Friday, July 30, 2010

DRAFT Agenda Aug 3 Commissioners Meeting

August 3, 2010
7:00 p.m.
Administration Building
215B West High Street, Lawrenceburg, Indiana



1. Tucker Development – Seldom Seen I, II & III/ Old Orchard (continued tabled)
2. Langley Heights – Ordinance to Vacate (tabled from 7/6)
3. Library and DCRSD appointments (tabled from 7/20)
4. Animal Control Fee (tabled from 7/20 – will be discussed during next day meeting)

1. Ed Opp – EMS & Fire Advisory Board
County Survey

2. OKI – Memorandum of Understanding signatures


VI. AUDITOR – Gayle Pennington


1. 2011 Holiday Schedule


X. COMMISSIONER – Tom Orschell

XI. COMMISSIONER – Ralph Thompson, Jr.




Tuesday, July 20, 2010

20 July 2010 Dearborn County Commissioners Meeting Notes

20 July 2010 Dearborn County Commissioners Meeting Notes

Present: Ralph Thompson, President, Tom Orschell, and Jeff Hughes
Also present: Gayle Pennington, Auditor, and Jack Gay, Attorney.

This meeting was preceded by an executive session on a personnel issue. Commissioners voted to take no action with Hughes voting Nay.


Sidwell Contract- Bill Ewbank reported that 3 months ago Margaret Minzner came and requested withholding the final $12,000 on this contract. He said we are still short some items requested- most significant are the county road ROWs. They had arbitrarily set 40 ft ROW. There will be a 4 week delay in ability to update as this is fixed. This is part of contract. Also some work for assessment use is needed on farmland assessment overlay, website for 1 year, and 3 days training. Total value is $16,000 and so we still are $4,000 over what we owe versus what has been paid. They are still withholding money.

RQAW- Brett Dodd- providing a repeat performance of the charette information for Council members who are present. (Cheek, Messmore, Morris, and Barrett.) Cheek wanted to be sure we address our needs but NOT do something to get under the referendum amount. Wants to keep it in the public eye. Thompson said the original was $40 million and we needed to get it down to something affordable. Cheek agreed and said that when we find out the cost, we need to sell it to the public. Then they vote. Barrett asked if the total amount would require referendum, but we paid part of it out of savings and the rest was under that limit do we go to referendum. Umbaugh and associates told the county per Thompson that it could go to referendum even if under the limit.

Dodd said that they need details of what is needed before we get price. It depends on materials used, etc. As in building a house or remodeling, you decide on granite or other materials. Barrett said it also depends on minimum security or maximum security or how many beds are needed etc. Lots of decisions regarding kitchen expansion, laundry, and dispatch moving or not, for example are still out. Dodd is suggesting they do the preliminary design phase to help get these costs nailed down.

The charette was the first step in setting the goals of the project. There were 18 people there representing the departments. Consensus was that the JAIL was the first priority. Hoosier Square made sense as it was available and it provided relief to the courthouse.
Barrett said this also has to be fluid so that if the state changes sentencing guidelines for judges, we won’t need as much jail space. Dodd agreed that alternative programs would require classroom space instead of jail space. GED programs also are being used to get detainees back to productive citizens.

Cheek said we need to get what we need- not what we want. When the taxpayers pay this sometimes gets forgotten. Dodd said that you have to go thru initial versus life-cycle costs to decide on the durability of materials.

Orschell asked if this next stage was to design and find the needs. Dodd said they were to do this and also provide some drawings to show design. Dodd passed out the proposal for preliminary design and costs. RQAW is deferring about half of the predesign for jail and Hoosier Square is pretty minimal in predesign fees. These predesign fees are offset by the next stage of development. Orschell asked about having citizens reviewing this – or on the committee. Dodd agreed. He referred a couple times to not doing any work on this and the ramifications being legal issues, as in getting sued about the jail space issues. Dodd wants to do a summary of the scope of work for Hoosier Square also. Orschell quoted the costs as: $102,000 for jail $12,000 for Hoosier Square, $ 45,000 billed monthly to county,$ 45,000 paid one year after completion. There are also reimbursables for travel, print etc. Part of this cost is also a public awareness program. Orschell asked about the list on page 6 #1-14. Typically printing $5,000, travel $500 for example. They can do a website with Powerpoint presentation for the public. You have to do this during an election year. That leaves 2011, 2012, and then 2014. Longer this goes on- more expense. Dodd noted that this is a low cost environment now. This can be a 14-28% reduction in costs per Dodd.

Hughes asked about appraisals on Hoosier Square. On in and one still out. He said not to put expense there until we are sure we have it. He also said we have to look at how much revenue we will have coming in. Hughes wanted to look at financials first before we do design. Dodd said this will be preliminary- not detailed design.
Dodd also told him with the state sentencing guidelines it will probably increase the number of inmates as the state will no longer be holding them. This would not be good news for the county.
Morris asked about the jail addition and if they are attached then does the existing facilty have to be brought up to current standards and codes. Dodd told them about fire suppression system codes etc. Morris persisted in other areas like 14 versus 12” spacing. Dodd went on about guidelines versus ordinance. He said they would not compromise anything that would get us in certification issues.

Cheek said the 2011 budget per the state would be the toughest since the great Depression.
Thompson said that Dodd had commented on adequate per diems for jail space rental. He said that our current per diems were not adequate. Thompson asked if the CAD drawings were the county’s property. The county needs a snapshot of where the county is. RQAW would have to alter contract agreement language to accommodate this. Thompson said square footage was OK but needed operation and use.

Carl Fryman- building Commissioner of Lawrenceburg. He asked if anyone had done a site analysis on this jail site. Site prep is first. He can help on that. The footer design that goes under this building is necessary first. It could cost more. He said they need to do soil tests etc. Dodd said- they had done soil borings on the original and it wasn’t good. They had to do additional caissons etc. This was done in the 80’s. Joe Mrak – project mgr on the original told Dodd that a couple pods might be able to have 4th floor on.


Bryan Messmore- Prosecutor’s Office- Ordinance approval for dishonored checks for merchants and citizens- based on Johnson County’s ordinance. REQUESTED TO BE TABLED per Messmore. TABLED

Animal Control fee Structure- TABLED.

HIGHWAY DEPT- Todd Listerman- actually went first on the agenda due to meeting with INDOT at 10 for the ITS signage on i-275. He gave a 15 minute report.

Working to get signage on US 50 also to get motorist info prior to getting on I-275 if accidents or road closures.

North Hogan and North Dearborn recently striped and chip seal/fogseal and ready to schedule pre-final inspections on stimulus project. Hughes said there had been complaints about tar on vehicles. Contractors are getting names and addressing those complaints per contract. He has a list of people who have called in so far.

Have old Cole Lane access to Laughery Creek completed.

Salt purchases this year are being prepared and getting better prices at about $60 per ton from the old price of nearly $100 per ton. Using the state bidding process is saving money.

Working with OKI on the sign reflectivity requirements to be in effect by 2013. Has to have a sign inventory to show how to do this. $39,000 (with 20% match) available to the county perhaps and he will see if this will help to place a layer in GIS system of this sign inventory. He is trying to have a staggered replacement pattern so as not to have a huge budget item in one year. This is similar to the system they use for equipment replacement. Estimate about 5,000 signs in the system.

Working on quotes for striping, maintenance trucks, and things for the new Randall Ave facility.

AUDITOR- Gayle Pennington- Claims and Minutes- paid the claims- including Witte’s final fee held from last meeting.

ATTORNEY- Jack Gay- nothing to report

COUNTY COORDINATOR- Bill Ewbank – Lawrenceburg Public Library District – Board appointment- 2 resumes received.

Opened bids for Courthouse roof- York $42,650 lowest bid out of 4 received.

Bill Black EMA- informed him that they were eligible for $6,000 grant to improve surveillance around the Courthouse via Homeland security. After review by the committee, they think they can do this within that budget. It is a federal grant project and has to reply by July 26 and complete by Sept 30. Commissioners approved to complete the application and signatures and to complete the project.

Ewbank yielded to Bill Shelton with a request on personnel. They need to fill the vacancy that exists for 2nd inspector after he was promoted. He will use the part time fund for this. Thompson said Kraus Sr. said this was funded already- so no problem for this. He has 15 applications already. Approved for him to review and hire.


Jeff Hughes- asked about 10% increase in budget and was told it was merely a placeholder per Ewbank.

Ralph Thompson- trying to make ACOs ( Animal Control Officers) into special deputies so as not to have to have sheriff’s deputies accompany them on citations. Lusby agreed. They had a special agreement drawn up that the ACO and sheriff signs. This will solve that problem.


Mike Hornbach- Extension Office. One of three educators resigned and he is looking to fill that position. Kraus Sr said it was appropriated and within the budget with no increases. Purdue pays for benefits on these per contract. He does not need commissioner’s approval. He will proceed with hiring.

Meeting adjourned at 10:40 AM

Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawrenceburg Township

Wednesday, July 14, 2010

DRAFT Agenda July 20th Commissioners Meeting

July 20, 2010
9:00 a.m.
City of Lawrenceburg
Administration Building
230 Walnut Street, Lawrenceburg, Indiana

EXECUTIVE SESSION 8:30 / Personnel Issue



1. Sidwell Contract
2. RQAW – Brett Dodd

1. Bryan Messmore – Pros. Ofc
Ordinance approval for dishonored checks for merchants/citizens

2. Animal Control fee structure


VI. AUDITOR – Gayle Pennington


1. Lawrenceburg Public Library District – Board appointment


X. COMMISSIONER – Tom Orschell

XI. COMMISSIONER – Ralph Thompson, Jr.




Thursday, July 08, 2010


From: Fischvogt, Brandi []

Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2010 12:21 PM

To: Todd Listerman

Cc: Flores, Steven; Eaton, Kathy

Subject: RE: Collier Ridge Bridge


The $1,000,000 which was awarded to Bridge 55 on Collier Ridge is only

transferable to another bridge project IF the bridge is already an existing

federal aid project. These funds which were specifically awarded to Bridge

55 are NOT eligible to be transferred to any given bridge project Dearborn

County chooses. Being that this is the only bridge project Dearborn County

is sponsoring at this time; those funds will be forfeited back to INDOT's

Bridge Program should Dearborn County no longer wish to continue with the

replacement of Bridge 55. Also, any federal funding spent to date on the

project would have to be repaid to INDOT if the project is eliminated.

Please contact me at the number below if you have further questions.

Brandi M. Fischvogt

Local Programs Coordinator

INDOT- Seymour District


Wednesday, July 07, 2010

PROPOSED Ordinance to Adopt Dearborn County Policies and Procedures

Below is the PROPOSED ordinance for grant applications and approvals in Dearborn County. This will be discussed at a future meeting of the commissioners.


ORDINANCE NO. ____ OF 2010

Ordinance to Adopt Dearborn County Policies and Procedures
for Grant Application and Approval by Any County Office, Agency or Department

An Ordinance regarding the establishment and adoption of policies and procedures that will apply to any office, agency, or department that seeks to have Dearborn County Government as the contracting agent and business agent recipient for any grant application that seeks to fund personnel position(s).

WHEREAS, Dearborn County, Indiana is an Equal Opportunity Employer; and
WHEREAS, it is the intent of Dearborn County, Indiana to comply with applicable federal and State of Indiana employment laws and regulations; and
WHEREAS, from time-to-time elected officials, department heads, and other agency personnel seek and obtain federal, State of Indiana, and charitable grants to provide services, programs, and personnel; and
WHEREAS, the Dearborn County Board of Commissioners has determined a need to establish uniform application and approval policies and procedures for all grant applications;
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED that any grant funded position or contract involving personnel compensation, personnel benefits, or other personnel expenses shall follow the attached grant approval and administration policies and procedures.
Effective Date: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage and promulgation as evidenced by the affirmative signatures of the undersigned as the majority of the duly elected and serving members of the Board.
Passed by the Board of Commissioners of Dearborn County, Indiana, on this _____ day of ____________, 2010.
Ralph Thompson, President

_______________________________ ATTEST
Jeff Hughes
Tom Orschell


The following general information shall be addressed by the grant applicant and reviewed by the Board of Commissioners and the County Council when an applicant seeks the award of a federal, State of Indiana, or charitable grant:

1) Statement of grant terms and conditions
a) Personnel requirements
i) Space
ii) Tools
iii) Salary
iv) Benefits
v) Training
vi) Travel

b) Time Period
i) Start date of paid position
ii) End date of paid position

c) Obligations
i) Does the amount of the grant award require matching funds?
ii) What conditions does the grant require? How do those conditions impact the county in the form of performance and/or compliance requirements?

2) What are the needs of county government that this grant award will meet?

3) Who will administer the grant and will an administration fee be charged or collected?


1) All offices, departments, or agencies shall complete a Request to Apply for Grant prior to submitting a grant application to a granting authority or source

2) All offices, departments, or agencies shall notify the Board of Commissioners, County Council, and County Auditor that a grant is being considered with as much advance notice as possible.

3) All potential personnel expenses, both direct and indirect, shall be estimated.

4) A proposed job description for the personnel position(s) to be funded by the grant award shall be submitted.

5) The proposed personnel position shall be classified within the County’s personnel classification system.

6) County Council approval of the proposed grant-funded compensation shall be obtained prior to submission of the grant application to the granting authority or source.


1) If the grant is awarded to the applicant, the grant document and contract shall be delivered immediately to the County Auditor. The Auditor shall review the grant using the attached financial impact checklist.

2) Before a contract is executed by the Board of Commissioners, the County Attorney, County Auditor, Board of Commissioners, and County Council shall review the grant requirements and evaluate the liability exposure of the County.

3) The office, department, or agency applying for the grant shall be notified in a timely manner whether the Board of Commissioners will execute the grant contract. The action of the Board of Commissioners must occur at a public meeting.

4) The County Auditor shall maintain a comprehensive list of approved and rejected grant contracts.


Personnel compensated through a grant award may be full or part-time. Their employment or work obligation is conditioned on grant funding. In the event that grant funds are not available to subsidize the compensation for the position, then the position shall be extinguished and the personnel assigned to that position shall be terminated, unless otherwise stipulated by the grant and authorized by the County Council.


Date: ____________________

Office, Department, or Agency: ___________________________________________________

Name and Position of Person
Seeking Request to Apply: _______________________________________________________

Contact Information: _________________________________________________________
(address, phone, e-mail) _________________________________________________________

Grant Due Date: _______________________________________________________________

Grant Name and Funding Entity: __________________________________________________

Grant Summary: ________________________________________________________________

Classification of Personnel Funded by Grant
within County Personnel Salary Grid: ______________________________________________

Request Received by Auditor On: ____________ By: ____________

Copied to Board of Commissioners: On: ____________ Via: ____________

Copied to County Council: On: ____________ Via: ____________

Authorized by County Council to
Proceed with Grant Application: On: ____________ By: ____________


Amount Paid Amount Paid
Description by Grant by County

PERF (If full time, wage x 6.5%)
Social Security (wage x 6.2%)
Medicare (wage x 1.45%)
Who will cover unemployment expense?
Who will cover worker’s compensation

Employer’s share of insurance coverage
Supplemental pay
Insurance expense over excess loss
(self-funded plans)

Training expenses
Personal computer, software licenses,
internet, and e-mail


Vehicle and fuel costs
Office space
Tools of the trade/position
Travel expenses
Does the grant require matching funds? No _____ Yes _____
Grant start date: _______________ Grant end date: _______________
Can a grant administration fee be charged
or collected? No _____ Yes _____ How much? __________________

Is this a new grant application _____ or a renewal of prior grant _____ (check appropriate line)

6 July 2010 Dearborn County Commissioners Meeting Notes

6 July 2010 Dearborn County Commissioners Meeting Notes

Present: Ralph Thompson, President, Tom Orschell, and Jeff Hughes
Also present: Gayle Pennington, Auditor, and Jack Gay, Attorney.

[NOTE: This meeting took 3.33 hours. The room was full. Both Commissioner candidates were present for the entire meeting- Shane McHenry, Republican, and Jim Schuler, Democrat.]


Langley Heights Proposed Vacation of public street right of way. Thompson advised the audience that there were errors in the naming of the roads on the maps that were posted. Platted at times when road grades and widths were not the same as our current standards. No sewers and the lot sizes are too small for septic tanks. Semantle open to get to water tower. Gibson and Chambers kept open. Aurora owns portions of the area. No access to any property is being taken away by this vacation per Jack Gay. He also did not think this would affect development in that area.


Larry Eaton from Versailles- attorney for Mr. Kern ( sp?)- asked the commissioners to not vacate the sections near his land. He is in the process of a development plan and wants this deferred until that is complete. They may need some of this by ROW that is in existence now. Aurora may be involved in the development. They see no immediate need to vacate this. Kern needs 3 years for the economy to improve. He had Archie Crouch of Land Consultants. This could interfere with economic development. That is a legal reason for remonstrance.

Archie Crouch- Kern purchased these lots with development in mind. ROWs can be added to in order to meet county standards. Thompson asked why they couldn’t just build ROW from scratch.

Johnny Wright- has been told he could use ROW and then later couldn’t. Aurora says they were never platted from city of Aurora. Aurora says they have no trouble getting to their water tower. Documentation shows that when Langley Heights was developed they were not used- they left after 10 months and gave up- they were roads even prior to that. He still has the right to use those ROWs. York, Semantle, and Stedman were the 3 he was concerned with. He has been to court on this and he has ditched the roads there and maintained them on his land and those affecting his land. Orschell asked him for clarification on the accesses he was talking about.

Mr. Moore- would as soon leave it like it was. He would like to keep Sutton and York down to his property. He said the developer is using influence with the county for personal gain. He wants to develop before he gets a road. I think he’d want to have a road before he thought about developing. He’s in favor of keeping it as is. The ROW when vacated it is split between the adjoining property owners. Survey issues are in litigation.


Listerman – Highway director
-told commissioners exactly what the county was maintaining up there in Langley Heights.

Jack Gay- attorney- In 1951- commissioners attempted to vacate part of this and it was never completed. Wright still has access to the other end of his property. He disputed Wright being able to access thru the road that would be vacated. Moore may have some issues. Currently he does not see any PLAN for development up there. He thinks it is in the best interest of the county to clean this up and it will help further development that way.

Thompson said he had talked to Mayor Hastings. They have requested the county table this to allow them time to coordinate with this process.

Commissioners decided to table this for one month.

Tucker Development- Jeff Tucker-
Addressed issue in Old Orchard Section 2. Attended Tech review on June 21st. Engineer conferred with Mike Hall on drainage issues . As soon as Tech review approves, they will fix- hopefully by Sept 21st. He will advise commissioners if any delay. Tucker is in process of renewing his bond. Have to have this by first meeting in August. Tabled till then.

Seldom Seen – a proposal was submitted in writing to county officials in 2008 per Tucker. Tucker controls significant amount of ROW for the Stateline project and will donate to the county on that. Orschell doesn’t see how we can switch these two projects as we don’t know what any of this is worth. Orschell has the meeting notes with Bryan Messmore and Listerman and Tucker. He read them for the commissioners- nothing was decided at that 2008 meeting really.

Orschell wants 8’ + 3” gravel and base plus 1” topcoat in 1997. Releasing the roads to a maintenance bond does not obligate the county to accept the road. Listerman said the maintenance bonds were done before they even paved the road! Seldom Seen 1,2,3 and Laurel Valley are all still out. All roads in question were cored by Listerman to see what depth they really were. When base was inadequate Listerman recommended increased asphalt layers- like 1.5 “. A small stretch of Campground Road has a grade separation area. All other developers have done the improvements as requested, except these sections of Tucker’s subdivisions. Tucker wants to do something about 2/3 of the cost that Listerman proposed. Tucker said it would have been cheaper and easier if they’d done it when Larry Smith was there during gravel set up originally. He was not happy with proposal.

Tabled Seldom Seen to review more.

Ordinance of Grant Applications- Witte wrote this and Gay brought it up. Grants need to include all costs- not just salaries of that position. Benefits, vacation etc per Gay. Ewbank said it was to have commissioners and council approve all grants that hired employees. There is supposed to state that there is no guarantee of continued employment after grant runs out. Hughes would like other dept. heads to review this. Ewbank said that favorable response from some heads that have seen it. Council needs to review it.
Tabled for Council to review.

[NOTE: A copy of this ordinance will follow on the blog.]

Resolution to assign ROW – Cole Lane to Public Launch Ramp- If they (DNR) cease to use and maintain it- the ROW reverts to Dearborn County. Thompson read the resolution into the minutes and commissioners approved it.


OKI Annual Agreement- $16,666.00 approved by commissioners.

EMA- Bill Black- Grant signatures
- for subgrant agreement $31,285.00 for Homeland security training. Commissioners signed this grant for the entire district.

In addition Black sent them a copy of Mobile command vehicle response guidelines. It will be under EMA control. If another county needs this it goes through Black’s office. Insurance is provided by EACH county that applies to use it. County commissioners needed to be advised about this- they are OK with it. The EMA Directors sign off on this- NOT commissioners.

Per Black last year- district administrator salary of $32,000. It ended June 30. It can be extended 12 months. Grant is signed for $50,000. The district heads are OK with it. Tracy Lightfield is staying on. Commissioners need to sign off on this agreement for her employment. Approved. 12 counties are in this district.

Cameras around the courthouse- Black can get about $6,000 for this project. The letter will arrive shortly regarding this and it requires a quick turnaround. It’s 2007 money- have to accept and spend it by September. If it arrives in the next couple weeks they need to sign it right away. Discussion stopped as Gay and Ewbank advised that security issues should not be publicly discussed. Commissioners will call executive session and special meeting when the letter arrives.

Road Blocks for fundraisers- Hughes talked to one of the trustees. Trouble with finding a way to permit or deny it. Safety of participants, impeding roadway, and liability of county granting permission- were all issues per Thompson. Gay agreed these are the basic problem areas. You can’t assign it to the trustees. Orschell said Harrison doesn’t allow it, INDOT doesn’t allow it. Who is going to police it? They turn a blind eye of firemen collecting at times. No action taken- leave it as a dead issue per Gay. Currently it would be under control of the sheriff’s dept. They can enforce them impeding the roadway. No liability if we don’t approve it. Orschell said- we’ve had a lot of complaints about it. Commissioners voted to send letter to sheriff to recommend that the practice of road blocks to fund raise not be allowed. Ewbank to write the letter.

Lisa Taylor- Villages of Sugar Ridge- speaking on behalf of the residents. Appreciated acceptance of Augusta and Oakmont for maintenance. They went to Council to request funding. They were told that Commissioners had to request that. It was suggested that they might be able to put money aside annually until they amassed enough to pave it. The road continues to deteriorate. They are concerned that it will cost more to repair and refinish it. More divots, sewer lids were elevated. Listerman said they haven’t patched any secondary roads yet. Plan to get there by end of summer. He detailed funding issues on roads again. Gas taxes and license plate fees pay for roads. Be sure to buy your license and gas in Indiana. Taylor said they are concerned about being fiscally responsible- and that it will cost MORE if it deteriorates MORE. Thompson said he talked to Plan Commission about this and that the home owners paid into the road but there are also undeveloped lots. Perhaps the lots could be assessed another fee for their share of the road. HOA could maybe have a road fee. Only the condos and landominiums have HOAs. They rest do not want an HOA. Commissioners made no decision – and noted that no topcoat should go on until more homes were built out there. Maintenance continues. They will return in a couple months for an update.

HIGHWAY DEPT- Todd Listerman- gave a 1-hour report. (To be fair, a large part of his time was taken by Collier Ridge residents.)

Shortridge Road bridge #31- plans were on the shelf. ROW is still being sought on other side of the road. Section 401 Water Quality permit signed by commissioners for this process to continue.

At the end of June Listerman and Ewbank met with INDOT regarding replacement of bridge 55 Collier Ridge Bridge. The agreement to follow all the laws etc for the $1 million grant was to be signed by commissioners.

Bill Ewbank- reported that they’d had a conference call withJames Barker- the bridge engineer that resident brought up. Repairs would allow a TEMPORARY patch on the bridge. He agreed that the old alignment is poor. The repairs would require 6-8 tons or less. Cost would be $50,000 perhaps, but he could not commit to that cost as he hadn’t seen the bridge. Ewbank and Listerman concluded repairs would not be cost effective or safe. They regret the hardship for residents, but recommend the PERMANENT plans that the county has sought. Three independent engineers looked at the bridge and recommend the replacement set for 2013. Barth, Hrezo, and American Structurepoint all looked at it pro-bono. They recommend replacement. Hughes wants to know what it will cost for temporary patch. Listerman will see about getting another pro- bono estimate of a patch on it.

Gary Collins on Collier Ridge- said his letter from Barker said it would be for 20 tons and complete rehab. One bus costs $25K more to use Kaiser to get to them for a year. He said that Barker said $600,000 maybe as low as $300,000 to rehab. Bells Branch is good now- you can run a tank over that. Using grate instead of asphalt lightens the load on bridge. Argument about pro bono versus $2500 fee for Barker.
Bell’s Branch was $793,000 per Listerman. Collins went over again how the residents want to keep it as is.

Cathy Albert – Collier Ridge- called INDOT Steve Flores-and he told her that none of this was a done deal. He told her that the county can change their mind if they don’t want to do the project. This only affects future funding IF it is a pattern of changing their mind. She stressed that INDOT seemed to be flexible on funding and even changing projects if necessary, as in when another bridge fails that is higher priority. Gary and I have worked on this passionately for several meetings. We are requesting what the residents want. It is OUR money. Give this a chance. We have seen $2000 given out for many things. Even if you don’t want to use Barker, that’s OK- we’re not related to him. You got a totally different assessment from Barker than we did. We don’t want a temporary bridge. That would be blowing money that we don’t have. Flores also told her it would take 3-4 years to get it started.

North Dearborn took 3 times to get their funding. This one we got right away. Listerman can proceed with this and also get some probono estimates by someone without any stake in it. Thompson said that they will have to reclassify the road and go back for the 2nd part of their funding. ALL engineers are looking for work in this economy, he said.

Commissioners directed Listerman to get a couple more PRO BONO engineer estimates and proceed with signing the coordination contract tonight for DES #10052 for Collier Ridge Bridge. Council will address the matching funding for this at their August budget hearings.

Met with ODOT rep on the Artemis system for cameras etc on I-275. They are also looking at message info signs on US 50 also- regarding closures on I-275. There are not enough funds to put one on SR 1 as well. Some talk to redo SR 1 between Nowlin and US 50 someday.

North Dearborn and North Hogan allowed to do chip seal and fog seal . Some residents here to ask them about it- tar coming off on their cars. They will discuss with Listerman after the meeting.

AUDITOR- Gayle Pennington. Minutes approved June 1.
June 15th tabled until Public comment section was typed verbatim at Hughes request. [NOTE: This is the section where I (Chris Mueller) asked about public records I’d requested on SCU and Hughes followed up with questions to me about my swimming pool fencing. I requested and obtained the video record of that meeting from Lawrenceburg Clerk Treasurer. They video tape the morning commissioner meetings in their chambers.]

Claims approved except for Witte’s claim for $4683.20 pending Orshell’s research on how much of that was related to the Hatch Act, as the commissioners had not authorized that work. Hughes did not want to pay for any Hatch Act research by Witte.

ATTORNEY- Jack Gay- gave his fee and services agreement to commissioners using the same agreement they had with Witte. Commissioners signed.

COUNTY COORDINATOR- Bill Ewbank- surplus auction will be on Sept 18th at Water Rescue Bldg. Other agencies have till Aug 1 to get things there.

Ewbank introduced Tracy Agner and Beth Blair – Juvenile services asked to replace a part time person to replace a retiree’s vacancy. Kraus Sr. said it was OK if Commissioners will be OK. Commissioners approved.

Orschell-Tom Cottingham- trustee in West Harrison wanted a longer lease on AMVETS bldg. Gay to research. Still nothing on DCRSD replacement? Nothing done to fill spot yet- no applicants.


Gerald Reilly sp?- Collier Ridge resident at bottom of the hill. If the bridge closes- in the winter no way to get emergency vehicles in. Would appreciate anything you can do.

Howard Luke -West Laughery Creek Road- my son in law Ken Griffin has requested a meeting with commissioners. Apparently he had asked Hughes and he told Ewbank. There is a time limit on the time for an appeal on his termination in March. There is a Worker’s Comp issue also. This all transpired at least 2 months after termination. Who paid damage to water hydrant on county property. It was covered up with snow.
Ewbank said he was reluctant to discuss personnel issues without an executive session. Gay said – the employee is the only one that they should discuss that with. The workers comp claim does not prevent an executive session from being held. Griffin can request an executive session on his termination, per commissioners.

Chris Mueller- asked about the DRAFT Public records Ordinance that Attorney Jack Gay had drawn up for commissioners that was headlined in the local paper last week. Commissioners took it off the agenda last week after questions arose. They said THEY had not seen it before the paper had a copy. I was assured after asking twice, that the ordinance would not be back on the agenda unless the paper was notified in advance so that the PUBLIC would know it was being considered.
In answer to the question regarding the records I have been requesting, I told them that there had been problems getting the Special Crimes Unit checking account records (Oct 2008-June2009) from the auditor as they do not have them, and the prosecutor who also did not have them last Thursday when he said I could pick them and other records up. Negangard emailed me Tues afternoon ( July6) saying they had been requested from UCB and would be available any time Wednesday for pick up. I added that hopefully that would complete it. [NOTE: Hopefully- because this is the 4th time I will be going down to pick up that set of records since June 7 when I made my initial requests.]

Meeting adjourned at 10:20 PM

Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawrenceburg Township

Thursday, July 01, 2010

Hoosier State Press Ass'n General Counsel Pans Ordinance Limiting Access to Some Public Records

READ READ READ -The Dearborn County Register FRONT PAGE article - and also editorial page column by Denise Freitag Burdette regarding limiting access to public records that are considered "gray areas" in the state law on Access to Public Records. Commissioners took it off the July 6th agenda after questioned about it.

The actual draft ordinance can be found at the Register's website or by clicking below: