignored some assets (I-74) which connect Indy and Cincinnati. Industrial growth in the TIF districts only neglects other areas. We need other areas to be developed to get tax base immediately. We also need comparisons to be in the charts and wanted more columns added to make them easier to work with. More industrial growth in the map doesn’t ignore Ag necessarily. She couldn’t come up with an example of how they could fit together however.

Daily wants more high-density Residential growth to conserve more farmland. She feels that would be beneficial to the county.

Thompson asked her- what other Industrial/Commercial areas were needed immediately. Daily said the TIF districts won’t give immediate tax base. DeMaynadier said- you can’t color the whole thing RED- you also have to have infrastructure. [NOTE: Now this is interesting- the TIF’s are there to attract outside industry/commercial- by giving a tax advantage to the business. Daily wants to develop outside the TIFs to get immediate tax relief to the county. The logic escapes me- WHY WOULD A BUSINESS DO THAT IF THEY COULD GET A REBATEON THEIR TAX ESENTIALLY IN A TIF?]


Plan Commission comments:

Kraus Jr. – This is how we want the county to grow- not to stop or promote development.

Laws- most of the audience is concerned with 20% of the county. I prefer a less restrictive land use map.

Thompson- Served as advisory board member and now as commissioner and plan commission. Many people worked on this effort. The dichotomy is one stressing development and one retaining rural character and less development. There is not much middle ground. The majority at these public hearings want a less development type strategy and we need some industrial to lessen the impact. He doesn’t think industrial development is the driver. Agrees with DeMaynadier- this is a starting point- we should move forward – it’s a living document. It does not foster nor curtail development.

Feiss- impressed with the turnout and hopes it improves the awareness of the plan. It’s a living document- she’s in favor of moving forward.

Nelson- My dad use to say- “Don’t be overcome with the exuberance of verbosity.” Development monitoring is not done- we need to be doing that. We need a strategy- he sees NO purpose in stopping the process. He wants the motion to say we will be willing to visit economic development in the future.

DeMaynadier- summarized other’s views. Stated this is a plan with many parts. The map plus guidelines has to be collectively viewed. The various boundaries are approximate. This plan does NOT assume that the PC won’t listen to all other use options when presented. We still listen on a case-by-case basis.
Move this process forward- don’t bite off more than we can chew- especially if there is no infrastructure. R has to be balanced by Industry Commercial and Ag is caught in the middle.

Hall- If this is the only problem- Industry and Commercial is not stopped by anything that is there- would rather go forward than stop or go backward.

Nelson motioned and Laws 2nd for AA as map Failed with 3 Nays from Thompson, Feiss, and DeMaynadier.

DeMaynadier motioned and Thompson 2nd for Map A Passed with two Nays from Nelson and Laws.

The text was accepted with Thompson motioning and Feiss 2nd . After several amendments they passed it with text cleaning up table 7-2 by adding existing and future land uses to it. They did NOT change the text on flood plain to restrict development completely. Laws and Nelson were Nays (as it matched a different map than they wanted.)

The Land Use map A and text now go to County Commissioners with a FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION for their consideration. Probably date is Nov 2oth at 6:30 PM. Watch newspapers for announcement in the legal section or call PZ office at 537-8821.

OKI – Fiscal impact Analysis regional and local prototype- gave a PowerPoint presentation and answered questions from the PC. In a nutshell- the fiscal impact study is ONE tool of several that are use to evaluate development. PC has to consider social, environmental, economic, political, etc. The analysis can use an average costing per capita multiplier method or a marginal costing or case study method. It will provide a clear link between land uses and government budgets. It also affects the need for capital investment and long-term borrowing. The analysis has to be DEFENSIBLE. They want an easy to use version with training. It also has to work for all three states in the OKI region. There will be an advisory committee to oversee this. $300,000 is total needing 20% match of $60,000 per year. Our share would be $5,000 per year for 3 years. This is to continue, update, and maintain the model. Seven communities are serious maybes right now. The methodology is regional but the data is local.

Larisa Sims and Bill Miller presented for OKI- they need a letter of commitment by Dec 15. If not now- we can still elect to participate in the future- the door is always open.

No decision was made yet.

Meeting adjourned 10:10 PM

Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawrenceburg Township

Friday, October 26, 2007

DCRSD Chairman's Letter of Resignation

Michael K. Hankins, CRNA
26301 Farmland Drive
Guilford, Indiana 47022-9799
(812) 637-1690

August 19, 2007

Dearborn County Regional Sewer District
Board of Directors
2l5B West High Street Lawrenceburg,~ 47025


It is with some sadness that I must submit my resignation as chairman and member of the board of directors. Personal issues require that my resignation be effective immediately.

Sanitary sewers and wastewater treatment in Dearborn County have become political hot button issues. We now have political candidates with sewer hook-up planks as part their campaign platforms. Recent events with the County Commissioners and County Council lead me to believe there is little confidence in our work or my leadership. Unless and until sewers and wastewater can be completely separated from local politics, our mission and vision for the future will never be realized.

I consider it a distinct privilege and honor to have served with each al1d every one of you. God bless you all and give you the courage and strength to continue the very important work that you do.

Very Truly Yours,

Michael K. Hankins, CRNA

Wednesday, October 24, 2007


As you may be aware, the Dearborn County Plan Commission was unable to begin its review of the draft, Comprehensive Plan (Land Use) update at last month's regularly-scheduled public hearing--as a result of some unexpected technical difficulties with the recording and sound system. Therefore, I would like to re-extend the Plan Commission's invitation for you to attend--and participate in--the next Plan Commission public hearing in which these items will be opened for discussion (see details below).

*Please note that the public hearing for the Land Use Element amendment proposal is scheduled be the FIRST item on the agenda for the meeting referenced below. Additional information concerning this meeting may be found online at:

Again, the details for our next meeting are as follows:

Date: MONDAY, OCTOBER 29TH, 2007
Time: 7:00pm
Location: Dearborn County Administration Building; Commissioners Room 215B West High Street Lawrenceburg, IN 47025

As always, please contact the Plan Commission Staff at 812-537-8821 with any questions, comments, or concerns that you may have in regards to this meeting or its purpose(s).

Sincerely and Respectfully yours,

Mark McCormack
Director of Planning
Dearborn County Plan Commission

Tuesday, October 23, 2007

Mitch's property tax plan announcement

Mitch's property tax plan announcement

October 23, 2007

Good evening.

For the last few months, no subject has been on my mind, or the mind of most Hoosiers, as much as property taxes. In almost every county, some homeowners were hit with huge increases; in some counties, it seemed almost everyone got a big jump. Assessments were inconsistent and often grossly unfair. It is not acceptable that any citizen cannot afford to keep the home they may have worked all their lives to buy. The status quo is not tolerable and we must act to fix it.

Several causes combined to produce this situation. Back in the ‘90s, courts ordered a change to assessments based on market prices. In 2002, the legislature repealed the inventory property tax on business, and switched from reassessment once a decade to once a year, or “trending”. And, the biggest factor of all, total local spending on schools, libraries, school construction, and other services has continued growing faster than taxpayers’ incomes. When that happens, property taxes can only go up.

We’ve been here before. Repeatedly over the last 35 years, state government has tried to help out. State taxes have been raised and the money used to subsidize local budgets and reduce property taxes. By now, 85% of school operating costs are paid for by our state taxes, not our property taxes. Half the sales tax, 3 cents out of 6, is sent back to support local government, or your property taxes would be far higher than they already are.

What we do next must learn from this history, because the old approach has not worked. In every case, a few years later our state taxes were higher and our property taxes were, too. It only took 5 years this time.

I have looked at every option for change. I have talked with Hoosiers all over the state. I have studied Indiana’s past approaches to this issue and the attempts of other states to deal with their own problems. When Indiana acts this time, and act we must, our steps must be fair, far-reaching, and final.

I have prepared and will recommend to the legislature a proposal to cut every homeowner’s property taxes sharply and cap them forever, at no more than one per cent of a home’s true value. This last provision must be added to the state’s constitution to ensure its permanence, and guarantee that no Hoosier ever again pays more than a penny on the dollar of their home’s value.

We can lower the average Hoosier property tax bill by more than a third by removing forever the rest of school operating costs, and the cost of protecting abused and neglected children, from the local to the state level. Immediate relief should be provided to every homeowner on the May ’08 bills, and the full 1% ceiling protection put in place by 2009.

We can fund this reform through a one-cent increase in the sales tax, and by using a small share of the surplus we have restored to the state budget these last three years.

Before settling on the cut and cap approach, I looked hard at the idea of totally eliminating property taxes in our state. Much as I would like to have taken that route, the risks to our schools, to small business, and to our economy generally, dissuaded me. In particular, I could not support the large increase in personal income taxes, paid by every Hoosier worker and most small businesses, which would be necessary for total elimination.

Any plan that makes a real difference in property taxation will have to go to its root cause, and that is excessive spending. Total local spending on school construction, libraries, fire departments, and all other local services simply cannot keep rising faster than Hoosier incomes.

To achieve better discipline while preserving local control, we must have single-point accountability for spending. Today, no one is responsible; each local taxing district sets its budget and sends you its part of the bill, which is only added up when it hits your mailbox. The County Tax Board in each county must accept the duty of reviewing the total of local spending plans and trimming those budgets as needed to keep our taxes down.

As further protection against overspending, we should strengthen taxpayers’ direct say in local decisions, especially the borrowing for new schools and other construction which has been the biggest driver of property tax increases. I will propose that any significant new capital project, or any spending in excess of the growth in local income, must be approved by voter referendum.

Next, we must protect other property taxpayers from being exploited. I will propose hard ceilings, with no exceptions and no loopholes, of 2% for rental properties and 3% for other businesses, also written into our constitution.

Finally, our unfair and unfixable assessment system must go. I will propose the elimination of all political assessors and the appointment by each County Council of a single, qualified and certified assessor to oversee trained professionals in conducting future appraisals.

Immediate relief for every homeowner; a one per cent permanent cap on every homeowner’s taxes; an end to unfair and inaccurate assessments; real limits on local spending. As bold as these changes would be, I am very optimistic of achieving them, especially if you will help.

In the last 3 years, we have already solved problems like the state government deficit and the state highway shortfall that people said would take years or were simply impossible. We can solve this one, too, and open a new era of opportunity in which Indiana is the nation’s leader in defending and promoting the American dream of home ownership.

Thank you and good night.

The Daniels Property Tax Plan:

- Cut every homeowner's prop tax bill
- Cap homeowner prop taxes at 1%
- Limit increases in local govt spending
- Appoint a professional assessor for each county

22 October 2007 Dearborn County Plan Commission Meeting Notes

22 October 2007 Dearborn County Plan Commission Meeting Notes

Present: Hall, Chairman, Kraus, Jr, Held, Feiss, Thompson, Nelson, and Laws.
Absent: DeMaynadier and Cheek
Also present: McCormack, Plan Director, and McGill, Attorney

1. The Tabled item scheduled to be heard was a zone change for White Pines Development- Tucker’s Development on Short, Gaynor, and North Dearborn Road. The applicant asked last week that it be tabled until the November 26th meeting- they want 8-9 board members to be present in order to have the best chance of being approved.

2. The 3 lot residential subdivision on nearly 35 acres of Ag zoned land called Stinchcomb Acres which is a private lane (Stinchcomb Lane) in Manchester Township (off Platt Road) involved a variance for placing a private street not centered in the 40-ft easement, a variance for the width of the private street, and a variance for setbacks to EXISTING structures off the private street.

Mike Hall was the surveyor, so he stepped down and his wife, Terry, presented the application and passed out the fire dept. letter. Kraus Jr. chaired in the absence of vice chairman De Maynadier.

Mrs. Stinchcomb is doing this division as part of her estate planning to deed land to her children. She also has Lot 4 with the fishing pond being a lot common to all the property owners- so that no one child owns it. The adjoining neighbor is OK with the easement on the road to gain better access himself. 16-ft of road width is a significant improvement to the existing driveway. There is no realistic need for a 20-ft road width here. They do not want to encourage the public to travel back there. Any further splits or if Lot 4 is built later- it will have to come back to the Planning Dept. There is a max of 6 lots on a private street per our ordinance.
The street is currently 9-10 ft wide with 2 homes. There are no site distance issues. Stinchcomb Road was named a private lane due to 911 regulations, so that EMS could locate the homes on it. Private Lanes have BROWN street signs as opposed to the green ones for county maintained streets.

NO PUBLIC came to comment on this.

Thompson motioned and Nelson 2nd to grant a 70 ft set back variance, a private drive variance that it doesn’t have to be centered in the 40 ft ROW and the variance that it can be 16 ft instead of 20 ft wide. The reason for granting the variance was that it was not injurious to the public safety etc, per the criteria for granting variance in the code. All ayes. Passed

Thompson then motioned and Nelson 2nd to approve the major subdivision request for Stinchcomb Acres for 4 lots, one non-buildable and one other buildable only when septic approval is obtained. Road improvements are to be achieved per the 1st motion. All ayes. Passed.

3. Proposed changes to the Subdivision Ordinance involving Bonds and letters of credit requirements were thoroughly discussed for over 1.5 hours.

Thompson requested they remove as built drawings and request only record drawings.

McCormack said they’d been working on this for over 6 months and had sent letters to the local survey companies, bankers, and homebuilders to get them to review and give their thoughts on the options of letters of credit, cashier’s checks, and performance and maintenance bonds. They also talked to McGill and County Attorney, Bob Ewbank. McCormack said the county was in trouble for not enforcing their own ordinances.
Ewbank told PZ he and the commissioners were in favor of no longer having letters of credit- only performance bonds.

Listerman detailed several examples of road bonds out more than 7 years with extensions and people unable to get bus and mail services to their homes until the road was finished.

McCormack said- we are not experts in this, which is why we talked to Ewbank.

Nelson said – Ewbank isn’t either- he’s just an attorney.
Nelson went on to say he was deeply concerned that by eliminating letters of credit we would be allowing only about 3 local developers to work in the county. What about the smaller developers?

Laws concurred and thought perhaps smaller jobs could have letters of credit.

Nelson said-it doesn’t matter what you have if you aren’t monitoring it and enforcing it- you have to have a system! [NOTE: Nelson is exactly on point here. The bottom line is the county screwed up- no one was watching out for the taxpayers. This is not the first time the bonds and letters of credit system has been messed up. It seems like they keep passing it back and forth between PZ and Hwy on monitoring. An ordinance should be set and it should name WHO is responsible for monitoring and enforcing.]

Todd Listerman was asked how many bonds are out now being monitored- he thought about 12-15.
Kraus Jr asked him to give the PC a monthly report on the status of those. Listerman agreed.

They also plan to notify the developer 90 days before bond or letter of credit lapses to have it renewed 30 days before it lapses. If not- the county will call the bond or letter of credit in 30 days prior to its lapse date. (They have to do it then or they won’t have anything to call in.)

Listerman detailed other roads of Kent’s for example in Happy Hollow that were finished in 2001 or 2002 and not accepted. They accepted those recently. [NOTE: How did they miss this? Who was plowing the snow? Did the county maintain an unaccepted road? Or were the neighbors just uncaring when a foot of snow was on their road- unplowed?]

Richard Schmidt, Nicole Daily, and Tom Kent were in attendance. Schmidt requested that they meet with PZ staff to discuss these changes. McCormack reiterated that they’d notified them 6 months ago, but that they were always willing to hear the public. When Nicole Daily concurred with Schmidt McCormack said Rosenberger had been notified. (Daily works with Rosenberger at Bayer Becker Engineering. ) [NOTE: Rosenberger is also the president of the HOMEBUILDER’S ASS’N. Did he not notify his group of these plans to modify the ordinance? They (Kent and Schmidt) acted as if this was news to them.]

PC decided to table this item for November’s meeting.


1. Dillsboro is meeting with staff on the buffer around their town. They will do this at their 6:30 Nov 14 meeting of their town Council. They are also interested in contracting with the county for planning services like St,. Leon and W Harrison.

2. St. Leon Comp Plan Draft is on the PZ web page for review. Their next meeting is Nov 7.

3. The letter from the Commissioners and PC to INDOT was sent. McCormack noted that his numbers show 12,000 vpd in the near future at the I-74 interchange vs, INDOT’s 1000 vpd in their long term study for eth rehab of that interchange.

4. The US 50 Collaborative will meet probably about 9 or 9:30 AM in the Emerg Mgmt Bldg on Nov 14. They want to get cities and county together so all projects are known.

5. Comprehensive Plan is set for Oct 29 meeting 7 PM in Adm Bldg with OKI after it. (This was postponed from last month due to the tape failing)

6. Nov 13th will be an executive session planned at 7PM for the Sugar Ridge litigation.

Vince Karstetter addressed the PC with his concerns about getting back to the original intent of plans for the PUD. He wanted the condos changed back to the driving range behind his lot- as in the original scope of work. He asked questions about what happens when a new owner takes over that development. He said he is trying NOT to sue the county. PC can’t change their plans until a new owner requests this.

PC lost the court case with Temmel- on primary plat approval- but nothing has happened on that property. Karstetter asked about how the sewage would work now that Macke is out. Temmel depends on Macke for sewer. (This will go to Greendale ultimately)

It is unclear what the status of the development by the Bright firehouse is. No recent activity.

Meeting adjourned at 10 PM

Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawrenceburg Township

Monday, October 22, 2007


"Can government FORCE citizens to give up their property and force them to buy government financed products?"

What if the Federal government forced every citizen to switch to hydrogen battery powered cars [because it believes they are more beneficial to mankind]. Then the government set the price for those battery powered cars to 10 times greater than what the members of the governing body paid for theirs. And, they didn’t allow the issue to be voted upon by the people it affects the most.

The above analogy essentially describes the issues in the lawsuit between St. Leon Sewer Board and the county residents they are attempting to force onto their sewer system.

The basis of the suit has several points:
The cost. We can't afford it. Another aspect under this heading is the inequity of hook-up fees [$4,150], the maintenance [owner's expense], the pipe and trenching [owner's expense - in several cases in excess of 500 feet to 1,300 feet] and the grinder pumps [$2,600 average cost]. The three sitting council members connected for $400 and everything else was free with lifetime maintenance, in gratis. Doug Farrow, President of Town Council, signed up for the $400 while the cost of hook-up for the community was $4,000. This, after he became President of the Town Council. No election was held - it was a caucus decision!

Next, the fact that this ordinance [law] was in-acted to apply to citizen's living out of the jurisdiction of the Town of St. Leon, in a 10 mile radius of St. Leon. Yet those homeowners cannot vote for representatives in town elections. We have absolutely no say as to the governance and practices that are affecting our property rights [septic systems - or more succinctly, the forced discontinuance of using our systems].

Then there is the dispute about the wording of the ordinance. The initial wording of the ordinance, when it was offered to the town folk, stated they "may" hook-up instead of the newly revised [2001] "shall" hook-up. It wasn't mandatory when first proposed in order to get passage - then sometime after it passed it became a mandatory requirement. Also, it initially stated ...if the sewer line was within 300' of the dwelling the homeowner MAY hook up... Now the wording states ...if the sewer is within 300' of the property line the homeowner SHALL hook up... This makes a huge difference [cost for pipe and labor for trenching] if you have a substantial set back from the road, sewer line.

Next, the fact that we can't sit on the sewer board, or planning board, or council [in St. Leon] because we are not citizens of that town disenfranchises us from having any input in the operation, fee structure, or management planning of the sewer, sewer expansion, and placement of pipeline.

We are constituents of the county of Dearborn and should be governed by the County standards. The County states ...within 300' of the dwelling... and the county does not FORCE citizens to connect. This is the position that all three commissioners agreed to back in February of this year. This position was expressed in the initial letter Commissioner Thompson wrote to the County attorney, Ewbank, in order for him to formalize the position of the County on this matter. Ewbank is politicking when he states he's not going forward with this because there is a pending law suit. The statement of the County Commissioners in this matter is their collective reasoning for sewer connections within their jurisdiction. We simply want to refer to it, if and when, we appear before a judge to plead our case. It seems that every time we turn a corner we get sabotaged by yet another lawyer. The real rub in all this is that the longer the lawyers stretch this out the longer they can provide themselves with legal fees [at our out-of-pocket expense for our attorney and tax payers expense for Watson and Ewbanks]. This is beginning to appear as an annuity fund for Watson, Ewbanks, et al.

Now, for the status of the case. Watson, St. Leon's legal consultant, filed for a summary judgment. This was after Dearborn County's, Judge Humphrey, recused himself and the case was assigned to Judge Todd from Madison, in Jefferson County. Seems that Watson didn't even want us to have our day in court to ask for our considerations in the matter. We [George Leininger, our attorney] have responded to that motion. This was postponed numerous times, since early May of this year. It was filed the last day of September, 2007. Now the ball is back in the court [no pun intended] of Watson, and the St. Leon mafia, to respond to our response. Again, we have to accept the decision of a judge that we can't vote for. Will he be as sensitive as he might be to our case given that we cannot vote one way or the other for his seat?

There is a feeling of grave discomfort in all of this. My impression is that they are deliberately trying to wear us down and cost us out of our constitutional rights. Laws and liberty come at a steep cost and it is not just pecuniary, it has cost us personal stress and anxiety along with some very serious time consuming expenses. Action [conducting and attending meetings - our own and theirs], communication activities [among ourselves, our attorney and the local media] and the responsibilities that are required to keep the group together are things we can never recover. The true pain in watching this melee unravel is the "system".

The justice [or injustice] is that good, decent, noble people know there is something very wrong about forcing rural property owners to shut down their working septic systems and twisting our arms [squeezing our wallets] to pay for something we did not ask for, nor need.

Thom Hammond
Logan Township

Friday, October 19, 2007


Updated 6/29/2007 by County Clerk's office

Federal, State and Judicial Offices


United States Representative - 6th Cong District MIKE PENCE

United States Representative - 9th Cong District BARON HILL

State Representative District 55 TOM KNOLLMAN

State Representative District 68 ROBERT J. BISCHOFF

Judge of the Superior Court #1 G. MICHAEL WITTE

County and Township Offices


Clerk of the Circuit Court PHILLIP D. WEAVER


County Surveyor DENNIS KRAUS, JR.

County Coroner WES HOLT

County Commissioner District 1 JEFF HUGHES

County Commissioner District 2 RICK FOX


Where to Vote for the Nov 6th City and Town Elections

Nov. 6. 2007 - Municipal General Election

These locations are hereby designated the official Precinct Polling Locations for the 2007 Municipal General Election to be held Nov. 6, 2007.


Center 1 Aurora Emergency Building (Third & Mechanic St.) Aurora City Park Pavilion
Center 2 Aurora City Park Pavilion
Center 3 Aurora City Park Pavilion
Center 4 Aurora Firehouse (Dutch Hollow Rd.)


Greendale 1 New Greendale Firehouse
Greendale 2 Old Schenley Office Building
Greendale 3 Greendale Utilities Building
Greendale 4 Greendale Cabin
Greendale 5 Greendale Cabin


Lawrenceburg 1 (New) Lawrenceburg Firehouse on Tate Street
Lawrenceburg 2 (New) Lawrenceburg Firehouse on Tate Street
Lawrenceburg 3 American Legion Post 239
Lawrenceburg 4 Community Fellowship Church


Sparta 1 Baptist Church Fellowship Hall

Designated by the Dearborn County Board of Commissioners this 16th day of October, 2007.




Thursday, October 18, 2007


You can find election news and some candidate interviews as podcasts or downloadable to your computer for listening on www.theflypod.com

If you plug in a zipcode of 47025 you will get the most information on Dearborn County. Click on News and Sports for the election related interviews. There is a main page with instructions on how to use the site if you are unfamiliar with podcasts.

Currently on the page are interviews with county officials such as a township trustee, the prosecutor, the highway director, a candidate for judge, and a candidate for D-2 commissioner.

An informed electorate is a worthwhile goal.

Tuesday, October 16, 2007

16 October 2007 Dearborn County Commissioner Meeting Notes

16 October 2007 Dearborn County Commissioner Meeting Notes

Present: Hughes, Chairman, Thompson, and Fox
Also present: Pickens, Auditor, Ewbank, Attorney, and Messmore, Administrator
A uniformed police officer was present.

[NOTE- Commissioners were not speaking up and the microphones were not picking up from the audience’s perspective.]

An executive session was held at 3:30 PM Commissioners took no action at this meeting regarding that meeting. Subject was: complaints from the highway dept. workers.

Harold White- 21166 Kuebel Road at the intersection with Fox Road wanted commissioners to clarify the deed for his property and the road that was moved about 30 ft onto it back in 1965. He said he wanted commissioners to pay for his land or he wanted to close it off. Later he indicated that he was 70 and wanted the property straightened out so his children wouldn’t have any issues.
Thompson motioned and Fox 2nd to table this until the county Hwy Dept could do further research. Ewbank will then send a letter to White concerning the county’s position on that issue.

Gayle Pennington presented the general procedures with the online tax information site. Apparently realtors, bankers, and appraisers have to go to a 2nd site after they exceed the 30 parcel per day limit on the taxpayer site. Then they have to pay about $2 per look-up and the rate goes down if there is a large volume of parcels. The parcel project will solve this but she thought it was 2 years out. Pickens has been getting information and has about 4 GIS companies who will be presenting to him. They indicate they can have it all online by July if they start in January.

Commissioners said their citizen complaints are basically that they want to know what the rates will be. Pickens said that everything is at the state now and we are waiting for them to send the rates- “we are currently at their mercy- if they have such a thing.”

Weights and Measures was consolidated into the Building Inspector’s Office for 2008 in the county Budget.

Messmore said- County Auction will be held Sat Oct 27 at the Emergency Mgmt Building at 10 AM. There are nearly 20 Crown Victoria and trucks for sale, office desks, etc. Items deemed worthless will be discarded. Pickens told Messmore to toss the old computer monitors. Listerman warned him that it couldn’t just go into a dumpster. Pickens said- just put them on the bottom- first in, last out. [NOTE: Can’t Solid Waste help handle this hazardous waste?]

Commissioners signed the letter of recommendation that Vieste wanted as part of their termination agreement was prepared by Thompson and reviewed by Ewbank. Pickens will send the letter after Messmore gives him Vieste’s NEW ADDRESS- they’ve moved. It reads as follows:

To Whom It May Concern:

On September 12, 2006, the Dearborn County Board of Commissioners (“County”) engaged VIESTE, LLC to develop a Comprehensive Capital Program Management Plan for the County.

Phase I of the project included an assessment of immediate, mid-term and long-term capital requirements for the County. An audit of the County’s financial processes, along with alternative funding strategy recommendations, was developed and submitted by VIESTE and the County’s financial adviser, London Witte. The comprehensive plan that was developed by VIESTE would potentially be a piece of the economic development plan for Dearborn County.

Due to the lack of political consensus within the County, it was the joint conclusion of the entire team, that the County government needed to step back and reevaluate the direction the County should take for a Financial Master Plan and for Economic Development within the county.

This is Dearborn County's acknowledgement that Vieste and its team has performed within the original Service Agreement and provided a Financial Master Plan for the Country's future. The County has instead chosen to reevaluate its current and future direction and financial plans.


Jeff Hughes, President Dearborn County Commissioners

Rick Fox

Ralph Thompson

Polling locations were signed off on for the Nov elections.

Todd Listerman- Transportation Director gave a 13-minute report.

1. Commissioners signed the letter (prepared by McCormack and Listerman) to INDOT regarding the I-74 bridge rehab and requested INDOT look at the projected growth in that area so they would increase the capacity of the bridge, rather than rehab it at their current level.
2. Listerman showed commissioners the new safety shirts and hats purchased at reduced rates by tacking onto INDOTs purchase agreement.
3. The aerial bucket the county purchased was thoroughly described to commissioners- cost was $89,495.
4. 4. Council approved funding for spreader boxes and related tools.
5. Hwy is finishing patching and preparing for winter maintenance.
6. The old nuclear gauge was sold to Christopher and Associates for $2500 and paperwork sent to INDY regarding its transfer.

Pickens- claims and minutes signed

Messmore had nothing to add.

Ewbank- said the county was named in the suit over the light at HVL along with Macke and several of his companies. County is named as it is on county property and they have been “unjustly enriched” by having it (without payment)
Ewbank said there was also a tort claim notice as there is a lapsed letter of credit and the county didn’t keep a better eye on Macke.

Ewbank brought up the sewer letter status at Thompson's request- saying there was a court case pending in St. Leon over the same issue as to whether the county ordinance or state ordinance prevails. He said we will await that court decision before going further with a letter. Pickens asked Thompson if he’d gotten any call back from Indy on this- (Thompson had met with legislative assistant on this issue) Thompson said No- he would discuss that with Pickens later. [NOTE: Eibeck- one of the parties being sued by St. Leon- said no court date was set yet. This issue has been dragging on for a long time. It would appear the county is using this as an excuse to drag their feet also. Who is protecting the county residents?]

Fox thought that if we are restructuring the highway dept- and a foreman’s job is eliminated maybe the county could still pay him the foreman’s wage and call him a back-up foreman. They could freeze his wage till the other county workers reached that level and then he could continue at their rate. Thompson asked Listerman to draw up a formal plan for this for commissioners to look over. Council will have to redo salary ordinance if this is to happen. [NOTE: It seems that the county is having trouble with setting limits. And commissioners are having trouble handling worker’s complaints. This is a dangerous precedent to set- they need to look at this from all angles.]

Hughes- wants drainage issues checked with Sugar Ridge and also the fire depts. to decide on lifting the ban on burning.

Meeting adjourned at 7:30 PM
Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawrenceburg Township


The following is a reprint of an editorial published last week in the Dearborn County Register by Cliff Eibeck- Logan Township

Dear Editor:

Chuck Andres has passed around a two-page article that he says is from Indianapolis. He doesn’t say who in Indy wrote it. It is titled SEPTIC SYSTEMS DO NOT WORK--PERIOD”.

I found this article to be false. The Indiana Water Resources Research Center contradicts it.

On page two they say:



Clifford R Eibeck
Logan Township

Saturday, October 13, 2007

$140 Million in Tax Breaks for Honda

On the front page of the Wednesday October 10, 2007 Edition of the Wall Street Journal is a story about the Honda plant being built in Greensburg. This plant is the fantasy dream of our own DCDEI and our own Lawrenceburg Chamber of Commerce. The hourly pay FOR THE WORKERS will amount to a lot less than the average Dearborn County Income. But all we hear is moaning and groaning about our missed opportunities related to the Honda Plant which up in Indianapolis is joked about as the "salvation of Indiana."

According to this Wall Street Journal story Honda has been given, surprise, surprise 140 million dollars worth of tax breaks and "other incentives"plus about 50 million dollars of state funds.

For the benefit of pro development folks who might have difficulty in reading this story or understanding the source of these tax breaks and the statewide funds, this represents OUR TAX MONEY. Of the 50, million statewide fund. Keep in mind Lawrenceburg's gift of 10 million dollars to Greensburg.

Now we have a problem in St Leon in which our friend and neighbors all hard working folks or retirees are being forced to come up with thousand and thousand of dollars to buy into the St. Leon Sewer system, regardless of their need for this sewer system which will enrich the usual folks, the sewer company named EES and of course our developers.

The St. Leon Town Council in its RECEIVED WISDOM has issued revenue bonds to pay for this extravagance. They passed an ordinance which essentially forces anyone whose property line is within 300 feet of a sewer line to pay thousands of dollars to hook up to this outrageous system. Don't pay up to hookup and your house can go to a Sheriff's sale. Can anyone imagine that this kind of thing can happen in these United State?

The Chinese government is taking people's property for whatever use they wish but that is China not the United States. Seemingly our elected officials can't tell the difference between the governance of Communist China and the governance of little old Dearborn County Indiana.

Now for a measly few million dollars, as compared to the Honda giveaway the state could help these folks by buying buy back the sewer bonds and inactivating them. These bonds are the basis of the forced hookup. Buying back the bonds would relieve our friend and neighbors of this onerous uncalled for burden.

Will the state do it, will our own Honorable Senator Johnnnnnny Nugent try to help? Of course not.

Alan S. Freemond, Sr.
Jackson Township

Friday, October 05, 2007

4 Oct 2007 DCRSD Meeting Notes

The following notes are provided in an effort to summarize the transactions of the meeting without editorial comment, except clarification of events.

4 October 2007 DCRSD Meeting Notes

Present: Chairman Enzweiler, Fehrman, Pruss, Dennerline and Maxwell. Adams was not present. Hankins has resigned.Also Present: Baer, Executive Secretary; Quinn, Quinn Engineering; Benning, Secretary; Frank Kramer, Board Attorney; Robert Hrezo, Hrezo Engineering; Jerry Jacobsen, SDRSD Board member; two Serenity Ridge residents; Dean Rogers, Umbaugh & Associates and Ralph Thompson.
Meeting started at approximately 7:00 PM in the Commissioner's Meeting Room. Meeting was not recorded.

Meeting Notes
Meeting Notes for September 6, 2007: Maxwell moved and Fehrman seconded, approved.

Treasurer's Report
$0.99 in Lawrenceburg Community Grant Fund.
$380.02 in RSD Savings Account
$61,741.61 in RSD Project Fund

Serenity Ridge
Have funds from 8 of 10 residents, who had committed. Stauts(sp) closed Thursday and would send his check tomorrow. Montgomery apparently will not be contributing. That would require an additional $860 from the nine residents, who have contributed in order to proceed. A resident was concerned about whether the project would proceed and whether she would get her money back or if it would go to the new resident if she sold her property. It was not clear in the current agreement.

A contract won't be let until the funds are in. DCRSD will send a letter out to the 9 who have contributed to add another $860. Once the money is in it will take about six weeks to get construction started. In response to the question of the impact on the non joining residents, Doug Baer indicated that when they apply for a construction permit, they will be required to connect. As soon as a contract has been let, the health department can release permits for construction. If residents sell the lots, there will be no requirement by the County for the Seller to disclose the situation to the Buyer. When the Owner gets ready to build, they will have to pay $7000 and the tap fee, at least if it is done in the next ten years. Will proceed with project, once all the funds are in.

Special Requests

West Aurora Project

Quinn provided an update, the State Revolving Fund (SRF) currently is offering a 2.65% rate on a 20 year note (changes quarterly and would be locked at the preloan application). There are some income restraints on the funds.

To proceed the PER has to be approved and will require a rigorous public hearing and SRF would want strong public participation. Need 10 days public notice and 10 days after the hearing, and the meeting will need to have a transcript taken (by a court reporter)and attendance signatures taken. The environmental study will need to be completed and submitted with the application. If they can approve the design by December 7, 2007, it can be submitted to SRF for review (approx. 90 days). Final plans should be held till approval. Based on the Dec. 7th submittal, they can resubmit final design May 15, 2008, have final SRF review by July 15, let bids August 7 and accept bids by October 2.

The collection system design should be safe; but, the treatment plant may have issues. They will have to submit three options: No action, Treatment plant and Delivery to Aurora. Based on 300,000 gallons, that will serve approx. 140 existing homes plus 120 for the Meierjohan project - Gabbard Estates (the land with the Fehrman Realty for sale sign on it). The SRF will not pay for cleanup or land acquisition; but, if they roll it in with the treatment plant they should be able to get it covered.

Randy was talking to Fehrman and thinks Aurora may be able to accept flow to the Cochran Lift Station. They were unsure if IDEM would lift the agreed order or allow them to connect. If they go to Aurora they will have to pipe to Marsh Road. If it goes to Aurora, Gabbard will require a lift station by the developer. Aurora wants to rebuild the 6" line down the hill. Will cost approx. $700,000. This may be less than a treatment plant. A separate line will leave capacity for the Aurora Industrial Park.

Quinn was also considering cleaning out the lagoon (at Highridge Estates) and putting the plant there. They would have to pipe around the lagoon during construction.

The collection system would run along the north side of 50 to serve Susanna, Hoffman Road, Tabor Court, Walston and Huesman Road plus Gabbard Estates. They will need to keep a 100 foot clearance from the cemetery and will need an easement from a neighbor, which might be hard to get.

Quinn will proceed with the collection system design, which should be the same for both options.
The project cannot proceed until the money is procured.

Quinn will use lines on GPS drawing for public hearing, which will be scheduled for November 18, 2007 at the Aurora Fire House, if feasible. Then they can do final approval at December 6, meeting. They should have notice sent to the approx. 140 addresses for the public hearing.

Aurora Agreement
Aurora had agreed to bill the cost of the sewer service and sewer system cost with the water bills. They have started collecting from those already connected. However, they needed to modify the agreement to allow Aurora to charge a debt service to those who choose not to tap in (they will charge the households which do not connect, their share of the design and construction costs for the sewer system, even though they are not using it). They need to do this to show fiscal responsibility to SRF. Aurora cannot charge the debt service untill the agreement is modified. Maxwell moved to approve and Fehrman seconded, approved.

The line is turned over to Aurora and Aurora will become the enforcing agent. DCRSD is only concerned with the initial hook up, afterward hook up will be enforced by Aurora.

Fees have been being collected and DCRSD should start receiving funds the first of next month.
St. Leon

Maxwell and Enzweiler met with Leone(sp)about two weeks ago. They wanted to look at St. Leon again, especially the prices. Enzweiler wanted to authorize up to $2,000 to have Burgess & Niple to get with Leone and review the costs, prior to retrying the St. Leon agreement. Maxwell wanted to keep the St. Leon option on the table . He mentioned the TIF districts and two highway interchanges as possible reasons. They need to consider cost recovery models before going back to Council for money. They could get 10% of the TIF funds to help pay the costs.

Jerry Jacobsen expressed a concern that the taxes in that area paid largely for schools and he thought taking funds for the TIF would impact schools in the area. Rogers indicated the incremental funds would go to the TIF.

Rogers indicated they haven't done a model like this. He felt they could do some sample scenarios and basic assumptions based on their experience. Maxwell felt it needed to be analyzed for income before they went to Council. They would get 45% of the 300,000 gallon capacity for $2.44 M under current agreement, whereas in West Aurora they would get 100,000 gallon capacity for $1.4M. That's a much higher cost for St. Leon.

The advantage to St. Leon was questioned. St. Leon has reached 70% of current capacity and needs to expand. They would receive County funds to help that cost.
Enzweiler wanted to have the costs reviewed and wanted a way to guarantee or avoid costs or get money back, if load didn't arise.

The TIFs and the Quadrant could be places to expand. Jacobsen indicated he had a conversation with Senator Robert Jackman regarding the Honda plant in Greensburg. Sen. Jackman knew of no companies looking to site in the North West Quadrant of Dearborn Co and no history of any companies seeking to develop there in the past.

Maxwell moved and Dennerline seconded, all approved allowing up to $2,000 to review costs. Maxwell will call St. Leon to advise them.

New Business
Construction Wage Hearings
No action is required by DCRSD. All the information would need to go to the county and be heard all together if needed.

There was one claim for Quinn Engineering for services on West Aurora. This would be against the funds approved by Council. Baer will get with Tracy to set up the account. Quinn was requested to make the invoice more specific and be submitted earlier. Enzweiler also wanted the packets provided ahead of the meetings. They will be made available on Monday before the meeting for pick up by the members. The members will have to remember to bring the packets to the meeting. ?? moved, Maxwell seconded, all approved claims.

The status of the Walston treatment plant appraisal was questioned. Dennerline moved, ?? seconded, all approved to allow up to $500 for the appraisal.

Annual Regional Sewer District Association Meeting
Baer indicated he would attend on October 29, 2007. Anyone else interested would need to register by October 15. The conference provides a chance to talk to other districts to see what they were doing and how.

Rogers from the audience indicated he had been working with Benning and the collection of funds would put DCRSD on the State Board of Accounts 'radar' and audit. Accounts kept on Excel would not be adequate and he suggested DCRSD contact State Board of Accounts about acceptable software.

Jacobsen asked Rogers who he was. Rogers indicated he was with Umbaugh an accounting firm involve in government finance and bonding. Jacobsen asked if Rogers was paid. Rogers indicated he had not been paid, though he had been providing service on and off since before the sewer board began in 2002. Benning indicated Umbaugh has a contract with DCRSD and has not been paid because they haven't submitted an invoice.

Dennerline: move to adjourn.
Adjourned at approximately 8:30 PM.

Note: Prior to the previous Board Meeting an Executive Session was held. At the September 6, 2007 meeting the following item (in bold) was on the Agenda:
Minutes of Executive Session held August 16, 2007 Action, An Executive Session Was Held for the Purpose of IC 5-14-1.5-6.1-6(A). No Subject Matter Was Discussed in the Executive Session Other Than Specified. No Vote Required.

Note: The specific section cited: Sec. 6.1. Executive sessions may be held only in the following instances:..........(6) With respect to any individual over whom the governing body has jurisdiction: (A) to receive information concerning the individual's alleged misconduct;

This item was on the September 6, 2007 agenda; but, not mentioned in this meeting. No vote is permitted in an Executive Session.

Also, the following is excerpted from the same Indiana Code: (c) A final action must be taken at a meeting open to the public.

No action or comment was made was made at tonight's meeting on this issue, either.

Notes by Ralph Thompson and Jerry Jacobsen.

Wednesday, October 03, 2007

2 October 2007 Dearborn County Commissioner Meeting Notes

2 October 2007 Dearborn County Commissioner Meeting Notes

Present: Hughes, Chairman, Thompson, and Fox.
Also present: Ewbank, Attorney, and Messmore, Administrator.
Stephanie Disbro took minutes for Pickens who was in Indy.
A uniformed police officer was present.

Hughes called an executive session prior to this meeting concerning highway dept grievance process. Commissioners decided at this public meeting that they intend to follow the policy already in place, but will authorize the county adm. to waive the 15-day reporting procedure to be fair to those complaining. No further details were given.

[NOTE: Information gathered from various sources outside the adm. bldg: Workers have been lobbying with some local citizens about their issues. Some highway workers are complaining about combining work forces from what were previously three districts. Some workers have issues with cross coverage training. Dearborn County is one of a handful or less of county highway depts. that had used the district system. Most have combined for greater efficiency and to save funds. Change seems to come hard to depts. where workers have been there for a long time and “have always done it that way.”]

Harrison Fire and EMS Contract was signed. It is an annually renewing contract that can be stopped with 30 days notice prior to each year-end. It also provides for renegotiation if the county can provide services in all or part of that area.

Craig Beckley from Heart House- came to explain the audit issue and federal findings with their procedures. Corrections have been made- none were concerned with money- only the paperwork supporting the draw downs from the federal grant funds. He asked Commissioners to sign a letter showing they have provided itemization and certification for all their draws and corrective action was taken. Commissioners signed.

Citizen concerns citizen was not present- but issues regarding road carcasses, trash, and paramedics were discussed.
Hughes was concerned that we do not have paramedic training and Mary Margaret Hospital works with Ripley County EMS to do this. Paramedics can administer medications. Thompson asked Messmore to get a database of factual info on the EMS volunteers to see what their training is. Hughes and Thompson rehashed briefly their disagreement on Dillsboro EMS contract issues.

Listerman spent about 15 minutes answering questions and explaining what other counties do with regard to road kill and trash in the county ROW. The bottom line- the county only removes what is a road hazard. They usually just push the carcass over the bank or away from homes to decompose. Health Dept does not indicate there is a health issue. (Though it stinks) Highway Dept. is not going to be in the trash pickup business. [NOTE: Littering and trash in the ROW is also a hazard for mowing equipment on county roads. It used to be thrown in out of the way (rural) areas. Now I see it in yards and along main streets. It is too bad litterers cannot be caught because there is a fine that can be assessed.]

Mark McCormack- Planning and Zoning: commented that there is a provision in county ordinance for fining people for trash dumping. Sometimes the trash dumped has a way of identifying the owner.

McCormack told Commissioners that he has 2 PC members up for renewal or replacement this year. Patrick DeMaynadier indicated he was willing to continue to serve. Tarry Feiss indicated she would rather be replaced. One of these two has to be a Republican, but the other can be either office per state law on politically balancing the board. There were three people in the past who indicated they would like to serve- Rick Pope, a former PC member, Jane Ohlmansiek, also a former member, and Dennis Sparks, who has not contacted the PZ office recently- but had sent his resume in a while back. Commissioners reappoint in Jan 2008.

Sugar Ridge Enforcement issues were detailed for Commissioners. The bond lapse and stoplight issues were also brought up. No permits will be given out from building or planning depts. Ewbank said that we need to enjoin him- file in court so that he cannot sell any more property. This will also show up on title searches for people buying land so they know a problem exists. The light should stay up – we need to settle this, Ewbank said.
McCormack asked about condos starting etc. – Ewbank reiterated that they need to take SWIFT ACTION to stop any further problems and get injunctive relief in the courts on this.

Listerman asked about stopping letters of credit and just having surety bonds. Thompson agreed. Listerman asked to be sure the commissioners were in agreement on this. Ewbank said the bond should be surety with NO EXPIRATION DATE! Thompson said – if they are financially unstable, they are unlikely to get a bond. Ewbank said- that is a point.

McCormack will bring in the ordinance revision on this. The PC attorney (McGill) to file for injunctive relief possibly and Ewbank is willing to help on this.
[NOTE: Letters of credit were a big issue over 10 years ago and have come up repeatedly as being risky for the county as there is no good system to see that they are kept current. It also allows for less financially stable developers to get involved in the county. Sugar Ridge was apparently going for several letters of credit from several different banks to add up to the total needed. Apparently that has not even been possible. What happens to the people who have invested in this development and built homes there? What about the subdevelopers who own sections- are they able to continue their work? Perhaps we need to get a list of all the owners and interests in this development and have the PC and their attorney assess their strategy. Some of this plan may be salvageable- and stopping all work may prevent another developer from taking over and buying it up – should that be the necessary next step.]

McCormack discussed the I-74 bridge at SR 1 rehab plans that PC feels is inadequate. INDOT consultants are estimating another 1000 vpd and with the plans in the area for commercial/industrial uses here and in Franklin County (industry on 59 acres), this estimate is far too low. The turn lane addition is not enough- PC thinks 4 lanes are needed. McCormack said this is just like what happened in Batesville and Harrison- we need to fix this so that in 2009 to 2010 when they build this rehab- they do it right. Commissioners will sign the letter and send it to Seymour and to Mr. Williams, head of INDOT. [NOTE: Why not add Chamber of Commerce, Redevelopment Commission (they declared the TIF up there), the school system, OKI with the MPO, and St. Leon? In addition, send copies to business friendly Gov Mitch Daniels and Rural Development head- Lieutenant Gov Becky Skillman. Get them all on board. Why waste the money on an inadequate fix?]

Transportation Dept- Todd Listerman- presented an hour’s worth of road work.

Listerman stated for the record that his house was on Carlee Acres Drive (1164 ft) and then presented it and Tree Top Drive by Happy Hollow (2030 ft) for acceptance into the county inventory. Testing results etc. were given. Tree Top was accepted under old requirements for specs in place at the time it was developed. Accepted.

Fox said- Do not accept anything that will be a maintenance problem in the future.

Cambridge Road will be set up as a two way in and out utilizing north (from 1960s) and south ( from 1937 or earlier) sections onto Georgetown Road. Site distance issues and safety are the reasons given for this. Craig does not own the south approach- it goes through another neighbor’s lands. It’s county ROW and the county is starting to maintain it again. Fox wants Listerman to send Craig’s a letter on this. Commissioners motioned to set Cambridge Road up this way for safety. Listerman asked Craigs why they had not asked the county for help in opening the south road- they said it would not have done any good then.

Randall Avenue appraisals (for highway offices and garage)were given out and Messmore and Listerman were given the OK to negotiate a price using the rules regarding appraisals. Two appraisals were received- Atlas and Thomas Appraisals. Total for 12 acres and the building were $1,060,000 – 1,085,000. Rack is the property owner. Fox and Thompson voted Aye to get an agreeable price. Hughes Nay- no reason given why. Listerman said there is $400K in Major Moves coming and $450K in 2008 hwy budget for capital improvements. (This still will not cover it all- unless it is spread out over a few years)

To get a complete list of the roads in these categories- contact the highway dept.
The county stressed that they are not giving up the ROW (right of way) just giving up the maintenance of these roads. People on these roads can upgrade them and bring them back in for acceptance per Fox. Listerman agreed.

The first batch was 26 roads that were accepted into inventory but do not exist. These are creek crossings and roads that didn’t get built or sections of roads that didn’t get built. Fox asked how roads were accepted if they did not exist. That means they could not have been tested either. There are 3 roads in HVL that were taken off this list (Cathy, Golfview, and Putter) because they need a letter from Mr Keller (the manager of HVL) to be sure they are HVL POA payers and not county roads. Commissioners approved removing the non-existent roads and sections.

The next batch is 30 roads and sections that we maintain but were not on the inventory lists. Commissioners approved these.

The third batch is 24 roads whose mileages do not match the inventory- so their mileages are corrected. Commissioners approved these.

The final batch are roads that were maintained but Listerman wants to remove them from maintenance. Many of these are roads that have issues- too narrow, inability to handle a car safely, etc. Some have no houses or just one. Mentioned out loud were Grady Anderson, Darling, Fly Run, Chapin, Carrie, Disbro, Lower Probst, and part of Happy Hollow. Commissioners refused to do anything with these until owners had been notified. Fox was concerned that out of town owners may have plans for the future for these lands.

[NOTE: It would seem that this would essentially land-lock some properties. Some of these roads run THRU one owner’s property to another’s. Some have water lines and public utilities along them- including fire hydrants. If some of these owners were issued permits by the county to build on these roads, it seems unfair to take that away now.]

Listerman updated Commissioners on progress with interlocal agreements with Aurora and L-bg on snow removal of some roads in both districts.

Safety shirts ordered at savings form INDOT supplier. CPR training to occur at $10 per person for all hwy workers.

Hughes asked Listerman about the NO PARKING signs in cul de sacs. Listerman explained that the county police can’t enforce the law without them. They need them for snow removal, buses etc. Hughes said he thought it was unnecessary gov’t spending. [NOTE: Kind of like unnecessary spending to have a police officer at every commissioner meeting?]

Listerman is also getting an ordinance together on speed limits for all county roads.

Claims and minutes were signed. Hughes voted NAY on the minutes he tried to shorten from early Sept. Bright EMS contract signed.

Messmore said the prepaid legal services were highlighted on Court TV in Sept and they are a good value as a protection against identity theft.

Messmore completed application and got supporting letters for Hometown Competitiveness Program presented last month.

Messmore said others in the building are trained to work with the new recording system now. And that it is fixed. (There was an echo still from the podium speaker throughout the entire meeting tonight)

Ewbank asked Thompson to get with him on the Vieste letter of recommendation. Thompson said he was busy this week- the secretary will contact him with a meeting time.

Hughes asked about the forced sewer hook-up letter.

Ewbank said there was a case pending with St. Leon and he’d talked to that attorney about it. He did not want to make a local law less restrictive than the state law. [NOTE: Restrictive from whose perspective? The Sewer Company or the citizen?]

Thompson said it hinged on the “MAY” in the state law. He had talked to people from the state and got no answer.

Ewbank said 300 ft from the property boundary could be excessive.

No conclusion on this issue.

Thompson asked about when they’d lift the No Burning Ban. Commissioners decided to keep it in effect as it’s still too dry to be safe. Local fire chiefs can be contacted for individual issues.

Meeting adjourned 9:10 PM

Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawrenceburg Township