Dearborn County IN - Public Forum

ALAN MILLER OFFICIALLY ANNOUNCES CANDIDACY FOR JUDGE OF SUPERIOR COURT 2

2012-01-31T07:26:00.002-05:00

ALAN MILLER OFFICIALLY ANNOUNCES CANDIDACY FOR JUDGE OF SUPERIOR COURT 2

A local attorney has made his candidacy for judge official. Alan Miller, attorney with Zerbe Garner Miller & Blondell in Lawrenceburg, filed the necessary paperwork Monday to make his candidacy for Judge of the Dearborn Superior Court No. 2 official.

"I am looking forward to meeting with the public and speaking with them about the problems with our system," Miller said. "I'm excited to discuss my proposed solutions and show them that we can do better."

Miller is currently running unopposed in the May primary for the Democratic Party nomination.
Miller publicly announced his intentions to run last September. He has been an outspoken critic of the county's proposed jail expansion project, arguing that the solution to the jail's overcrowding problem lies with changing the system itself.

Musician and Event Producer, Johnny Schott, Dies

2012-01-27T08:42:00.004-05:00

Local event producer and musician, Johnny Schott, passed away suddenly. Johnny was actively interested in Dearborn County issues. He will be missed.

http://downtown-mtauburn.fox19.com/news/arts-culture/85388-musician-and-event-producer-johnny-schott-dies#.TyKnV5A7huU.email

John SCHOTT(1946 - 2012)
SCHOTT

John A. Schott, 65 , of Harrogate, TN. (originally of Cincinnati, OH.) passed away suddenly at home on Wednesday, January 25th. Johnny was a talented singer, songwriter and event producer with a career in the music industry that spanned 46 years. He was an avid outdoorsman, a brilliant gardener and a devoted husband of ten years to his wife Rachel (Sams) Schott. Johnny was born on March 21, 1946 and was preceded in death by his father John S. Schott and mother Maey (Bonnick) Schott. As the eldest of six his loss will be felt deeply by David and Libbie Schott of Tazewell, TN., Stephen and Lori Schott of Cincinnati, Michele Schott and Joe Morris of Boyd, TX., Chris Schott, and Terry and Peter Konrad of Colorado. Johnny's life will be celebrated at Vitt, Stermer and Anderson Funeral Home located at 4619 Delhi Pike, Cincinnati OH 45238 on Saturday, February 4, 2012 from 1 - 4 PM. www.andersonfuneralhomes.com

Glennda Dennerline- former Democrat Party Chair Obituary

2012-01-25T09:58:00.001-05:00

Glennda Dennerline
6/4/1951 - 1/20/2012
Glennda G. Dennerline, age 60, of Aurora, passed away Friday, January 20, 2012 at Christ Hospital following a long illness. She was born June 4, 1951 in Indianapolis to Gilbert Timmons and Marie Mahan Timmons. Glennda graduated from George Washington High School in 1969. She joined the US Air Force where she attained the rank of a TecSgt, with her last assignment a Wright-Patterson Air Force Base before retiring in 1985. While serving in the Air Force she met Rodney Dennerline, and they were married on May 19, 1979. Following her retirement from the Air Force, Glennda became active in politics, serving as Democratic Party Chairwoman of Dearborn County from 1989 until 1997. Glennda was employed by the State of Indiana as the Manager of the Bureau of Motor Vehicles. in Lawrenceburg. She and Rodney were members of the American and enjoyed socializing at the Lawrenceburg Post. She enjoyed making jewelry, gardening and flying with her husband. She was especially devoted to her family, and loved spending time with her children and grandchildren. Surviving are her husband, Rodney Dennerline; 2 sons, Richard (Ann) Dennerline and Rhett (Debbie) Dennerline, 2 daughters, Nancy Gagnon, and Tonya Freeman, 3 brothers, Ronald, Walter, and Jim Timmons; 1 sister, Joyce Roach; 6 grandchildren; Meredith, John, Jenny, Jake, Owen, and Jack. A private memorial service for Glennda will be held at a later date. For a more lasting tribute, the family asks that you consider the American Lung Association as a memorial in lieu of flowers. You may donate to them at lungusa.org. Arrangements have been entrusted to Filter-DeVries Funeral Home in Dillsboro.

24 January 2012 Dearborn County Council Meeting Notes

2012-01-24T21:14:00.002-05:00

24 January 2012 Dearborn County Council Meeting Notes

Present: Dennis Kraus. Sr., President, Dan Lansing, Jim Hughes, Liz Morris, Maynard Barrett, Bryan Messmore, and Bill Ullrich.

Also present: Gayle Pennington, Auditor
ABSENT: Bill Ewbank, County Coordinator

Dennis Kraus was re-elected as President and Maynard Barrett as Vice president.

Council members made appointments:

Maynard Barrett- Redevelopment and CVTB
Kraus – as SEIRPC
Juvenile Advisory Board- Liz Morris
Plan Commission – Dan Lansing
Solid Waste Board- Jim Hughes
PTABOA- Shawna Gentry and Mary Booker
Alcoholic Beverage Board- Ray Shaffer
Personnel Adv- Maynard Barrett
Kraus, Hughes, Barrett – Classification Committee?

DC Regional Sewer District- Baudendistel talked to Frank Kramer- the DCRSD has always retained their money from sewer fees. He asked Council’s advice. Pennington said the DCRSD sec’y writes checks from that- Auditor does not handle it. They think no action needs to be taken.

RuthAnn Batta presented her pitch for the summer art program. They will try to do a college visit to Earlham College in Richmond this summer- they do one each summer. They will look at limestone quarries around Bedford. They are partnering with P&G to do surveys and raise money. There were 129 kids last year. This year looks like it will be a heavy year as it’s their 25th year and they are doing special stuff. As she does 4 different classes- they usually give $2,000. Approved.

Sheriff Kreinhop- funds needed to promote deputy to sergeant- $1493 from County General/Riverboat- Kraus said they were going to treat all hires and departments the same so he has to re classify this and come back.

REQUESTS FROM RIVERBOAT REVENUE

Sheriff- Security Automation Systems- retrofit- $292,000- Kreinhop thought this had already been approved from last month. They had discussed but not approved per Pennington because it had not been advertised. Ullrich chimed in about the difficulties with the system and repairs. Kreinhop said this was the original 20 year old system. Ullrich said this was to be part of the remodel of the existing jail after the new jail expansion was completed. This forced it to be done first. Approved for $292,000.

The sheriff asked about the canine deputy and Pennington said they had to advertise for next meeting.

Health Dept- vehicle to transport 2 emergency trailers- $35,000- tabled at Doug Baer’s request.

Health Dept- Vaccines- $12,000- Approved. This was taken out at budget- there was $100 left from before.

EMA- Emergency alert system by Rapid Notify- $7425- Bill Black said they’d been looking at reverse 911 system for some time. They were hoping on some funding. This system does not have all the bells and whistles- though it will use the data from 911 and we can notify all residents in a particular area. $7425 for first year includes setup and some training. If you don’t have a landline- you can register your cellphone to get notified. Comcast no longer has the ability to help notify as of July 2011. The second year is $6500. There is email capability also. This will be up and running quickly within a couple weeks. The rates go by population. This would help with severe weather warnings too. Morris noted that in her area it’s hard to hear the sirens – this would be helpful to supplement the siren warnings. It won’t replace the sirens. Council approved. This is annually renewable. They want it to be for just a year to start out.

Surveyor- Upgrade GPS- $2800- Dennis Kraus Jr. – These are necessary due to narrowband regulations. Council approved.

Commissioners- 2012 workers Comp Premium permission to transfer funds for insurance premiums- $1130- tabled.

JAIL FUNDING- Barrett said they couldn’t talk about funding without numbers.
Orschell said Commissioners appointed Bill Ewbank to do a Justice evaluation over at the Courthouse. He doesn’t think this will affect this project.
Kraus said there were various options that could affect the cost of the jail. Messmore agreed that it would be a good idea to look at this.
Barrett said he was shocked to see this on the agenda. He said a local contractor asked him how they could approve this if they don’t know the bids to see that they can get it for what they want. He doesn’t have the stomach for anything as high as $10million. We need to hire a project manager. "I want to table this until we have some firm numbers."
Orschell said the commissioners do not have any money to hire any construction managers.
Per RQAW - Standard is about 4-6% over the project cost for the construction manager. Architects are 6-8%.
Joe Mrak- RQAW- we are talking about chicken or egg. The study you have from Oct 12 – 2011- from RQAW- we gave you the construction cost range up to $9.4million. 5 phases. First phase is schematic drawings for $70-80,000. Construction earns 20% up front and 80% during process. 10% of fee would be spent now to get this started for construction management. RQAW’s fee is a lump sum fee. They get 15% in phase 1. Can’t go to Phase 2 until phase 1 is approved. RQAW is the architect. Commissioners seek RFQs to get one and then negotiate the fees.
Orschell said if you appropriate the money for a construction manager, then commissioners will get selection process started for a construction manager. Orschell said to budget $75,000 for architect and $50,000 for construction manager for this phase.
Lansing said they need a real number. The commissioners will bring it back at next meeting and advertise it. Tabled until then.

Gayle Pennington- Auditor- presented sheets for certification for Dennis Kraus’s appointment for SIRPC.

The next meeting will be Feb 21st at 6:30 PM. Third Tuesday of the month at 6:30 PM the following meeting planned is May 22nd. Budget meetings will be set at the next meeting so council members can plan vacations. Nov 20th is the last planned meeting for 2012. Council adds other meetings as needed.

Bookkeeping appropriation for Judge Humphrey from adult probation user fees ($3000 from there) to supplement salaries. This is to be retroactive to Jan 1 so they don’t have to amend salary ordinance. Approved.

Barrett and Morris asked if Pennington had sent the letters discussed at a previous meeting regarding 911 taxes. Pennington said yes.

Lewis Kappes funding for lobbyist- is to be reimbursed by local cities and towns. They reimburse based on population except for Lawrenceburg- they pay $24,000 as does the county. The county pays it all up front
.
Minutes were not received by Council- so they were not approved. Tabled.

They installed a new sound system. They will upload both the sound of the minutes and the minutes themselves to the county website. [NOTE: Now that will be interesting to listen to!]

Meeting adjourned at 7:35 PM

Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawenceburg Township

AGENDA for Jan 24th Dearborn County Council Meeting

2012-01-18T11:35:00.001-05:00

AGENDA
DEARBORN COUNTY COUNCIL MEETING
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
6:30 p.m., Commissioners Room
County Administration Building
215 B West High Street, Lawrenceburg, Indiana

I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

II. CALL TO ORDER

III. REORGANIZATION

IV. DCRSD Ordinance

V. DISCUSSION OF Summer Art Program - Batta

VI. SHERIFF – Mike Kreinhop
Road Sergeant
Security Automation Systems – Security System Retrofit

VII. HEALTH DEPARTMENT – Doug Baer

VIII. COMMISSIONERS – William Ewbank

IX. EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY – William Black, Jr.

X. SURVEYOR – Dennis Kraus, Jr.

XI. HEALTH DEPARTMENT – Lois Franklin

XII. JAIL FUNDING

XIII. AUDITOR – Gayle Pennington

XIV. ADJOURN

17 January 2012 Dearborn County Commissioners Meeting Notes

2012-01-17T13:02:00.002-05:00

17 January 2012 Dearborn County Commissioners Meeting Notes

Present: Jeff Hughes, President, Tom Orschell, and Shane McHenry
Also present: Gayle Pennington, Auditor, Bill Ewbank, Acting County Administrator, and Andy Baudendistel, Attorney.

OLD BUSINESS:

Private Real property Rights Preservation Ordinance Freedom for Options Form- Hughes said he has done a lot of research on this and he wants time to do some more. Tabled again. This has been tabled since April 2010.

Overtime Policy and Actual Hours worked Ordinance- Baudendistel prepared the ordinance changing the personnel policy section 3.17.1 per last meeting’s discussion. It was motioned on and seconded without Shane McHenry and he did not vote. No reason given. Approved.

Appointments BZA and County Farm Board- Orschell still wants to talk to Earl Dawson before appointing County Farm- Tabled.

BZA appointment- Hughes wanted Frank Linkmeyer and Orschell wanted to consider Phil Darling. The decision is left up to McHenry. He has talked to Phil, but not Frank and wants to table till he does. Tabled.

NEW BUSINESS:

Mark McCormack- Planning Director- Proposed Amendments to Article 2 Section 200, Article 3 section 300,325,330,355, and Article 25 Section 2570 of Zoning Ordinance- McCormack was out for a family issue. Baudendistel asked to table it and said that he doesn’t think the 90 day rule applies to this. He thinks the recommendation dies if they don’t act on it. Tabled.Proposed Amendments to Article 3 Section 305R and Appendix A of the Subdivision Control Ordinance- also tabled for reason above.

Donna Thacker- CASA-Citizens Against Substance Abuse- this is a yearly report on their budget and grants. Current budget is $66,660. This is used for grants to agencies in the county that help attain the CASA mission. They also have a Drug Free CommunityGrant form Lawrenceburg Foundation for $100,000 per year. They deal directly with the state now and not the consultant they use to have. They have had their funds gradually decrease. They finished their 5-year federal grant. The city of Lawrenceburg grant will still support them. Continue to work with youth- seem to have a perfect formula. They train 25 youth form each middle school as youth ambassadors. They took McHenry with them to the NW Alcohol conference in 2011. Orschell asked if their budget cuts will affect their community outreach. She said yes- as they will give less to local agencies. She noted that drug usage has decreased among youth here. They realize there is a need for treatment in the area. She said South Dearborn does not participate in their survey. Some schools are afraid that it may show a drug problem that will affect their school system negatively. Orschell expressed a desire to help CASA also. Hughes said South Dearborn was his alma mater- so he might try to get them to do the survey. CASA grant recommendations were accepted.

Sheriff Dept- Food Bids-Accepted as presented. Two bids.

Laura Priebe- Hoosier Hills Literacy League- permission to go to Council- as part of Black White Read- they will have a summer program on a Quilt Program that will relate to this. They will each make a quilt wall hanging themselves and a duplicate for a larger quilt that will be auctioned/raffled to raise funds at a gala this year. They also do the Dolly Partin Imagination Library. They have grants from Dollar General and they graduated 11 GED students this past year. Orschell said he was all in favor of reading programs in the county. She needs to go to Council for $2,000. This program raises money for other programs- even adult ones. Dearborn has 9 % of adults who are illiterate. Hughes said he thought the schools were doing a pretty good job already. McHenry and Orschell voted to do this Hughes didn’t vote. Approved to go to Council.

Appointments: Historic Hoosier Hills- Brad Dawson was recommended for this and he is a staff member of the Conservation Dept. They coordinate activities around conservation, natural resources, etc in SE Indiana. Approved.

Hospital Board- Robert Schroeder the chairman’s term is expiring on March 30th. Reappointed for a 4 year term.

Commissioner Hughes talked to a gentleman who was a judge executive from Boone County also on OKI with Hughes and who was on the board of St. Elizabeth. Hughes said we want to talk to the two board presidents. (St. E and DCH) Hughes wants to make sure that they are not approached by any means to be taken over. He wants to make sure that we have every possible procedure available to DC residents. He wants to bring it right out into the open. His mother in law works as a therapist there and she wants to know what’s going on too. Need to talk to Mr. Resnick first. Hughes just wanted to make commissioners aware of what he was doing.

Bill Black Jr- EMA- resolution to participate in the Great Central US Shakeout- Earthquake Awareness- They did some drills with kids- Drop-Cover- and Hold On. Feb 7th is the 200th anniversary of the New Madrid Earthquake.. He is not planning on going to the schools this year. They do have a website that the schools use. The resolution to participate was signed by Commissioners.

Baudendistel prepared an ordinance changing the emergency levels from numbers to colors. Red- most severe- requires an emergency declaration, Orange – watch- only essential services travel, Yellow- Advisory, White Caution- no restrictions- but be alert to changing conditions. Commissioners passed this as ordinance 2012-2.

HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT: Todd Listerman, Highway Engineer gave the following report:Signature Sheet for Commissioners to sign on the North Dearborn road project.

INDOT LPA agreement for the Stateline Rd slip project for 100% of emergency repair as $4,024.33 and 80 /20 of $212,033 for the permanent fix. Hughes made the motion!!- says he can because they haven’t adopted Roberts Rules of Order so he can.

Orschell said he commended highway dept. and all new hires got their cdl.

Orschell also asked for a moment of silence for Tim Grieve’s wife passing away this week.

AUDITOR: Gayle Pennington- Covered Bridge certification- at Guilford- was signed.
Jan 3 minutes signed. Claims signed. Hughes asked if everyone had done a good job and so they could sign payroll – Hughes motioned again here with McHenry 2nd. Orschell hadn’t reviewed them. Passed. (Claims get passed in pieces.) Hughes also motioned to sign the utility bills and McHenry 2nd as Orschell hadn’t reviewed those. Passed.
Hughes wants Pennington to advertise so that the 3 commissioners can meet with our representative Frey to talk about county interests.

ATTORNEY: Andy Baudendistel- said that Council had asked about an ordinance for retaining fees from High Ridge sewer bills to pay for maintenance on the system. That will be advertised and on the next agenda.

COUNTY COORDINATOR: Bill Ewbank- In previous meetings he wants to create a “commissioners criminal justice report- a study and fact sheet” under the county administrator. This would replace commissioners having separate studies. This would get all statistics etc. on criminal justice in the county. Hughes says he is one of those law and order guys, but… Ewbank is going to speak with judges, sheriff, etc. He wants to get all the information in one place. Then they can disseminate it. Commissioners approved Ewbank doing this report.

COMMISSIONER COMMENTS- McHenry said that Ewan will get a title search on the Moore’s Hill building.

LATE ARRIVAL INFORMATION- none

PUBLIC COMMENT- none- except Hughes praised a folder on how people get elected etc.

Meeting adjourned at 10:07 AM

Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawrenceburg Township

Agenda for January 17th Commissioners Meeting

2012-01-12T15:29:00.000-05:00

AGENDA
DEARBORN COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MEETING
January 17, 2012
9:00 a.m., Commissioners Room
County Administration Building
215 B West High Street, Lawrenceburg, Indiana

EXECUTIVE SESSION @ 8:30 a.m. - MED BEN APPEAL

I. CALL TO ORDER

II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

III. ELECTION OF BOARD PRESIDENT

IV. OLD BUSINESS
1. Private Real Property Rights Preservation Ordinance Freedom for Options Form
2. Overtime Policy and Actual Hours Worked Ordinance
3. Appointments - BZA, County Farm,

V. NEW BUSINESS
1. Donna Thacker – CASA
2. Laura Priebe - Hoosier Hills Literacy League
- Permission to go to Council
3. Mark McCormack – Planning/Zoning
a) Proposed amendments to Article 2, Section 200, Article 3, Sections 300, 325, 330, 355; and Article 25, Section 2570 of Zoning Ordinance
b) Proposed amendments to Article 3, Section 305R and Appendix A of Subdivision Control Ordinance
4. Sheriff Department – Food Bids
5. Appointments
a) Historic Hoosier Hills
b) Hospital Board - Robert Schroeder
6. Bill Black, Jr. - Resolution to Participate in the Great Central US Shakeout
– Earthquake Awareness

VI. HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT- Todd Listerman

VII. AUDITOR – Gayle Pennington
1. Claims/Minutes

VIII. ATTORNEY - Andy Baudendistel

IX. COUNTY COORDINATOR – Bill Ewbank

X. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS

XI. LATE ARRIVAL INFORMATION

XII. PUBLIC COMMENT

XIII. ADJOURN

THE JAIL BUSINESS

2012-01-06T10:35:00.001-05:00

THE JAIL BUSINESS
by Chrisine Brauer Mueller

Dearborn County appears poised to enter the jail business.

I’m in favor of running a jail in a business-like manner. I am not in favor of having taxpayers fund the growth of a jail business that seems unwilling to do some internal soul searching and remediation of the causes for jail overcrowding.

Decisions surrounding the jail expansion size and funding have become tainted with ethical conflicts of interest- which became alarmingly evident at the Dec 20th Council meeting. Council members who get their paycheck from the sheriff’s dept or prosecutor’s dept claim they have no conflict of interest.

Many years ago Bill Ullrich asked Judge James Humphrey about the legality of running for County Council and remaining employed by the county sheriff’s department. Ullrich reported that Judge Humphrey told him the law did not forbid it. Judge Humphrey, in a previous role as county attorney, would often state that officials were to avoid all PERCEPTIONS of impropriety.

The Council vote Dec 20th was widely perceived as ethically improper. Our state legislators repeatedly get asked to pass a law forbidding a government employee from holding office at the same time as he is employed by that governmental unit. The vote and process for this jail expansion illustrates one good reason to pass this law.

If your boss- the sheriff or prosecutor- wants a new or expanded jail and you vote against it, it is hard to see that your job duties, hours, or paycheck might not be affected. Your well being depends on pleasing your boss. If you are wearing numerous hats in county employment, your many allegiances could be affecting your performance. If you have family also employed by the county, you have to consider their jobs as well, particularly in this economy. These are natural survival and familial instincts. And these instincts will ethically compromise decisions that are to be made for the good of the people.

Despite all public comment at the meeting being against this vote, Liz Morris gave a pre-prepared motion seconded by Maynard Barrett to remove the unanimous consent of Council for spending money in the Riverboat Savings Account 197. Bryan Messmore and Bill Ullrich also voted aye. That account has remained untouched except for unanimous Council consent since 1998 - 13 years. This is the easy money- the low hanging fruit- and a way to avoid going to the taxpayers for the jail expansion funding. These four council members seem to forget this IS our money.

This savings account is the only cushion the county taxpayers have should some catastrophe occur. The doors are now wide open for anyone who can persuade four Council members to spend our savings account.

It is no longer something that would take consensus to insure that the vast majority of the public would approve Council’s choice. Four Council members made a serious mistake, in my opinion. These four set aside the wisdom of their predecessors for expediency.

Voters and taxpayers need to take a look at these four. Three (Ullrich, Messmore, and Barrett) are up for election in 2012. Perhaps then we can send them a message they actually hear.

Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawrenceburg Township

3 January 2012 Dearborn County Commissioners Meeting Notes

2012-01-03T20:12:00.002-05:00

3 January 2012 Dearborn County Commissioners Meeting Notes

Present: Jeff Hughes, President, Tom Orschell, and Shane McHenry
Also present: Gayle Pennington, Auditor, Bill Ewbank, Acting County Administrator, and Andy Baudendistel, Attorney.

ELECTION OF BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS PRESIDENT: Jeff Hughes re-elected.

RE-APPOINTMENTS:
Department Heads: (all the same as 2011)
County Attorney- Andrew Baudendistel
County Engineer- Todd Listerman
County Highway Supervisor- Tim Grieve
Building Inspector- Bill Shelton
Emergency Management-Bill Black
911 Director- charley Ashley
Veteran’s Service Officer- Mike Burgess
Maintenance Supervisor- Eric Hartman
Animal Control Director- Marlene Underwood
County Administrator (New Position)- Bill Ewbank- Acting County Administrator

Boards Commissioners Currently Serve (All serve on Solid Waste)
Jeff: Plan Commission, SIRPC, OKI, Personnel Advisory- all reapproved
Tom: County Farm, EMA, Redevelopment- all reapproved- Orschell hopes there will be some good news coming out of redevelopment in the next couple weeks.
Shane: Common Construction Wage, Juvenile Advisory- all reapproved

Citizen Boards:
Planning Commission- Mark Lehman and Russell Beiersdorfer both reappointed
Health Board- Dr Steven Eliason appointed
Alcohol Beverage Board- reappointed Jim Dole
Convention/Visitor’s Bureau- Ian Abdon, Marilyn Bower, Dee Hacker, Steve Hedges, and Ellen Perfect
PTABOA Board- Bill Hartwell, Mark Neff and Mark Hardenbeck reappointed
Board of Zoning Appeals- Nicole Dailey was hired by the Planning Dept. Commissioners will hold to look over candidates until next meeting. This one has to be an Independent or a Democrat per Hughes.
County Farm Committee- Mike Heffelmire retired and Commissioners want to talk to the board and Earl Dawson to see where they want to go with that board. Earl Dawson and Jerry Newman reappointed.

ADA Coordinator- Bill Ewbank reappointed- he is working on this already.

OLD BUSINESS:

Private Real Property Rights Preservation Ordinance Freedom for Options Form- Hughes wants to see it passed and let the Plan Commission work with it. Orschell asked about where the money would come from? The legal fees alone would be astronomical. He thinks we have the courts in place for this. Hughes said- no one is going to put a toxic dump next to anyone. He cited the property they were sued for by Wolgamot, Diehl, and some woman whose name he forgot as having all the infrastructure in place and yet it was denied. He said a court can call it capricious. Orschell didn’t want another layer of government. McHenry is worried about the significant legal fees. Orschell said Hughes needs to come up with some more specifics. Both Orschell and McHenry said the legal fees would be out of sight. McHenry doesn’t want it so open and vague. Orschell doesn’t want it to be a monetary issue. Hughes will continue to work on that. Tabled essentially.

Overtime Policy and Actual Hours Worked- Pennington said the committee sent an unfavorable recommendation – they want it to stay the same. They cited Fair Labor Standards. Orschell said- we’ve been doing it all along. Hughes and Orschell were inclined to go against the recommendation of the committee. This was only if pre-approved vacation time a week in advance. If they don’t have it pre-scheduled, then they don’t get the time and a half for the “overtime” that week. Comp time has to be used within 180 days of earning it. Comp time is limited to 5 days in a year. This happens during snow emergencies. Comp time is rewarded at time and a half at a mutually agreeable time.
Orshell motioned that overtime monetary reimbursement is based on actual time worked except for scheduled comp. personal, or vacation time. This will be effective retroactive to Jan 1st. Commissioner McHenry does not get paid out of this fund per Orschell – he wants that on the record. [NOTE: McHenry’s time with SCU is paid by a grant.] Baudendistel will prepare the ordinance for next meeting.

NEW BUSINESS:

Ruth Ann Batta – Permission to go to Council for Summer Arts Program- approved to go to Council to seek funds for their 25th year.

Signatures for Public Official Bonds- approved all bonds for the following public officials- Barb Kaffenberger, Phil Weaver, Gayle Pennington, Glenn Wright. Hughes wanted Bill Ewbank to see if Commissioners and Council needed bonds.

HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT: Todd Listerman, Highway Engineer- SR 62 was closed to Friendship due to a slip. The county can declare an unofficial detour and they can declare costs for this- they are declaring Farmer’s Retreat Road in the county. Commissioners signed off on this. Most people are using Friendship road in Ripley County as a detour.

AUDITOR: Gayle Pennington-utility docket signed. No claims signed as they don’t cycle for a couple more weeks. Payroll claims approved. Minutes were signed for Dec 6 and 20.
Pennington said the Beacon stats for GIS website- 667 requests a day and 68 users per day.

ATTORNEY: Andy Baudendistel- tort claims involving an inmate and medical claims. Bill Black’s changes in emergency levels ordinance will be ready for the next meeting.

ACTING COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR: Bill Ewbank- asking to go to Council for transfer $10,164 from liability insurance to WC account, and an additional appropriation of $1130 in addition to pay 2012 WC bill. We had a reduction of over $10,000 for liability premium. Approved.
Bill Ewbank was authorized to vote the county’s proxy for the Conservancy District election.

COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: McHenry brought up the Moore’s Hill building that was derelict. Baudendistel discussed with John Watson, Moore’s Hill’s attorney, to get all the owners involved. Pennington said they could choose what they wanted to present for Commissioners certificate sale. They have not had any commercial ones. There are around 50 up for sale this time. Until we have a title search done- we can’t do this per McHenry and Baudendistel. Orschell met with Mark McCormack and Moore’s Hill officials to get a grant- perhaps with using it as a city building along with the old bank.

McHenry was concerned about the CMS study and the results. Ewbank said that they are sending out a second round with a stronger request. The commissioners could withhold their EMS funding until they get the information. Lawrenceburg is not participating as they are self- sufficient and wish the rest of us the best in this endeavor. They will send a firmer letter.

Orschell wished all a good new year.

LATE ARRIVAL INFORMATION- Bill Black- wants to get $7400 from Council for rapid notify- a reverse 911 and the communications board has looked at it and has seen a demo. Cost is $6500 for each additional year. Approved to seek this from Council.

PUBLIC COMMENT- none

Meeting adjourned at 7:15 PM

Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawrenceburg Township

Agenda for January 3rd Commissioners Meeting

2012-01-02T18:42:00.001-05:00

AGENDA

DEARBORN COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MEETING

January 3, 2012
6:00 p.m., Commissioners Room
County Administration Building
215 B West High Street, Lawrenceburg, Indiana

RE-ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING

I. CALL TO ORDER

II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

III. ELECTION OF BOARD PRESIDENT

IV. RE-APPOINTMENTS

1. Department Heads

a) County Attorney

b) County Engineer

c) County Highway Supervisor

d) Building Inspector

e) Emergency Management

f) 911 Director

g) Veteran’s Service Officer

h) Maintenance Supervisor

i) Animal Control Director

j) County Administrator (New Position)

2. Boards Commissioners Currently Serve (All serve on Solid Waste)

a) Jeff: Plan Commission, SIRPC, OKI, Personnel Advisory

b) Tom: County Farm, EMA, Redevelopment

c) Shane: Common Construction Wage, Juvenile Advisory

3. Citizen Boards

a) Planning Commission

b) Health Board

c) Alcohol Beverage Board

d) Convention/Visitor’s Bureau

e) PTA Board

f) Board of Zoning Appeals

4. Other appointments

a) ADA Coordinator

V. OLD BUSINESS

1. Private Real Property Rights Preservation Ordinance

Freedom for Options Form

2. Overtime Policy and Actual Hours Worked

VI. NEW BUSINESS

1, Ruth Ann Batta – Permission to go to Council for Summer Arts Program

2. Signatures for Public Official Bonds

VII. HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT- Todd Listerman

VIII. AUDITOR – Gayle Pennington

1. Claims/Minutes

IX. ATTORNEY - Andy Baudendistel

X. COUNTY COORDINATOR – Bill Ewbank

XI. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS

XII. LATE ARRIVAL INFORMATION

XIII. PUBLIC COMMENT

XIV. ADJOURN

20 December 2011 Dearborn County Council Meeting Notes

2011-12-21T07:47:00.003-05:00

20 December 2011 Dearborn County Council Meeting Notes

Present: Dennis Kraus. Sr., President, Dan Lansing, Jim Hughes, Liz Morris, Maynard Barrett, Bryan Messmore, and Bill Ullrich.

Also present: Gayle Pennington, Auditor and Bill Ewbank, County Coordinator and Andy Baudendistel, County Attorney.

Steve Renihan- DCRSD -Sewer Board- and Bob Hrezo, Engineer, passed out information to Council and an update on all projects and progress of DCRSD. He apologized for absence last month. He wants to get the contingency fund back up to $10,000. He gave an accounting of their expenditures and they only have $818 in it now. They need to have money available for things that come up during the year. Collected $99,000 from customers from Highridge Plant- so that is in a separate account at UCB. He thinks they should keep that money for future maintenance and repair on that plant. It is a county asset. They could turn it into the sewer account and then have to come back to council for it. Kraus said they can deal with that in January. $23,682 has been collected on Stewart road and Cole Lane. The West Harrison TIF is almost done. Hueseman Road is proceeding. Morris motioned and Ullrich 2nd to approve $9200 to that account. Messmore voted Nay- rest Ayes- passed.

Sheriff Kreinhop- wants to replace his civil process server. He wants the individual he has selected to be approved. He hadn’t even advertized it yet. Kraus said the committee recommends 7 days to advise council. No one backed Kraus up on this- and apparently the council doesn’t enforce the county policy to advertize positions and open them to the public. Council approved it anyway.

IRS requires an amendment to the police pension and it has no financial impact on the county. Baudendistel has reviewed- no problem. Merit board pres. And Kreinhop has signed. Council approved Kraus’s signature on these amendments.

Medical expenses for inmates- the fee schedule was amended and commissioners approved and now it needs Council president’s signature. Approved.

Liz Morris presented the 911 fee before in November and Pennington pulled off the fees for 2010. AIC (Association of Indiana Counties) suggested language for funding for gas tax revenues and 911 issues. Morris said this is asking our reps to approve legislation to addresses these issues. Council approved signing the 2 resolutions.

Pennington also asked Council to set their January organizational meeting for board appointments etc. . Council will meet the 3rd Tuesday at 6:30 in January.

Kraus said he will take the SEIRPC (SE Indiana Regional Planning Commission) spot now that they want an actual Council member and not Mark McCormack as before. Council approved Kraus Sr.

Council approved a 2.5% raise for county employees, with Bill Ullrich abstaining. [NOTE: Apparently he recognizes a conflict of interest since he is a county employee. Messmore-Victim’s Advocate Coordinator- did not abstain. Perhaps his and his boss’s positions are not paid by the county?]

Council approved the October Budget adoption minutes. Lansing and Hughes weren’t at the meeting so they abstained.

Andy Baudendistel- County attorney- searched ordinances- 1998- written motion indicating a 7-0 aye vote was to approve the riverboat savings. It was never passed as an ordinance.
Kraus found it reaffirmed in 2003 and 2006 minutes. It was also in newspaper articles.
You can change it even if it were in a written ordinance.
To change how it’s done now would be a simple vote. [NOTE: The county attorney also works in Judge Sally Blankenship’s drug court and his mother works in the probation dept. He’s juggling a lot of duties and allegiances here.]

Morris said- that even now we can vote to spend it as a simple majority.

Lansing said it was disrespectful to those who sat here for the last 15 years. Lansing doesn’t think it’s good to rely on the riverboat for everything.

Morris said that once we get economic development then we won’t be relying on riverboat. (Is she saying the jail expansion is economic development?)

Lansing noted ongoing yearly costs of the jail- what’s paying for that?

Morris said we can’t ignore the problem. It’s about safety.

Ullrich said the best case scenario you move the people thru as fast as you can. The judges are trying to do that. He said the programs to help people- we don’t have enough space for all of that. If they keep the sentences- then we can send them up state. We can house Ohio county prisoners again. We used to do federal prisoners. [NOTE: Ullrich works for the sheriff’s dept and transports prisoners. Should he be in this discussion or vote?]

Lansing brought up Gardner’s article and thinks that we are doing things differently than most other counties.

Morris said- we passed this last month.

Ullrich’s main concern is no additional impact to the taxpayers.

Jim Hughes would like to let the people vote on it.

Ullrich said the federal prisoners were the best ones you could have.

Jim Hughes said we shouldn’t be in the business of housing prisoners.

Messmore said the plan is not to house other prisoners. [NOTE: Then why do the sheriff and Ullrich keep bringing that idea up in campaigning and meetings?]

Ullrich said we need to do Ohio County.

Lansing asked RQAW rep what the 72 extra beds that would go to the empty shell built now would cost. He said a few 100,000s of dollars.

Tom Cheek former councilman of 12 years. He said at the bottom of every riverboat sheet at budget hearings the 7 vote requirement was written and signed. The charettes a few years back – the jail surfaced as the top project. The project was at $14 million. Now it’s whittled down. And it still says that won’t achieve the goal. He challenged Morris on why not put it to the voters? Why are we afraid to do that? There is a presidential election. He also said that 3 people are involved in these decisions that shouldn’t be- conflict of interest. [NOTE: He’s referring to Commissioner Shane McHenry, Councilman Bill Ullrich, and Councilman Bryan Messmore- all employed by the county sheriff and/or prosecutor. McHenry also has a mother (probation) and step- father (sheriff’s dept) employed there. He's also juggling a lot of allegances.]

Judy Howard- Aurora- Harmony Hills- spoke passionately and directly- I’m sick of hearing that it won’t cost the taxpayer. It’s a bold false lie and you know it. There is no such thing as a free lunch. I hope that if you learn nothing else- you learn that this is not the truth. Mr. Ullrich- you stated that this won’t cost anything additional to the taxpayer. What if you don’t have the base anymore? I’m 73 years old and I’ve gone thru hell and heaven in my life. I hope that you know what you are putting on the taxpayers. There a lot of inmates in this county. It isn’t free- that $15 million in the savings account- is the people’s money. It’s the citizen’s of this county. I want you to promise that you won’t lie again.

Liz Morris- I’d like the record to show that I resent being called a liar.

Stephanie Libbert- taxpayer. I have questions and I get now answers. Why do we have 2 bonds in this county? It makes it harder for people to get out of jail.

A surety bond is tacked on to cash bond when they are from out of county per Ullrich.

Libbert- why not show us you are trying something besides just adding jail space? What about first time offenders? What about crimes with victims?She told a story of a woman writing bad checks at several stores including hers and when she sought help with the prosecutor- it wasn’t done. You are not protecting us- and she was a victim at this point. Why did you not put it to a vote of the people? How can you represent us if you do not ask? I work every day- I pay taxes so that you can take them from me. Use survey monkey- and modern technology to get in touch with your people. Get your own blog. Grant money is tax money too. Government creates their own problem as you all demonstrate. I agree with the whole conflict of interest here.

Ullrich said he does not have a conflict of interest. A conflict of interest is when you have a monetary interest and I don’t have one in this project. [NOTE: YIKES!!!]

Jerry Jacobsen- Greendale- we have bad economic times and the Riverboat Revenue is used as a buffer against these times. It’s very important that you keep it. If you bond it you get 90 cents on the dollar. Do we need the jail expanded? If you are going to spend your cushion I think you need to put it to the people. That would be the politically expedient way.

Cindy Luchow- I think you should stick to the 7 or at least 6 to decide. I would be interested to see the statistics on the jail. Once charged with a felony or ending up in jail – they will lose their jobs. I think the conflict of interest is a valid point- you need to think about that.

Harley Ohmansiek - Aurora- has there been any discussion of a federal mandate if they force building a jail? It hasn’t happened yet.

Tom Cheek- clarification- DLGF looks at Riverboat money as a tax- a gaming tax. But it’s not a property tax.

Morris reading from a prepared motion said the current jail is a maximum security facility built by federal judge’s mandate. We should take matters into our own hands. I would like to put it in the minutes that the county attorney said this should be in our minutes. Morris and Barrett motioned to make the simple vote to get it out of 197 savings. Four ayes- Morris, Barrett, Ullrich, and Messmore ayes. Lansing, Hughes, and Kraus, Nay.

[NOTE: Morris clearly ties the change in vote for 197 savings account to the jail expansion. In this vote and prior discussion are two people who ethically should not be part of the jail expansion decision. Their paycheck and their boss’s favor is part of the system. If ever there were an argument about county employees also being elected officials- this is it.]

The actual funding of the jail project will be on the January agenda. The council will decide how MUCH of the Savings account will be spent on this. They could do portions of the savings and a bond or tax. They could do all savings.

Meeting adjourned at 8:05 PM.

Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawrenceburg Township

20 December 2011 Dearborn County Commissioners Meeting Notes

2011-12-20T13:46:00.002-05:00

20 December 2011 Dearborn County Commissioners Meeting Notes

Present: Jeff Hughes, President, Tom Orschell, and Shane McHenry
Also present: Gayle Pennington, Auditor, Bill Ewbank, County Coordinator, and Andy Baudendistel, Attorney.

OLD BUSINESS:

Private Real Property Rights Preservation Ordinance Freedom for Options Form- Baudendistel researched into how a Comp plan was construed within the courts Ogden vs. premier properties- 2001 Evansville- comp plan was a GUIDE ONLY. It is one of several things to consider in rezones. Other case comp plan was a general long term blue print- and pay reasonable regard to the plan- a guide- rather than an instrument of land control. Nothing in statute that says gov’t HAS to follow the comp plan. He also read our intro to our comp plan in Dearborn County. Based on his research he thinks the comp plan is not binding- it’s a tool.
Hughes said this was helpful and not what a lot of people thought on the future land use committee. It is confusing- you have to take it into consideration- but it doesn’t stand alone. TABLED again for further review. This item has been tabled since April.

Ratify Life Time housing Payroll Authorization Letter- Bill Ewbank- a time sensitive document that was presented to Hughes- this is the payroll for rehabbing the homes we previously approved for a grant. Commissioners ratified the signature.

Overtime Policy and Actual Hours Worked- Shane McHenry- 3.17.1 overtime- Gayle Pennington changed a sentence to accommodate the vacation that is counted as scheduled as workdays. It has to be a pre-scheduled time to count towards overtime. Orschell said it should go to the personnel committee first.
Dennis Kraus, Sr. said the Personnel Committee that he is on had given an unfavorable recommendation – they had decided not to make any changes. He also said that anyone who would be a recipient of this money generated by overtime should NOT be voting on it. [NOTE:He’s referring to Shane McHenry having a conflict of interest on this issue, as he has a "pecuniary interest." Kraus is right about that, and McHenry stopped talking on the issue and did not motioon, 2nd, or vote. He did not abstain either.]
Todd Listerman was asked if this had to be decided before Christmas. He said not his year- no snow is expected.
Orschell motioned – Hughes 2nded and McHenry was silent on all of this after Kraus’s statement regarding recipient’s voting on the overtime pay rules. Two commissioners voted that this go to the advisory committee for review. Pennington will schedule that.

NEW BUSINESS:

Surplus Vehicle Ordinance- read by Baudendistel- any vehicle over $1000- all paperwork submitted to the county. Priority given to county depts. Second priority to agencies, like fire dept and life squads in the county, and third, they can be offered for sale to the general public. Commissioners approved the ordinance.

Proclamation Community Read Project- Dan Toon on Library Board with Jody Maples (Librarian) and Marilyn Hoffbauer (Dearborn Highland Arts Council) in attendance as support. This was started by Dolly Parton. Kids get a book a month to create a library of 60 books by the time they are in school. Adults will be reading great Gatsby and kids will read Black Beauty in the year long reading program. Hoosier Hills Literacy League in cooperation with several county agencies. 2012- Color Dearborn County Black White and Read. Proclamation approved.

Contract Agreement Hoosier Square- construction contract for Seyferth ( sp?) Co in Cleves. $277,732. This will also make the building ADA compliant. Signed after commissioners verified that Baudendistel looked it over. Hope to start this week per Ewbank.

Dilapidated Buildings in Moore’s Hill- Board member and clerk treasurer of Moore’s Hill presented pictures of the condemned building. It has been vacant 4 years. We have a letter from US Bank and also the adjoining neighbor. It was condemned for the pigeon droppings issue. They want county help
14942 Main St- Henry Alvin Brown- delinquent on $8,000 property taxes plus liens for 2 sewer for $7,000 =$15,000 in liabilities to a potential buyer. It was attempted to sell in 2009. It remains on eligibility for Commissioner’s sale. It is a negative liability. Lot may be worth $10-15,000. Only real prospect. We could assist them in finding redevelopment funds for demolition – if there is a public end use. Owner is unwilling and financially unable to comply with this property. Owner is in failing health- aged 79. We are at the point- we want to do something- even if it’s wrong. Bob Blue owns 1/8 of the building- he doesn’t care what happens per the board member. He said he’d give it away. Alvin Brown said he wanted $35,000 for it. He hates the government. Baudendistel said whoever demolishes this- has to own the whole building. Title work needs to be done on the property. Mitchell Brown- his son also had an interest in it- but may have given that back to his father in 2009 in a quit claim deed. Bill Shelton- Building Inspector said it’s beyond repair. It was an original science building for the college. They want to get the taxes forgiven or written off and the sewer lien dropped. More research to be done.

HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT: Todd Listerman, Highway Engineer:

Mobilecom- new narrow band frequency radios to accommodate all the radios in the US by end of 2012. The chips are already in our radios bought in the last 4 years. They just open the radios and switch it over. The repeater tower has to be upgraded and that is already in the budget for this summer. Signed the paperwork for Mobilecom to get narrow band for the county.

Working with federal highway adm to get funds for rain caused slippages on Lower Dillsboro- $10,451 and change approved- and we get 100% on emergency and 80% on permanent repairs.

Are in process of purchasing ROW in Bright on Stateline. They were worried about signage that now will not have required setbacks. Commissioners signed resolution that their signage is grandfathered. This is just for area between 500 ft South of Salt Fork and 20 ft North of Jamison and already in existence and related to the Stateline project.

Hope within next couple weeks will have deeds secured to have Stewart St done this summer.

March or April letting for North Dearborn construction this summer.

Still working on Shortridge Rd to secure properties.

AUDITOR: Gayle Pennington- claims signed. Hughes said he hadn’t had time to review some of these. Minutes from Nov 15 approved.

ATTORNEY: Andy Baudendistel- letter from Liberty Roberts from jury trial- praising county staff for their help. Bill Black told him the warning levels are now colors instead of numbers. He will have that next meeting.

COUNTY COORDINATOR: Bill Ewbank- request from county Park Board- they were asked to mow the County farm area now that County Highway has moved. $4200 will be requested from council for YES Home and old County Animal shelter. Park Board wanted to be sure this was OK with Commissioners. Parks is storing their equipment there anyway. This will be an existing mowing contract- and added on to that. Commissioners approved Parks to approach council for this request.

ADA status- he attended training seminar in Greensburg from INDOT and state ADA coordinator. They are taking compliance effort seriously. June 30 2012 – INDOT will be inspecting reports from every county for roadmarks we have to achieve toward compliance. This will affect our scoring for any of our federal funds. He said the bar is fairly low for this first step so far- we could gain a competitive advantage by surpassing that standard and improving our scores. He suggested they add ADA coordinator to January appointments- and noted it was a non-paid position.

COMMISSIONER COMMENTS- Hughes- wanted to make Bill Ewbank- coordinator- into the interim Administrator for 60 days to review resumes. Approved.
Hughes referenced an email on judicial issues and was wanting feedback from judges and prosecutors etc. he is looking for communication and new ideas.

Commissioners wished everyone a Merry Christmas AND Happy New Year.

LATE ARRIVAL INFORMATION- none.

PUBLIC COMMENT- Bill Black- trying to get everyone on the same page and now state has changed the codes to colors. Also the radios are being transferred same as Listerman referenced. Hughes also thanked him for the HVL Dam updates.

Meeting adjourned at 10:30 AM

Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawrenceburg Township

ALAN MILLER ELECTED PRESIDENT OF DEARBORN-OHIO COUNTY BAR

2011-12-20T06:49:00.001-05:00

The Dearborn-Ohio County Bar Association has a new president. Alan Miller, partner at Zerbe Garner Miller & Blondell in Lawrenceburg, was elected president of the local bar association last week.

“I am excited about this opportunity,” said Miller. “We should be a leading community service organization in the area. I am hopeful that we can achieve this and more during my term.”

Miller’s term will run for 2 years. The Dearborn-Ohio County Bar Association is comprised of all attorneys and judges in Dearborn and Ohio counties.

County Council Meets Dec 20th for Expansion of Jail Funding Vote

2011-12-19T07:07:00.004-05:00

County Council meets at 6:30 PM Tuesday Dec 20th in the Commissioners Room of the County Administration Building.

The discussion of how to fund the jail expansion project is planned. There will also be discussion and a probable decision on whether to keep the unanimous vote required for spending any of the Riverboat Savings account. The Council in the late 1990s set this up as a unanimous vote to force consensus before this account money could be spent on any county project. This was done to make sure it was a project that nearly all the citizens wanted.

Like the general public, Council has not reached consensus on this issue. The Riverboat Savings account could be reduced by more than 50% if Council decides to use only the savings account for this purpose. They can also decide to use a portion of it and bonds and/or increased taxes. The current plans for expansion are not the entire project. Council and Commissioners reduced the plan to under the $12 million limit that would have required a referendum and a vote by the citizenry.

Tuesday night is when your voice can be heard on this issue.

AGENDA 20 December 2011 Commissioners Meeting

2011-12-16T15:21:00.001-05:00

AGENDA
DEARBORN COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MEETING
December 20, 2011
9:00 a.m.
City of Lawrenceburg
Administration Building
230 Walnut Street, Lawrenceburg, Indiana

I. CALL TO ORDER

II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

III. OLD BUSINESS
1. Private Real Property Rights Preservation Ordinance
Freedom for Options Form
2. Ratify Life Time Housing Payroll Authorization Letter
3. Overtime Policy and Actual Hours Worked

IV. NEW BUSINESS
1. Surplus Vehicle Ordinance
2. Proclamation – Community Read Project
3. Contract Agreement – Hoosier Square
4. Dilapidated Buildings in Moores Hill

V. HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT- Todd Listerman
Updates

VI. AUDITOR – Gayle Pennington
1. Claims/Minutes

VII. ATTORNEY - Andy Baudendistel

VIII. COUNTY COORDINATOR – Bill Ewbank

IX. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS

X. LATE ARRIVAL INFORMATION

XI. PUBLIC COMMENT

XII. ADJOURN

Conflicts of Interest Involved in the County Jail Expansion Decisions

2011-12-15T07:29:00.000-05:00

Conflicts of Interest Involved in the County Jail Expansion Decisions

There is a group in Dearborn County who believe we require a new, expanded and expensive law enforcement center to address their perceived rising crime rate trend in the county. In rough numbers the object of their desire requires a capital expenditure of $20 million and an ongoing annual operating expenditure in excess of $1 million from the taxpayers.

There is another group who feel that misguided and overzealous law enforcement, prosecutorial and judicial practices are creating our inordinate criminal statistics vs. other Indiana counties. They feel policy reform is the answer to perceived jail overcrowding.

Whose argument has more merit is nowhere as interesting as the methods employed by the jail proponents to advance their dream.

We're in a lousy economy with lots of grief and little relief on the horizon. All Dearborn County citizens are hurting heavily. There is no way in hell an expansion of Dearborn County law enforcement at a time like this would be favored by the voters.

Jail proponents, therefore, knew without a doubt they had no way of achieving their dream without depriving the taxpayers of any involvement.

Quandary? Indiana state law guarantees that projects of this magnitude must be approved by the voters. Solution. Break down the project into two or three smaller pieces that only have to be approved by two commissioners and four county council members to succeed.

Thus, on November 1st, two of the three county commissioners voted to move the first downsized $9-10 million project forward and approve county council to explore financing alternatives. Commissioner Jeff Hughes bravely voted nay as he felt the people deserved a say in the process. Kudoes to Commissioner Hughes. Commissioner Tom Orschell voted aye. The deciding aye vote was cast by Dearborn County Detective Shane McHenry, full time employee of Dearborn County Sheriff Michael Kreinhop in his part time role as Dearborn County Commissioner.

It's interesting to note that Tom Orschell, when elected commissioner, immediately resigned from the county highway department so as to avoid any image of bias or impropriety. Commissioner Shane McHenry seems to suffer no similar concerns when it comes to his employers new jail?

The saga continues in the County Council where the jail proponents have targeted a $15 million Riverboat Savings Account set up at the beginning of the boat era. Council at that time hoped some money from the casino windfall could be secured from the temptation of future councils to spend it, except in the most dire and deserving of instances. They ensured this by requiring a unanimous vote by all seven council members.

Quandary. The jail proponents don't have all seven council members favoring the project. Solution. Attack the legality of the previous councils decisions, reduce the number of votes to grab the money to something less restrictive, such as the number of council members in favor. These shenanigans would be funny if the matter at hand wasn't so serious.

These discussions continue in County Council. It would be remiss and unfair to Commissioner McHenry not to also mention that Dearborn County Sgt. Bill Ullrich, full time employee of Dearborn County Sheriff Mike Kreinhop is also part time County Councilman at large, Bill Ullrich, involved in the acquisition of the financing.

You should be outraged when a project that Indiana law mandates be approved by you is so painstakingly massaged to prevent your involvement. You should be ethically concerned when two of the only six people now required to approve the $10-20 million burden on the taxpayers are so closely bound to the recipient and beneficiary of the funding. How do the commissioners and county council's attorneys possibly justify this blatant conflict of interest and why haven't they required McHenry and Ullrich to recuse themselves from any and all aspects of this project?

However you feel, discussions may continue at the next County Council meeting scheduled for next Tuesday, December 20th at 6:30pm in the County Administration Building. How concerned are you?

Chet Wolgamot
Manchester Twp.

CASA: Drinking, Drugging and Driving (with Sheriff Mike Kreinhop)

2011-12-10T16:39:00.000-05:00

Greetings to our listeners and subscribers --

CASA: Drinking, Drugging and Driving (with Sheriff Mike Kreinhop) -- Host Gary Puckett discusses these inter-related topics with Dearborn County Sheriff, Mike Kreinhop.

http://www.theflypod.com/asp/newpage.asp?RN=60680

We hope you enjoy listening to these shows. Tell your friends, neighbors and co-workers about TheFlyPod.com New-Media Network. Also, check out the OPEN FLY FORUM feature on our website -- you can create your own broadcast, immediately! We are quickly becoming a leading "local world" source of programming in the new digital-media age. Any person can sign up on our website to begin automatically receiving "New and Notable Show Alerts". It's 100% free and we will never, under any circumstances, share your email address with any person or organization.

To submit your ideas, questions, comments or complaints, email us directly in Studio 7 at anytime 24/7 -- shout@theflypod.com -- or pick up your cell phone and call our national listener feedback line at 206.666-4780
NEW and NOTABLE SHOW ALERTS
Fly Paper Productions, LLC
Digital Media Group - National Operations Ctr
POB 324
Harrison, OH 45030
USA

6 December 2011 Dearborn County Commissioners Meeting Notes

2011-12-06T20:25:00.003-05:00

6 December 2011 Dearborn County Commissioners Meeting Notes

Present: Jeff Hughes, President, Tom Orschell, and Shane McHenry
Also present: Gayle Pennington, Auditor, Bill Ewbank, County Coordinator, and Andy Baudendistel, Attorney.

Previous executive session was to discuss the county administrator position. That will be posted on Career Builder for 7-10 days as the personnel policy indicates. [NOTE: This replaces the county coordinator position currently held by Bill Ewbank.]

OLD BUSINESS:

Private Real Property Rights Preservation Ordinance- Freedom for Options Form- tabled until they meet Tuesday with the planning Director.

Ratify Life Time Housing Payroll Authorization Letter- tabled – no one here from Life Time and letter was in Sue Hayden’s computer- and she got called away for an emergency today.

NEW BUSINESS:

Randy Foley- Cardinal Office Products- SE Indiana rep and Paul Holland who is the sales manager presented a program in place for the city and county offices. Foley is local- originally from Milan. He has raised the level of service and pricing structure with user friendly sites for easy access to their system. Holland said that there was a less expensive way to fund office products. The national website has no personal communication but does have good prices. They decided to have the same prices for their products with the same service they provided before- the personal touch and visits to your office when needed. You will get national government pricing- same as the national website. You can order over the phone also if you want and get the same pricing. Commissioners agreed they like to buy local if it’s the same price. Foley said they also carry any product the big box stores carry. They still have next day service. The office at 409 Walnut is a showroom now. They did this to meet the demands of the customers.

Bill Black Jr- EMA- Grant Agreement- $ 3623.18 was distributed because the county exceeded their goal in their assessment from Homeland Security. Signed acceptance.
Greater Cincinnati Hazmat contract was $8100 last year and now is $6380.99. They will probably reevaluate this next year and may go back up. Baudendistel said there is a 90 day termination clause and it automatically renews otherwise. Black noted that the county couldn’t maintain a Hazmat team for that price. Commissioners agreed to have Hughes sign the contract.

HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT: Todd Listerman, Highway Engineer gave the following updates:

Emergency repair work done on Wilson Creek Road just north of US 50 for $5,758.85. Commissioners signed the agreements with INDOT for this.

Met with INDOT regarding Whitewater Scenic Byway- we are the lead agency for this. There will be a separate account set up for this- no count funds will be used for this. There will be an agreement coming to us for this soon.

Working with INDOT to move up the North Dearborn project east of Dover. All ROW is acquired. This is to be under construction summer of 2012. They will be cutting trees to eliminate the Indianan Bat delaying that project.

Bids were all accepted for stone, sand, and gravel from Harrison Sand and Gravel, Newpoint Stone, and Hanson Aggregates. Hot and cold mix asphalt was accepted from Rohe and O’Mara. Gas and fuel was only bid by Laughery Valley Coop. Accepting all bids makes it easier to get best price depending on where the project is in the county and trucking costs.

Bid prices were:

Gas- $2.910/ No 1 Fuel oil $3.551/ No 2 Diesel fuel $ 3.101/ No 2 road diesel $3.258

Hot mix Base Type A $42.50-47.50/ Intermediate type A $44.50-49.50/ Surface type A $48.50-53.50

Cold mix delivered $95-110

Stone went from $7.20-14.75/ Rip rap from 49.90-11.15/Dense road base $7.25-7.35/ Aglime $4.50-6.50/snow and ice abrasive $3.60-3.75/ pea gravel $5.70-9.00/B-borrow $3.60-3.75.

Orschell asked about HVL getting in on our pricing. Grieve checked with all the vendors and they said their process were for the county- not private entities.

ADA (Americans with disabilities act) will be monitored by OKI as the MPO for those projects for compliance.

He also met with Bruce Keller of HVL and said they’d try to advise them when striping is done in our area so they can try to get the vendor at the same time for a better price.

AUDITOR: Gayle Pennington Minutes adjusted to reflect change requested by McHenry last meeting regarding verbatim transcription of his jail motion. Minutes approved. Claims schedule was approved for 2012. Claims approved without Hughes having time to review so he abstained.

ATTORNEY: Andy Baudendistel- Jury trial in Superior Court 2 involved an accident on Pribble Rd. County was removed from the case. Insurance paid for the legal work.

COUNTY COORDINATOR: Bill Ewbank reported:

RFP Bids/Shumway and Votaw Buildings- going to rebid this.

Commissioners 2012 Meeting Schedule- same as this year. Will have all scheduled in our building- no longer at Lawrenceburg.

Construction documentation firm for Hoosier Square quote for $2800. This will give a photographic history of all work as done and traced to the construction documents. This is a test to see if they will get further county work. Commissioners signed a contract with Multivista for this- with Shane McHenry voting Nay.

WGU Indiana- Governor signed this for completing online college work. Bachelors in 3 years and masters in 4 years possible.

Had a number of requests for surplus vehicles for first responders- he will have a policy for next meeting. County offices will be first priority.

COMMISSIONER COMMENTS:
Tom Orschell- Jail Project moving forward- County has a duty to set up a committee to go around in perhaps 3 areas to have meetings to explain to the citizens what we are doing to prevent recidivism in the jail. Also trying to get a GED program in the jail. He will work with the courts to see how to set these up and will keep them informed. Commissioners agreed it was a good idea. McHenry said the expansion of the jail is so they can expand these programs not just lock more people up and throw away the key. Orschell will keep them updated on this.

Shane McHenry- Overtime policy and actual hours worked- had a lot of concerns coming his direction from highway, sheriff, juvenile detention, and 911. They want personal time off and vacation to be counted as actual hours worked and thus to be included in this calculation. Commissioners decided to enact this soon so that it is in effect before the first snow storms come. Sick time and suspension do not count toward this overtime calculation, as suggested by Kreinhop. Pennington will have the policy revised by the next meeting.

Hughes met with Randy Frey hoping to get money for roads.

LATE ARRIVAL INFORMATION:

Sheriff Kreinhop said they lost control boards over the weekend and in order to fix this he needs a signature to get these fixed. This was to be done with the jail addition. The need has been moved up with the failure over the weekend. They did get short term repairs done by late Monday. He gave them a proposal that was not bid out- though they had 3 quotes from before. This company is the one doing the work at Hoosier Square. They are familiar with the original system. The indoor panels still worked- just the perimeter doors were affected. This equipment is 22 years old. There is no budget for this. They put this as part of the jail expansion. Liz Morris said at Council budget hearings per Dave Hall that they would have to give emergency funds if necessary. They are honoring the prices quoted 18 months ago. Commissioners signed the Security Automation Systems for $292,000 and approved going to Council for this.

PUBLIC COMMENT- none

Meeting adjourned at 7:30 PM

Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawrenceburg Township

Agenda for Dec 6th Commissioners Meeting

2011-12-02T11:33:00.001-05:00

AGENDA
DEARBORN COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MEETING
December 6, 2011
6:00 p.m., Commissioners Room
County Administration Building
215 B West High Street, Lawrenceburg, Indiana

EXECUTIVE SESSION – 5:30 PM Personnel Issue

I. CALL TO ORDER

II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

III. OLD BUSINESS
1. Private Real Property Rights Preservation Ordinance
Freedom for Options Form
2. Ratify Life Time Housing Payroll Authorization Letter

IV. NEW BUSINESS
1. Randy Foley – Cardinal Office Products
2. Bill Black, Jr - Grant Agreement

V. HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT- Todd Listerman
Updates

VI. AUDITOR – Gayle Pennington
1. Claims/Minutes

VII. ATTORNEY - Andy Baudendistel

VIII. COUNTY COORDINATOR – Bill Ewbank
1. RFP for Bids / Shumway and Votaw Buildings
2. Commissioner’s 2012 meeting schedule

IX. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
1. Tom Orschell – Jail Project Moving Forward
2. Shane McHenry – Overtime Policy and Actual Hours Worked

X. LATE ARRIVAL INFORMATION

XI. PUBLIC COMMENT

XII. ADJOURN

22 November 2011 Dearborn County Council Meeting Notes

2011-11-23T07:43:00.002-05:00

22 November 2011 Dearborn County Council Meeting Notes

Present: Dennis Kraus. Sr., President, Dan Lansing, Jim Hughes, Liz Morris, Maynard Barrett, Bryan Messmore, and Bill Ullrich.

Also present: Gayle Pennington, Auditor and Bill Ewbank, County Coordinator

The meeting began at 6:30 PM

County General, Bail, and Pretrial Amount Requested-Superior Court II—Sally Blankenship- Public Defender fees required due to economy- $7500 because several of the cases have gone to trial which increases fees. $3,000 from part time salaries to Public Defender fees and $4,500 from bail and pre-trial budget. Council approved.

County General Probation users Fees- Sally Blankenshup –This is for a computer server and needed Parts - $10,828 for probation and courts. It’s slow. Because it serves probation- $7,000 would come from user fees. $ 3828 from county general. Council approved.

County General Riverboat-Prosecutor-Aaron Negangard- Funds needed for transcripts, depositions, etc. due to major felonies-$10,000. $6,000 is already spent of this request. The remainder will get them thru the rest of the year. Depositions are the sworn statements of witnesses. Greateramount needed because more cases are going to trial. Liz Morris said $25,000 was budgeted in 2010 and $20,000 allotted for 2011. So they are about $5,000 over 2010 budget with this total. Council approved.

Planning and Zoning:- Mark McCormack- Planning Director- Four computer tablets - $2,000- this is for highway, building inspectors, health, and planning. Only need $1500 of this – health dept has one already. Council approved $1500. The also need to replace three computer towers and one monitor- $2,180- to replace ones that have burned out or have needed extensive repairs or have software issues. They need units that can handle the GIS etc. Council approved.

Dearborn County Jail-Mike Kreinhop - Funds needed to cover remaining 2011 holidays- $20,000 to cover 3 upcoming holidays. Three employees were off over 3000 hours and two have been dismissed after using up all their leave time. One is back to work. $60,800 were their total salaries. One inmate at the hospital for a week required overtime for one officer at the hospital 24/7. Bill Ullrich said that money left on the road side of the sheriff’s dept can’t be transferred for this jail side per SBOA. There is a surplus on the road side. Lansing questioned how they pay for replacements. Budget time they asked for more money to hire for the jail. Any replacement for them was at time and a half for two of the employees. It takes 5 employees to cover the jail as a skeleton crew. Sheriff said they could get by with $17,000 instead of $20,000. Ullrich voted Nay on this- 5 voted aye- passed. ( No reason given for nay) [NOTE: Ullrich is an employee of the sheriff’s dept.]

Ken McAllister- asked for funds to replace the canine who has cancer. They paid $10,000 in 2008 for that dog. The price is the same now except for the classes and the 5 week stay there to train the new canine. He has some grant opportunities thru CASA for $7500 ( will know in Jan) and $225 in donations so far. Maynard Barrett said HVL said a gentleman there would match up to $7500. McAllister said they are working on trying to set up a 401c3 to do this. Ullrich said that total $14,370 is needed to get things started as they have to put the current canine down. Schools and demos – the canine dog goes with him. Gayle Pennington said this was not advertised so will have to be on Dec agenda. (Dec 20th) He may have more money by that time as well- or even by Jan 14th meeting. April 30th date is his target to go off to school for 5 weeks. County is willing to take a look at this. No decision.

Health Department- Doug Baer- Vehicle to transport two health emergency trailers- $35,000- readvertised from last meeting. If you table this- I’m looking at other options within the county to solve it. Tabled.

Regional Sewer District-Steve Renihan- Additional funding request for contingency Fund set up for Sewer District- $18,500. Tabled until the end of the meeting, in case he shows up. At meeting’s end- Vera Benning couldn’t answer what this was for to Council’s satisfaction. Remained tabled.

Communications- Charles Ashley- Repair transmitter that was struck by lightning- $5,500- damaged in early summer on Henderson Road. $7283 with $2200 paid by insurance after deductible. $5500 is the deductible. Council approved.

Circuit Court Probation-Stephen Bradley-Needing additional appropriation in paying cost of drug treating- $3,000- Pennington read his letter into the record. He is asking to transfer from the part time employee account to this account. He is asking just for a transfer to drug testing. Council approved.

Commissioners- Bill Ewbank- Complete renovations on Hoosier Square Building, Courthouse, and Administration Building - $650,000. Ewbank gave report on Hoosier Square, Votaw, and Shumway Bldgs. This is the estimated soft costs of all the proposed plans. He has scaled back his requests to just complete Hoosier Square. He will come back for the rest later. He’s asking for $80,000. $1.5 million will cover all the property acquisitions, renovations etc. This affects 13 county agencies. This also relocates agencies with similar functions. If we do everything I asked for it will come in at $2.1 million. This is being done in steps to work with the architect at each stage. Hope to start Monday and be done March 1 on Hoosier Square. Barrett noticed the parking lot is still flooding at Hoosier Square. The parking lot was excavated below the water table there. With the unique rains this year- can solve it with a pump. $80,000 approved for Hoosier Square. Approved out of Contingency.

Highway Department -Todd Listerman- Encumber funds for Short Road bridge as couldn’t complete this year. Approved.
Projects funded up front by county and reimbursed after completion Stateline Rd slip repair- $225,000 this is 80/20. We get 80% reimbursed on this. This should come out of the infrastructure account. INDOT has approved this already. This was not advertised as it was already allowed thru the infrastructure fund approval . Approved.
Hogan Hill- $155,000- and West Laughery- $ 165,000- hold on this until FEMA approves.

Clerk Perpetuation Fund- Phil Weaver-Clerk of Courts- Funds needed to manage and maintain records of the court- $17,407. This fund has about $26-29,000 per year. Already has $6,000 in budget so only needs $11,407 for equipment from 2008. They have been going around on it and he owes it. This is an old bill. Council approved.

PAWS-Sandy Carley-Resolution signed by Commissioners in August 2008. Paws is asking for the remaining balance of the 97 account of $121,000 to be turned over to PAWS. Discussion about where this money came from. Approved with leaving $100 in it to keep it open for future gifts at Liz Morris’s suggestion.

Cardinal Office Products- Randy Foley-not here??

Treasurer- Barb Kaffenberger- raises and title changes for employees in that office- after meeting with them in committee Dennis Kraus, Sr. said they are giving an unfavorable recommendation to their request. Request denied by Council.

Park Board- Steve Walker- Ordinance- Kraus said he didn’t like this ordinance at all and doesn’t want it approved. Walker said it was looked over by auditor and county attorney. They added a 30 day deposit per SBOA rules. Disbursed and surplus property were singled out by Kraus. Why can’t Park Board operates like others? Walker said this is a way to put money we raise separate. It’s not intended for any major transactions. Gayle said we have capital improvement fund and land acquisitions that are non- reverting. Capital improvements from 2010 has $21,250. They could also put money in these accounts. Messmore said the concern was that they needed to have oversight on the funds. Denied the operating fund for the park board.

DISCUSSION OF RIVERBOAT SAVINGS ACCOUNT: Council Discussion:

Kraus said he doesn’t see why they should change it.

Lansing asked when money came in first- answer- 1998. Thirteen years we have been doing this with this rule said Lansing. Ullrich was there in 1998 also. Lansing said my father thought enough to do this back then. Why now?

Messmore said back then we wanted to protect it for projects like this.

Ullrich said this was a safety mechanism as we didn’t know how big the pot might be. One vote could grind a project to a halt.

Jim Hughes said- if you put it in with 7 votes- how can you take it out with less? Answer: Not sure it was even an ordinance. [NOTE: why haven’t they gotten the original minutes on this discussion? I was present at budget when this was originally discussed abck when the Riverboat accounts were first set up. There were many of these same questions raised and answered. Bo Lansing went to Florida in the winters and they worried that he wouldn’t be present if an emergency occurred. Discussion was that if it was that big a deal, he would come back for it. And they were united on not spending it for anything but a capital one-time expense. They also were united in wanting it to be a consensus- noting that if all of them agreed to it- them it was more likely they were representing the wishes of the taxpayers. If there were areas of disagreement or a person was voting nay- it was likely that some needs were not being met by the project and they wouldn’t proceed. This was a Council that worked together. And they knew there would be times in the future that people would want to raid that money. They wanted it to be spent wisely.
Now it seems like two of the checks and balances built into this system of capital projects to protect taxpayers are being bypassed. The first is a referendum- being bypassed by breaking the project into parts. The first part is estimated at about $9 million and does not include the work release expansion. This will be asked for afterwards because it is an easier sell. The law needs to be addressed as to legality on phasing projects to avoid referendum. The RQAW project sheets have disclaimers on them in a few places noting that this plan does not address the full needs of the county at the 20 year level. The second is the unanimous vote to use Riverboat SAVINGS (and thus deplete it by more than half.) id Council does not want to pitch this project to the taxpayers, then they should at least assure that the taxpayers are likely to agree to it by showing a vote that is unanimous or at least a supermajority should they elect to change the unanimous rule.]

Kraus said it was written on every budget- that this account takes 7 votes to take it out. Kraus said if it does get changed you have to be specific about what this gets spent for.

Lansing- we hit a brick wall so now we try to do this?

Liz said she never considered she was binding herself to that rule by passing the budget. She said a previous Council can’t bind a future Council by a rule like this. [NOTE: This makes no sense as Council bound future Councils when they approved debt to finance the Courthouse. This rule can be changed by future Council’s. But it was intended to make it hard to do that.] Morris said,if one can turn it down- a lot of power in one person’s pocket. What if someone had an interest in it and had to abstain?

Lansing said- maybe that’s why that money has accumulated to that amount- no one touches it easily.

Tom Cheek- taxpayer (also former county councilman) a lot of people don’t realize we had savings beyond the RR we spend in 146 and 147. New casinos in OHIO will affect us by maybe 25-30%. He thinks this should be publicized and let everyone know what is going on. Why build it if it’s not going to meet your needs? Bridges in the county need replacing- and we are taking money from these projects when we use this money for the jail. We will take over half that savings account. Do the bond issue as Messmore was talking about. If we run into more emergencies down the road- we will have no means to address them. If someone is not here- we would wait- it’s important enough.

Chris Schwab- as a young man raised here. There has been very limited changes in how our justice system operates. Officers show up and arrest everyone- and I personally heard them say- let the judge figure it out. You can do citations etc. We like the idea. I landed in the middle of this process at age 19. (14 years ago) I made a decision to seek help elsewhere- got help for OCD and depression. 40% of jail population is probation violations due mostly to drug testing positive. Rebuilding requires rehabilitation not reincarceration. We need to spend this money for rehab, recovery, and education for our youth. As law enforcement cracks down on prescription drugs- the users go over to Cincinnati to get heroin. $80 for a presc. Pill, they now spend $20 for heroin of varying purity. An addition is not the answer. Locking up more citizens is not the answer. We need to rebuild lives- not destroy them. We need direction- not diversion.

Aaron Negangard- When I was in Council earlier in this decade- we knew then that our jail in 2000 or 2001… this was an opportunity to save money for debt in the future. You guys are here to determine what is best for the community. This 7 vote thing- they question legally is whether supermajority is allowed. Legislation says simple majority approves expenditures. Recommends they get legal advice before they vote on this. [ NOTE: State laws are the minimum standard and local laws cannot be made less stringent than the state- but it can be made more stringent. Negangard seems to imply that unanimous or supermajority votes are illegal. ] He said he spoke to Mr. Schwab one night late at night and was worried at first about how that would go as they were on opposite sides at that time. He has dialogued with him since. Our judges and sheriffs have worked hard to control this opiate situation. When they run out of funds to get drugs they will steal form family even. It takes 40 years for an opiate addict’s brain chemistry to return to normal! Jail chemical addiction program started by Judge Cleary and Blankenship is starting to work. Can’t put any more than 16 in these programs- no room. Also work release is running out of room. If it isn’t going to help with this, then don’t support it. Our probation dept says you shall not do drugs. And 15-20 a week test positive. [NOTE: Do the math- only 16 are in the program- and they stay much longer than a week- and 15-20 test positive every week on probation. If ever there was a mandate to get to the ROOT of the problem- this is it.] If they don’t take the help we’re providing, they are sent off to prison. These people are capable of being dangerous. Negangard said even non- violent offenders can become dangerous. Cited Franklin and Decatur County cases. Cincinnati violence is not here because of the diligence of our officers, judges etc. I don’t even know if this project will do the job. We don’t need to close the doors to any avenue for funding. You guys have put public safety first. That is what we need – your help to keep Dearborn County safe.

Stephanie Libbert- taxpayer and RN. (also former candidate for Greendale mayor) I push morphine daily for patients. Codeine, morphine, heroin is the hierarchy of the drug. Heroin was given to the military in WWI. Bayer co made it. 80 % of people in jails are there for possession. Victimless crimes- example- a kid with 2 joints isn’t hurting anyone but himself. Programs where pharmacists and nurses come to school to teach kids about these things are needed. If they kill someone- be in jail- but some of these others should be treated as patients. Prohibition didn’t work. 2.5 million people use illicit drugs in this country. We can’t jail them all. She had an addict bilateral arm amputee from gangrene from shooting up drugs. CATO institute has studies showing that criminalizing drugs doesn’t work. Alcohol kills more people than drugs combined. And it’s legal. Why are we blowing all this money on a jail, when the boats are coming to Ohio. We have to be smart about how we spend taxpayer money. Just as the saying goes, if you build it, they will come, well- If you build it- they will fill it. Please vote no on this.

Tom Orschell- County Commissioner- I headed up jail task force. I learned a lot about the jail. I have a list of 236 people incarcerated there. 88% felonies etc. There is space in this project for some of these programs.

Council voted to get a professional opinion from county attorney on the unanimous voting process. [NOTE: Let’s see if he invokes Home Rule on this one.]

DISCUSSION OF JAIL FUNDING:
Jim Hughes said he’d like to see more rehab than incarceration. He wants to see the people vote on it. One election would cost $40-50,000. If you put it on a regular election- cost is not there.

Lansing said- town meetings where Aaron Negangard, Mike Kreinhop and the judge could talk. I was asked during a Fed-ex delivery and a guy asked why he didn’t have any info on this.

Chris Schwab talked more about how education is the key to keeping kids away from this.

Ullrich said he’s seen this from both sides. He said if we can expand the case, we can expand the programs. Families and parenting are the way to fight drug issues. Getting people off methadone in the jail. Would rather take care of them here than ship them off to another county. [NOTE: Ullrich works for the sheriff dept.]

Kraus said this has been going on for years. We keep putting this jail off. Fund or not fund.

Liz Morris said on the task force she has come to understand the need for expansion. Standard is that 85% capacity is best to be able to put inmates in appropriate areas. $2million of this price tag is for rehabbing the current jail spaces. Twelve men in work release now- with expansion that can go to 48. (but that is in a later phase of this plan) People in the J-cap programs are grateful to be there. The current jail was built as a result of a lawsuit-ordered by a judge. We need to take care of it on our terms, said Morris.

Messmore- the good thing is that we are talking about the same solutions. How we get it funded – I guess we’ll work it out. We have tried to consider how to get additional counseling etc. We need to not polarize this and use this for other issues. It’s full, the people belong there. If you let 50 people out you’d have people who would cause problems in the community. Not trying to scare you. Maybe we should allocate funds to hire a general contractor to get some bid specs and get bids. Maybe we can bid out a couple more options. [NOTE: Why are we depending on the people involved in design and build to tell us what we need? That’s an inherent conflict of interest. Why have our elected officials and staff not produced the numbers and argument for this jail expansion? How do we relate to other counties with methadone clinics and casinos in relation to percentage jailed on felonies? The numbers are available- and it is clear that of the counties with one or both of these factors present only Wayne County and Ohio County have a higher per capita incarceration rate on D felonies than we do. (Richmond’s meth clinic and I-70 drug corridor are in Wayne County.) We need to look at improving our efficiencies and measuring our effectiveness.]

Kraus said we can vote if we are going to fund it or not and then later vote how we will fund it.

Jim Hughes-motioned to go for referendum with RQAW’s proposal. Lansing 2nd. Two ayes.( Hughes and Lansing) Motion fails.

Liz motions to approve the Commissioners’ actions for funding the jail somehow with RQAW plans. Ullrich 2nd- Messmore asked about who would select the architect? Liz said she wanted them to use RQAW’s with Messmore’s amendment to put it out to bid to improve pricing. 4 ayes 2 nays.(nay- Lansing and Hughes; Kraus did not vote) Passed. [NOTE: Motion 2nded and voted on by Ullrich- an employee of the sheriff’s dept.]

Actual method of funding discussion goes to Dec 20th meeting.

Auditor- Gayle Pennington- had two ordinances with fee schedules that commissioners passed and council needed to sign off. Approved.

Liz Morris talked about 911 fees on cell phones and how these are going to be set up in the future. AIC has asked counties to sign on in support of their position on this. It’s a resolution they can look at for their Dec meeting.

Gayle Pennington also had $500 for two advanced EMT classes and Margaret Mary Hospital to have Kraus sign off. Passed.

Minutes approved for Oct 25th.

Tom Cheek – gave them info on sewer board regarding the Huseman Road sewer project. Contractor is owner of Gabbard estates also. He wants to get a 6 “ line and he will have to flush the line periodically.

Meeting adjourned at 9:10 PM

Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawrenceburg Township

Prosecutor Aaron Negangard Defends Jail Expansion Project

2011-11-22T06:45:00.001-05:00

Prosecutor Aaron Negangard Defends Jail Expansion

The time has come to set the record straight with regard to the local criminal justice system. The Dearborn County Law Enforcement was built in 1991. Dearborn County has been forever changed since that time. In the 1990's, we saw the advent of riverboat gaming, the largest methadone clinic in the entire nation moved in Greendale and we experienced significant population growth. These factors along with the recent influx of heroin in our community has brought significant demands to our criminal justice system. We are no longer a community where we can leave our doors unlocked.

In June of this year, Douglas Garner and Democrat candidate for Superior Court Judge, Alan Miller wrote a letter citing that 45% of the people being held in jail were on misdemeanor charges. They cited the RQAW study to support this statistic. However, the RQAW study statistic was referring to the type of charges processed through the jail for the entire year not at any one time. The actual data from the Dearborn County Sheriff's Department shows that approximately 85% of the inmates are being held on felony charges. In fact, around the time they wrote their letter on June 29, 2011 of the 220 inmates being held in jail,188 were being held on felonies. This means that either Garner and Miller do not understand the problem or are intentionally trying to mislead the public. In any case, they have not stated the truth. The truth that our jail is being used to protect the public from dangerous individuals, who are charged with attempted murder, child molesting, rape, drug dealing, robbery, burglary, forgery, and theft.

Many of the people in our jail committed crimes to help pay for drugs. These people are potentially very dangerous. Early this year in Decatur county a mother tortured her 12 year old son to death because he wouldn't tell her where he hid her drugs. He had hidden the drugs because he didn't like how mom acted on her drugs. In Franklin County, a family and their neighbor were brutally murdered because of drugs. A two year old little girl was left to wander the carnage where her mother laid dead. This is the power drugs has over people and the lengths they will go to get them.

Simply putting these people on work release or in-home incarceration is not enough. The northern part of Dearborn County was terrorized early this year by an individual who had failed to return to work release in Nebraska. These programs are being used significantly but it is important to make sure these individuals are appropriate for these programs before placing them on in-home incarceration or work release.

Recently the law firm of Zerbe, Garner, Miller and Blondell has submitted another letter demonstrating their failure to grasp these issues. The recent correspondence suggests that we are just locking up and throwing away the key on these individuals. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Our community is dealing with an epidemic of opiate abuse. High school students have access to heroin. It should be noted that it takes an opiate addict 40 years before his brain chemistry returns to normal. To deal with this crisis Judge Sally Blankenship with the cooperation of other elected officials started the Jail Chemical Addiction Program (JCAP). This allows opiate addicts to receive counselling while they are incarcerated in our local jail. This helps to put these individuals on the right course before they are back in society. I personally have spoke to many of these individuals and am always impressed at how far they have come. Without Judge Blankenship's leadership on this issue JCAP would not exist. One of the reasons to increase the capacity of the jail is to expand this program. Due to space constraints the number of people who can participate in this program at any one time is 16. This is not enough to meet the demand.

Judge Cleary and Judge Blankenship have worked together to start a problem solving court called the ACC court which focuses on treatment. Judge Humphrey has been instrumental in starting an adult intensive probation program as an alternative to incarceration. That being said, if these individuals do not follow the rules of the program or otherwise fail the program, then jail is the only alternative left.

Many people in jail are in jail for probation violations. In fact, approximately 40% of the jail population is being held on probation violations. These are people who have been given a break and failed to follow the rules. Most of the probation violations are failed drug tests. Many of these people have failed multiple times. If someone cannot follow the law they need to be held accountable for their failure to obey the law.

The fact is that jail is operating above capacity and we need to increase it's capacity. We could simply not arrest or incarcerate people who commit crimes. We should catch and release fish, not criminals. It is no coincidence that in the 1990's when States started increasing penalties on habitual offenders that violent crime started to fall. Nationwide incarceration rates are high but the violent crime rate is low. The facts prove when you lock up criminals, crime goes down!

Our elected officials have foreseen this need and that is why years ago we started saving money to expand our jail. Our elected officials should move forward with the jail expansion only if it is done economically and without raising taxes. They need to be certain we get the most out of every dollar we spend. This can be done. Garner and Miller have suggested that this jail expansion will cost each resident of Dearborn County $26 a year. I believe this cost estimate is an exaggeration, but who would not be willing to protect themselves and their family for the cost of a dinner at Frisch's.

The fact is our law enforcement officers, jail officers, probation officers, Judges and all those who work in our criminal justice system are doing everything they can to keep Dearborn County a safe place to live. The public safety of the citizens of this County should never be compromised. Certain criminal defense attorneys may be willing to compromise public safety by not telling the public the truth. However, it is the job of the elected officials of this County to make decisions that will keep Dearborn County and it's citizens safe. They have done so and I believe they will continue to make the right decisions to protect our families.

Aaron Negangard

Prosecuting Attorney for Dearborn and Ohio Counties

Agenda Council Nov 22nd Meeting

2011-11-21T19:53:00.000-05:00

AGENDA DEARBORN COUNTY COUNCIL MEETING

Tuesday, Nov. 22, 2011

6:30 p.m., Commissioners Room

County Administration Building

215 B West High Street, Lawrenceburg, Indiana

I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

II. CALL TO ORDER

III. SUPERIOR COURT II – Judge Sally Blankenship

IV. PROSECUTOR – Aaron Negangard

V. PLANNING AND ZONING – Mark McCormack

VI. SHERIFF / JAIL – Mike Kreinhop & Ken McAllister

Funding commitment

Amendment for signatures

VII. HEALTH DEPARTMENT – Doug Baer

VIII. REGIONAL SEWER DISTRICT – Steven H Renihan

IX. COMMUNICATIONS – Charles Ashley

X. CIRCUIT COURT PROBATION – Stephen Bradley

XI. COMMISSIONERS – William Ewbank

XII. HIGHWAY – Todd Listerman

XIII. CLERK OF COURTS – Phillip Weaver

XIV. PAWS - Sandy Carley

XV. CARDINAL OFFICE PRODUCTS – Randy Foley

XVI. TREASURER – Barb Kaffenberger

XVII. DISCUSSION OF RIVERBOAT SAVINGS ACCOUNT

XVIII. DISCUSSION OF JAIL FUNDING

XIX. PARK BOARD - Ordinance

XX. AUDITOR – Gayle Pennington

XXI. ADJOURN

County Officials' Refusal to Consider Alternatives Will Cost Taxpayers

2011-11-17T09:01:00.002-05:00

County Officials' Refusal to Consider Alternatives Will Cost Taxpayers

by Douglas Garner
Zerbe Garner Miller & Blondell, LLP

The jail expansion plan has been approved by the County Commissioners and is set to be voted on by County Council on November 22nd at 6:30 p.m. It will cost county taxpayers at least eight million dollars to build and millions more to operate. The jail expansion is a direct result of the Prosecutor’s and Judges’ failure to change policies that caused the jail overcrowding dilemma. They would rather throw county taxpayers’ money at the problem and lock more people up than admit current strategies are not working and seek new solutions.

Less expensive and more effective alternatives to incarceration are underutilized by our Prosecutor and Judges. The primary response over the past 20 years has been to lock offenders up, both pretrial and after conviction. Dearborn and Ohio Counties share a prosecutor and a judge and are leaders in Indiana in sending people to the Department of Corrections (DOC). Dearborn County and Ohio County are 6th and 3rd respectively out of 92 counties in sending people to the DOC for low-level (Class D) felony convictions. With more jail space, more people will be held in jail longer locally.

Holding offenders in jail and sending them to the DOC for short periods of time is ineffective in preventing future crime, wastes money and ruins lives. “Lock them up and throw away the key” might be a popular campaign slogan, but it does not protect our community. The maximum sentence for a D Felony is three years. It is often served in 1 ½ years with good time credit. This means D Felony offenders will be released and be back in our community in a short period of time. Contrary to local thinking, “a taste of prison” is not helpful in reducing recidivism. Sending offenders to prison for a few months does not increase the chances they will stay out of trouble. It does the opposite. Over
67% of prison inmates reoffend within three years of release. Appropriate treatment reduces recidivism by more than 30% over those receiving no treatment.

A felony conviction and no treatment increases the likelihood an offender will be involved in new criminal behavior. If our county officials were truly concerned about protecting the community from crime, they would be proposing spending more money on appropriate treatment for low level offenders. Eight million dollars in building costs and likely over one million per year in operating costs for an expanded jail would fund a lot of treatment.

Since 1980, the number of incarcerated Americans has quadrupled. We have the highest documented incarceration rate in the world at 754 per 100,000 people. Albert Einstein reportedly said, “Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” It is time to try something different in Dearborn County.
Douglas Garner

15 November 2011 Dearborn County Commissioners Meeting Notes

2011-11-15T11:00:00.002-05:00

15 November 2011 Dearborn County Commissioners Meeting Notes

Present: Jeff Hughes, President, Tom Orschell, and Shane McHenry
Also present: Gayle Pennington, Auditor, Bill Ewbank, County Coordinator, and Andy Baudendistel, Attorney.

OLD BUSINESS:

Private Real Property Rights Preservation Ordinance Freedom for Options Form – tabled for Baudendistel to meet with McCormack. Hughes asked to be with them at this meeting to be sure his ideas are understood. Orschell thought McGill should be present as he’s Planning attorney. Baudendistel agreed as he seeks help from McGill when he has questions on Planning.

Recorder’s Office- Redaction Services and Support Agreement- every document we get in is redacted. He contacted CSI- $4095/year and a four year one with an out of $2925 (one year) paid. This is funded thru fees from the recorder’s office. $2925/year is the amount if they do the four year contract- a big savings. Commissioners approved the four year contract.

Sheriff’s Dept Medical Fee Schedule Signature- Baudendistel prepared the ordinance that amends the inmate handbook. This amends the sick call request form. Commissioners approved Ordinance 2011-015. Pennington will present this to Council at their meeting Nov 22 at 6;30 PM

NEW BUSINESS:

Mark McCormack- Planning Commission:

Request to Vacate Candlewood Court in Harvest Ridge Estates- At the Oct 24 PC meeting there was a unanimous favorable recommendation. Maxwell petitioned to vacate the small street (155 feet)so they could replat. They will replace it with a private common driveway that the county does NOT maintain. No one has objected to date. All property surrounding this belong to Maxwell. Commissioners approved the vacation as it does not limit access to property. They signed the ordinance 2011-016 as prepared by Baudendistel.

Proposed Amendments to Article 2, Sections 280 and 282 of the Subdivision Control Ordinance- McCormack stated that the PC unanimously gave a favorable recommendation to this. He explained that these were changed to match the states new code revisions. No one spoke out against this at the PC meeting. If all property owners are in agreement that it’s OK to vacate, they don’t have to have a hearing- they can just file a written instrument doing this. This will save applicants an extra step and money and time in some cases. Commissioners can send items to PC for review if they want to get their recommendation. We want certified surveys as part of these in addition to the requirements of state code. It makes sense in some areas with ROW and other public ways involved. The person wanting to make the change is responsible for the fees. Costs are about $150 plus meeting costs. Commissioners approved ordinance 2011-017 and 2011-018 for the amendments to Article 2 Sections 280 and 282.

Proposed Amendments to Article 22 Section 2245 of the Zoning Ordinance –PC unanimously passed a favorable recommendation to entirely repeal that section on parking lot landscaping requirements. Other ordinances cover drainage issues, etc. Exterior plantings and bufferyards are still required. The applicant can still put landscape in parking areas on their own if they desire. Commissioners approved Ordinance 2011-019 to remove article 22 Section 2245 from the Zoning Ordinance.

McCormack said they will be bringing more revisions due to the state law changes in the future. He will email to Baudendistel as their offices have moved.

County Administrator’s Position- County Coordinator position not funded by Council- this is now a newly funded position in the 2012 budget. They will post the position and HR- Suellen Cauble will help with the interview process. Some positions get a team interview. They will go over the old Administrator’s job description. Commissioners make the final decision. McHenry wanted to make it clear that this was not an attack on Bill but we have to follow the policy on filling a new position. Orschell concurred. They will schedule an executive session for this.

Ratify Life Time Housing Payroll Authorization Letter- This was time sensitive so Hughes signed. McHenry said they should have sent someone to answer questions about this. They don’t know much about this. They refused to ratify until Life Time comes in. Tabled.

HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT: Todd Listerman, Highway Engineer was absent so Tim Grieve, Highway Supervisor, presented.

Hired truck drivers- most have CDLs- still looking for the 5th driver. McHenry asked for the names of those new hires.

They had a round table discussion at HVL per Orschell- and they asked if they could share some of our paving contract prices, fuel, and salt. They could participate in the INDOT contract for salt like we do- unless there is some issue with their lack of incorporation. Orschell said we could still do the fuel, asphalt, and paving. Grieve will research that for legalities. Grieve asked how much asphalt they use. They could maybe get the contractors to smile on them for the prices on the paving issues etc. Salt would not work as they are not a public entity. Grieve thought the best thing would be for him to talk to our vendors. He thought the cities should consider this as well. Some towns like to be their own player.

AUDITOR: Gayle Pennington- presented that Dr Steven Eliason ( sp?) will continue on. Commissioners reappointed Eliason to the Board of Health. The appointment can be reaffirmed at the first Jan 2012 meeting per Baudendistel.

Nov 1 meeting minutes- McHenry wanted his motion on the jail expansion to be typed out verbatim. Tabled for Gayle to do that. Claims were approved.

ATTORNEY: Andy Baudendistel-Margaret Minzner with GIS forwarded an agreement for Wolpert, Inc. to perform orthophotography for the county. They fly the county in February. Hughes is impressed with the IT capabilities of the GIS system. Cost of the contract is shared with OKI and pledges of support to council and towns, cities, conservancy district. Each will pay in something. Orthophotography is turned on now per Pennington. Commissioners approved the contract for $ 41,293.31

COUNTY COORDINATOR: Bill Ewbank:

Appointment of American Disability Acts Coordinator- Federal Hwy funds depend on our compliance with this ADA act. There are a number of steps and milestones that must be met. Several have to be accomplished by Dec 31st. they are revisiting this to get to 1996 level of compliance. Bill Ewbank (the County Coordinator/Administrator) will be the ADA Coordinator. Costs will include doorknobs at $150-200 each lever lockset. Hoosier Square to get entrance ADA accessible. Parks, roads, crosswalks, etc. will be addressed. Grants may be available for some of this. First we need to get our laundry list together to see what we need to do. Historical structures may be exempt if ADA would destroy historical value. Sight, hearing etc are also needing to be considered.

Request to go to Council – Additional Appropriation for Hoosier Square and Courthouse Renovations and Adm Bldg. – requesting $655,000 additional. They are going to try to bring this budget down, line by line. They have some major work to get space for Superior 2. They can fund Hoosier Square first and then do the Courthouse 2nd. Because the number is high they know they have to phase it. The original costs of all this would have been $6million- now if we get it all done- it will be less than $2 million including Votaw space etc. Commissioners approved Ewbank going to council.

Approve Consulting Agreement with Kroger Consulting & Dearborn County Foundation - DCF- enable IT- trying to get broadband to all of Dearborn County. Partners are all schools, hospital, municipalities, and HVL. Hughes asked to include Workforce One. No cost to us- just want us to enthusiastically support it. Commissioners signed.

Ewbank asked to develop a procedure to dispose of surplus vehicles. He has been getting a lot of requests from other entities. He wants to keep county agencies as first pick. 2nd pick could be municipal fire depts. and EMS and maybe last go to private not for profit organizations. Pennington said SBOA would want some procedures in place. Orschell said Sue had copies of titles of vehicles we no longer have- that may be at HVL. Bill to develop a procedure and email to Baudendistel to look over. This has to be available for audit by SBOA.

Pennington is getting ready to purchase a new recording system effective Jan 1st. This will have a written and audio version to be ADA compliant. You can click on these on the county website soon.

Health Sept has a video conferencing set up so the county can use that if needed.

Sue Hayden has placed all board members due for appointment Jan 1st.

COMMISSIONER COMMENTS- none

LATE ARRIVAL INFORMATION- none

PUBLIC COMMENT- none

Meeting adjourned at 10:25 AM

Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawrenceburg Township

Veteran's Day 11-11-11

2011-11-11T07:01:00.002-05:00

On Veterans Day we thank those who have served in the military during times of war and peace, especially our own Dearborn County veterans.

This nation will remain the land of the free only so long as it is the home of the brave.
-- Elmer Davis

I think there is one higher office than president and I would call that patriot.
-- Gary Hart

In war, there are no unwounded soldiers.
-- José Narosky

We sleep safely in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm.
-- George Orwell

The more we sweat in peace, the less we bleed in war.
-- Vijaya Lakshmi Pandit

Courage is almost a contradiction in terms. It means a strong desire to live taking the form of readiness to die.
-- G.K. Chesterton

In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot.
-- Mark Twain

History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid.
-- General Dwight D. Eisenhower

Freedom is never free.
-- Author Unknown

Agenda for Nov 15th Commissioners Meeting

2011-11-10T15:30:00.001-05:00

AGENDA
DEARBORN COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MEETING
November 15, 2011
9:00 a.m.
City of Lawrenceburg
Administration Building
230 Walnut Street, Lawrenceburg, Indiana

I. CALL TO ORDER

II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

III. OLD BUSINESS
1. Private Real Property Rights Preservation Ordinance
Freedom for Options Form
2. Recorder’s – Redaction Services & Support Agreement
3. Sign off on Sheriff Department Medical Fee Schedule

IV. NEW BUSINESS
1. Mark McCormack – Plan Commission
a. Request to Vacate Candlewood Court in Harvest Ridge Estates
b. Proposed Amendments to Article 2, Sections 280 & 282 of Subdivision Control Ordinance
c. Proposed Amendments to Article 22, Section 2245 of Zoning Ordinance
2. County Administrator’s Position
County Coordinator position not funded per Council
3. Ratify Life Time Housing Payroll Authorization Letter

V. HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT- Todd Listerman
Updates

VI. AUDITOR – Gayle Pennington
1. Claims/Minutes

VII. ATTORNEY - Andy Baudendistel

VIII. COUNTY COORDINATOR – Bill Ewbank
1. Appointment of American Disability Acts Coordinator
2. Request to go to Council
Additional Appropriation for Hoosier Square and Courthouse Renovations
3. Approve Consulting Agreement with Kroger Consulting & DCF

IX. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS

X. LATE ARRIVAL INFORMATION

XI. PUBLIC COMMENT

XII. ADJOURN

Joseph McCaleb Letter from Brewington Sentencing HearingTranscribed

2011-11-07T21:02:00.001-05:00

9/25/11

Re: Dan Brewington

Mr. Negangard,

I am currently a cellmate of Dan Brewington, whom I assume you are familiar with. Mr. Brewington is always discussing his case. However, two days ago he received transcripts of his grand jury hearing. Based upon what he’s been telling me and what I’ve read in the transcripts, this guy needs help.

I understand how he’s frustrated because he truly believes he has done no wrong but some of the threats he made against Judge Humphrey and yourself are more than just frustration. They are so detailed and thoughtout that I really believe that he may act upon them. For example, he has told me a fantasy about following Judge Humphrey home from work, kidnapping him with the .357 he was ordered to hand over to his ex-wife, shooting him and using concrete to dispose of him in the Ohio River. It’s not so much the fantasy of doing such, but it’s moreso the well thoughtout step by step details he gave that alarmed me.

Moreover, he has admitted stalking Dr. Connor by driving past his house, his plans to picket his home and business with signs proclaiming him to be a criminal and unfaithful to his wife and admitted he knew Ms. Humphrey was the wife of Judge Humphrey when he post their address.

I would appreciate it if you would keep this confidential. From what most I have heard from the people here (mostly Brewington), you are crooked and dirty, only out for yourself. I don’t take these opinions too seriously considering the sources so I have faith that you will honor this request.

If you need to speak to me regarding this I will be more than happy to do so. I do not ask for anything in return other than keeping this to yourself for now.

Regards,

Joseph McCaleb

Brewington Voluntarily Dismisses Federal Lawsuit Without Prejudice Today

2011-11-07T20:39:00.003-05:00

Note: Dismissal Without Prejudice does not preclude filing the suit at a later date.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION
DANIEL BREWINGTON : CASE NO. 1:11-CV-1144SEB-DML
:
Plaintiff :
:
-vs.- :
:
F. AARON NEGANGARD, et al. :
:
Defendants :

PLAINTIFF’S STIPULATION OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL OF
ALL CLAIMS AS TO ALL PARTIES PURSUANT TO FRCP 41 (a)

Now comes the Plaintiff, by and through undersigned counsel, and hereby dismisses his
complaint in the within cause of action without prejudice at Plaintiff’s costs.

/s/ Robert G. Kelly
Robert G. Kelly (0002167)
Trial Counsel for Plaintiff
4353 Montgomery Road
Norwood, Ohio 45212
(513) 531-3636
(513) 531-0135 Fax
Email address: rgkellycolpa@aol.com

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on November 7, 2011, a copy of the foregoing motion with signature was filed electronically. Notice of this filing will be sent to the following parties by operation of the Court’s electronic filing system. Parties may access this filing through the Court’s system.

Cory C. Voight
Deputy Attorney General
Email: coryvoigt@atg.in.gov

Michael E. Brown, Esq.
Kightlinger & Gray
Email: mbrown@k-glaw.com
Case 1:11-cv-01144-SEB-DML Document 39 Filed 11/07/11 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 169

Liberty L. Roberts, Esq.
Collier Magar & Roberts
Email: liberty@cmrlawfirm.com

Karen R. Goodwell, Esq.
Richard L. Mattox, Esq.
Mattox & Wilson LLP
Email: krg@mattoxwilson.com
Email: rlm@mattoxwilson.com

Jason J. Pattison, Esq.
Jenner, Auxier & Pattison, LLP
Email: jpattison@wjennerlaw.net

/s/ Robert G. Kelly
Robert G. Kelly (0002167)
2

1 November 2011 Dearborn County Commissioners Meeting Notes

2011-11-01T20:55:00.002-04:00

1 November 2011 Dearborn County Commissioners Meeting Notes

Present: Jeff Hughes, President, Tom Orschell, and Shane McHenry
Also present: Gayle Pennington, Auditor, Bill Ewbank, County Coordinator, and Andy Baudendistel, Attorney.

Register Publications covered the meeting.

OLD BUSINESS:

Private Real property Rights Preservation Ordinance- Hughes wants an Addendum to Future Land use Plan Exemptions for all private property owners who request it. Hughes went back thru land use plan and said it wasn’t going to be regulatory. Doesn’t want special interests group to determine what someone can do with their land. Orschell said – it’s an advisory tool- and it should be discussed in Planning and Zoning. Hughes thinks commissioners should LEAD that process. Hughes wants to have Baudendistel to research it to exempt property owner from the land use plan. Orschell has a problem with exemptions. McHenry said he sees a use for regulations and also wants people to be able to use their land for whatever in reason. Hughes calls the master plan an arbitrary plan made up by special interests. He cited an individual asking someone to be taken off the master plan committee when they didn’t do what he thought was right. Hughes doesn’t want government standing in anyone’s way, if they use all their creative genius to kick start the economy with a business for example. Baudendistel is to look to draw up an addendum that make sure the future land use map is not a regulatory map and doesn’t get in the way of developing property if someone wants to. It will go to plan commission for discussion.

Revised Jail Expansion Project- Mark of RQAW and Joe Mrak were present to go over the history of the justice center and current plan. April 10, 2010 meeting- Purchase Hoosier Square and add to the jail were the 2 items that came from that meeting. RQAW was contracted to plan for this in the master plan for the justice system housing. There were a series of presentations over the next year to construct 250 more beds that included a component of work-release housing. It became known before June 2011 that we might not be able to afford this. They eliminated the work release housing from the plan, knowing that it might be able to be done later. Even with that 50 bed elimination it was thought to be too expensive. They went back to the table- now on revision 2 on the preliminary design phase. They want their design to accommodate future expansion should it be necessary. Proposing about 122 beds with the option of 78 or so more. These 122 would be lighter security cells- dormitories and 4 man cells. They also would, have the open space minimally constructed like a walk out basement for the 78 should they be needed later.
Programming space is also in the plan for drug programs. Remodeling of the basement allows for additional space for law enforcement. Video arraignment might also be in this plan for improved security. New kitchen and laundry space is included. Miami County uses their multipurpose room for video arraignment. RQAW designed that. Hughes kept asking how close the video arraignment space had to be to the judge. He didn’t realize that this operates through the internet for video transfer.
Mark said that they can relocate some officers to supervise 120 inmates more without having to change staffing needs. He also had a new space to isolate the female population from the males. There would be increased utility costs due to increased space, but the staffing plan would be staff neutral be relocating their spaces. Food, heat, and staff are the big jail costs.

Cost of this is: Hard construction costs- $7 – 7.4 million. Soft costs would be $1.13- 1.2 million. Shoot for the low number and plan on the high number. Maximum amount is $9,259,663 according to their estimates.

Additional square footage for vehicular sally-port is about $250,000. Proposed 336 bed total capacity. They also have a space to add additional housing attached to the current plan space. Prefabricated modular steel cells are what are being used to make these cells. This is most cost effective. This happens without disrupting security for the rest of the jail. They have been using these since 2002. Columbus Indiana- Bartholomew County Jail uses these and the architecture matches the city there. These modular cells are inside the building- a double envelope style. The windows do NOT line up with the outside windows to avoid prisoners “show and tell” with outside world. They still get borrowed natural light. Task Force recommends this – the group changes a little bit depending on staff schedules. Orschell said he had the pleasure of heading up the task force and the biggest problem was the money. They took out basement and parking area and an elevator. The J-caps and GED needed space. Orschell thinks this is a good fit for Dearborn County. McHenry asked what it would take to take C3 back to work release. Mark outlined the details that would need to be added. Less than 200 ankle bracelets are available in the county for work release. Orschell said the county wants to reduce repetitive crime with their programs. We keep 80 out of state (25%) or out of county in here and 100 probationers. ( 40%) Kreinhop provided the percentages that they have on average. Kreinhop is concerned that the county will be sued for overcrowded conditions as they were 22 years ago. A judge ordered the building of the current facility due to this. A bill died that would have returned all Class D felonies to us. If they do succeed in passing this we will have a problem housing this. Orschell said that Rep. Jud McMillin told him it could happen but not as likely as a year ago. 87% are being held on at least one class D felony or more. Only 17% were being held for misdemeanors.

Hughes asked if the commissioners would like to have a public hearing. McHenry says this is fueled by drug abuse or related crime. These people often commit more crimes – theft – to get money for the drugs or substance abuse. He doesn’t want to see the county become catch and release like Hamilton County has become. McHenry said- Dearborn County is called the Bermuda Triangle- once you get caught over here you are never coming back.

Hughes asked if the economic downturn has increased crime. This particular downturn has not shown this per Joe Mrak of RQAW. Hughes thought that more jobs and economic development would decrease crime. McHenry said that with 87% of felons- they will have a hard time getting jobs with that history.

Orschell said this project should go forwarded. McHenry agreed. He wanted to hire a construction management firm to help them. Hughes asked about a referendum. Orschell said that would cost $50,000. Why not have a remonstrance possibility with 100 signatures- cheaper. This would call for a petition “war” or “race” to see what side wins then. Barnes and Thornburgh and Umbaugh and Associates presented on this earlier.

Orschell said that if we are doing our homework, due diligence, and be fiscally responsible. If they feel we did it wrong they will fire us next election. He thinks Council is going to have to work out. McHenry says Council will decide if they are ready to fund this. McHenry motioned to go to Council with the project and see if they are willing to fund it and if so we will hire a construction management firm to manage it. Orschell 2nd. Hughes wanted it to die. He voted nay- Passed. This discussion took a little over an hour.

Unnecessary Regulations Discussion- Planning Commission forwarded a favorable recommendation section 2245 Article 22- tabled.

Vacate Right of way at West St and Alley in Hardinsburg- Kraus Jr. County Surveyor presented on behalf of owner Terry Cornett. It was also modified to accommodate the needs of the Lawrenceburg conservancy district for floodway control including the request by Richard Butler, attorney for LCD. No discussion as no public was concerned. Baudendistel read the ordinance vacating this. Commissioners passed the vacation of West Street and the alley.

NEW BUSINESS:

Sheriff Kreinhop/Kenny McAlister- request to approach Council for one time funds to replace canine who had to be retired due to bone cancer. McAlister was available for questions as the canine handler. Kreinhop supported and endorsed the replacement. McAlister gave a quote from the kennels in Peru where they purchased the last one. Cost is same as the old one for $10,000. The price increase was not used as this was so early to replace. The last one was funded by the Community Foundation for $23,000. He has turned in a $7500 grant from CASA. He is also seeking $5,000 from the community foundation. There are also options for private citizens to donate. He also passed out info on programs the canine participated in. He uses the dog has a bridge to get the kids to talk. Commissioners approved them seeking money at Council.

Recorder- Redaction Services and Support Agreement- Bill Ewbank asked to table this until contract is amended . Tabled.

HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT: Todd Listerman, Highway Engineer:

Accept Indian Ridge section 2 off Dutch Hollow road- 3 roads- Creek Side Drive0.2mi, Falling Rock 0.16 mi, and extension of Indian Ridge 0.26 mi. Commissioners approved these 3 roads and accepted them into inventory.

Bridge needing replaced- #38-Schwipps Rd- $58,300 for Barth and Associates for design. Approved. Baudendistel has reviewed the contracts on this and the following 3.
Bridge #41- $53,700 on Lake Tambo Road- Barth and Associates- Approved
Bridge #43 $56,800-Platt Road Barth and Associates- Approved.
Bridge # 77 Woliung Road$60,700 – Barth and Associates- Approved.

Council gave preliminary approval to meet with INDOT to start the process on Stateline Road.

Dedication tomorrow morning at 10 AM for new salt facility on Randall Ave funded by L-bg thru the Community Foundation. Commissioners joked about having brunch as they already had the salt.

Hughes asked about contracts with private contractors for snow removal. Listerman said they are using FEMA prices.

AUDITOR: Gayle Pennington- claims approved. Oct 18 and Sept 20 minutes approved. Hughes said he hadn’t looked them over- but if they were ok with it was good enough for him.

Gayle said that Superior Court 2 has not had any conflicts with our morning meeting since she has been in office. She wanted to have them moved to adm bldg for 2012- Commissioners agreed. They were grateful to L-bg for providing the space and a letter will be sent to L-bg thanking them.

ATTORNEY: Andy Baudendistel- Presented the ordinance regarding Commissioner and Council Districts which were redrawn without splitting precincts. Commissioners approved the ordinance- #2011-013.

Baudendistel also presented an amendment to Zoning Ordinance to comply with new laws passed. It deals with appeals and waivers. Article 1 section 160 Approved.

COUNTY COORDINATOR: Bill Ewbank
Disposition of surplus vehicles- no longer needs to be discussed. These go to general fund and so the agencies selling need to request these funds back from Council.

INDOT available Thursday for Commissioners- who will drive up together early that morning.

COMMISSIONER COMMENTS- none

LATE ARRIVAL INFORMATION- Hughes had to sign a grant from the Indiana Justice Institute from Tom McKay who said it was time sensitive. McHenry said it was a worthwhile program. McKay had been working on it for a long time. No money needed from county. Commissioners ratified the grant.

PUBLIC COMMENT- none

Meeting adjourned at 8 PM

Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawrenceburg Township

Agenda for Nov 1st Commissioners Meeting

2011-10-28T18:28:00.000-04:00

AGENDA
DEARBORN COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MEETING
November 1, 2011
6:00 p.m., Commissioners Room
County Administration Building
215 B West High Street, Lawrenceburg, Indiana

I. CALL TO ORDER

II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

III. OLD BUSINESS
1. Private Real Property Rights Preservation Ordinance
Addendum to Future Land Use Plan Exemptions for All Private Property Owners who request it
2. Revised Jail Expansion Project
3. Unnecessary Regulations Discussion
Planning Commission Forwarded Recommendation Section 2245 Article 22
4. Vacate Right of Way at West St. and Alley in Hardinsburg

IV. NEW BUSINESS
1. Sheriff Kreinhop/Kenny McAlister – Request to approach Council
2. Recorder’s – Redaction Services & Support Agreement

V. HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT- Todd Listerman
Updates

VI. AUDITOR – Gayle Pennington
1. Claims/Minutes

VII. ATTORNEY - Andy Baudendistel

VIII. COUNTY COORDINATOR – Bill Ewbank
1. Disposition of Surplus Vehicles

IX. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS

X. LATE ARRIVAL INFORMATION

XI. PUBLIC COMMENT

XII. ADJOURN

24 October 2011 Sentencing Hearing For Dan Brewington- Notes

2011-10-25T17:25:00.002-04:00

24 October 2011 Sentencing Hearing For Dan Brewington- Notes

Special Judge Brian Hill from Rush County presided over the hearing. Brian Barrett continued as Brewington’s Public Defender- also from Rush County. Prosecutor Negangard and his assistant prosecutor Joe Kisor were also present. Brewington was attired in his orange jumpsuit and pink handcuffs.

Judge Hill asked if they all received a copy of the presentencing evaluation report. Answer-Yes.

Negangard presented all the state’s evidence with Kisor nodding frequently throughout the presentation.

Mike Kreinhop- sheriff was called first and identified exhibit 1 as Dan’s Adventure’s in Taking on the Family Court’s writings. Negangard added- and those are just the ones he’s added since the jury convicted him!

Barrett asked questions for the preliminary purpose of objecting. He asked, “Do you have knowledge as to who posted these? He has been in your custody.” Negangard noted they were also posted in links on the Dearborn County Blogsite.

The postings were admitted over Barrett’s objection.

Dr Edward Connor was called by Negangard and identified as one of the victims. He read a lengthy statement for the court directed at Dan Brewington. Connor said he’d read his (Brewington’s) thought’s for four years and that you have spent an enormous amount of time blaming everyone but yourself. You have been scheming and plotting to intimidate. Connor cited a case where Brewington wrote an anonymous letter to damage his practice and get others to hate me. and said that he didn’t testify at trial because he knew they would ask him about that and he’d have to admit to it. You told people I was a pervert in a post about asking a client about “shaving pubic hair.” That is a commonly asked question in cases where we try to find out about possible molestation. This is how you take one item and twist it to your own purpose. Connor reiterated the accusations that Brewington tried to damage his reputation and practice by mass mailings to attorneys and colleagues of Connor’s from the trial. He said, you have obsessed about me for four years, You are paranoid. But you do know the difference between right and wrong. I couldn’t predict if you would act on your writings. You also posted things about my wife (who is also a psychologist and works with Connor) When you said you would beat the custody evaluator senseless, that was a real threat, You even found a picture of my deceased father and posted that and also a picture of me from a wedding- and it is not known how you obtained that. You posted my street name and the amount of mortgage on my house. It did intimidate us. Three judges, the KY Board of Psychologists, all agreed that I had a right NOT to release the case file to you. You hold fast to these ideas and it will be a longer time away from your daughters. Connor cited the ex wife, his former attorneys, staff at daughter’s school etc as people Brewington blames or thinks are all wrong. Connor said- I never wrote anything about you on the internet. You have tremendous writing skills, computer skills, and intelligence. But you lack emotional intelligence. I do not determine if you get the case file- the court decides. Know this- There is nothing in the case file that will have any bearing on your custody case! I know that you would have posted info from that case file on the internet and hurt your ex-wife and kids. You wasted taxpayer’s dollars with this trial. Your family supports your delusional behavior. If allowed to go free you will ramp up your efforts to hurt people. We need to set a precedent here about internet stalking. The Courts will not have assistance or citizens to help as they will fear internet retaliation.

Sara Jones- Connor- had no prepared statement- she defers to what Dr Connor said. This is frightening to us. We have dealt with him daily for the past four years. We were not sure how he got info on us. The number of websites he used is astonishing. The amount of time he spent in his quest for revenge is disturbing. She reiterated the so- called anonymous letter to her husband. He attempted to gather other disgruntled clients- some of the clients we have are dangerous individuals. We were frightened for our children. He won’t stop if he goes free. What will he do? No children for two years doesn’t stop him, jail time doesn’t stop him. This is not about free speech-it’s about threats and intimidation- the degree he has caused alarm and fear in ours and other victim’s lives.

Heidi Humphrey- said they had to change their life style. He was given a simple request to seek help- and instead he has used this to intimidate. We are scared. I am still looking over my shoulder.

Judge Hill conferred with the attorneys.

Judge James D Humphrey- identified as Circuit Court Judge for Dearborn and Ohio Counties and a victim of Dan Brewington’s crimes. He read a statement saying that he was here in an unfamiliar role and needed to temper his remarks as he is a judge. He said that NO judge who saw Brewington’s writing, behavior, etc. would have …. This is not first amendment, but a disturbed person. He has not taken his own kids into consideration. It is more disturbing that he put my wife and family in this as some sort of sick revenge.
Humphrey praised Judge Hill for taking the case and also the public defender and Negangard for their roles in the case. You will probably be the next target. My wife and I have been targeted in a ridiculous federal lawsuit. He said that the lawsuit paperwork was sent to their home address- as one more way of using their home address. (Heidi Humphrey’s only legal address)
Humphrey said this is not a banana republic where judges can be intimidated. We will not be bullied or intimidated by you!
He (Brewington) will not listen or show any signs of remorse. Probation will just be a new target of intimidation. My wife and I will accept whatever your decision is. This man has no remorse and will carry out his sick campaign into the future.

Humphrey then sat in the front row and watched the rest of the hearing.

Joseph Kevin McCaleb (in getting the correct spelling from the county jail inmate list other info is that he was incarcerated July 4, 2011 for several counts of theft and attempted theft) McCaleb said he was Brewington’s cellmate for the past 2.5 months. He identified and exhibit as a letter that he (McCaleb) wrote to Aaron Negangard. Negangard asked McCaleb if Brewington said anything about future behavior. McCaleb said that there were comments about shooting Judge Humphrey that were so detailed and thought out that he was worried. He said now I don’t think this anymore. Negangard asked why and he said after talking to him and getting to know his family, I don’t think the same. Negangard asked what the fantasy was that he had written about. McCaleb said following him home, shooting him and dumping him in the river. Did he admit to having the 357? McCaleb- yes. Did he admit to driving past Connor’s house? Yes. Did he admit Heidi was James Humphrey’s wife? Yes.

Negangard asked, “Did he have any other thoughts and opinions?” McCaleb said- “He had thoughts and opinions about you!” Negangard ignored that comment.

Barrett asked about the date of the letter- Sept 25,2011 – it was the date sent- and noted that was before the trial. (this was not brought up at the jury trial)

Negangard was finished with witnesses and Barrett asked if Brewington could use elocution and present evidence or testify. They recessed for Barrett and Brewington to consult and then resumed at 2:40 PM

Dan Brewington testified under oath from his chair. Barrett asked several questions to get the following information: Brewington is 37 years old, divorced, with two children, Mary (7) and Audrey(5). He has been incarcerated in the DCLC since 3/11/11 continuously with his previous arrest in Ohio 3 days prior to turning himself in Indiana. He bonded out of Ohio to report to Indiana. He is prepared to address the court himself and present several documents.

Brewington began by addressing the judge as your Honor and cited some court cases throughout this and quotes to show his belief in his constitutional rights of 1st amendment. ( Cantwell vs. Connecticut) he said- I vigorously challenged the legal system. If I felt the activities violated laws I would not have done that. I don’t like to use this word in court but Mr. Negangard said that you can call the judge a son of a bitch but not a child abuser. The prosecutor convinced the grand jury to indict me for exposing evidence and even told the jurors in my trial not to worry about that.(referring to the post where Brewington says he’s going to talk about the grand jury and then the link goes to a movie script.) This brings into question all the indictments by the grand jury. Judge Humphrey’s candidacy and political contribution report has a post it note that says “Do not disclose address.” In Ohio this is against election rules. This exhibit B shows Humphrey’s election forms dating back to Oct 12, 2004 ALL LISTING Humphrey’s address- as it is a public record.

In reference to publishing Heidi Humphrey’s address on the internet- Brewington said that as late as Aug 22, 2009, she was listed as a public official. In a Feb 21, 2011 article on the internet it lists all of James Humphrey’s activities, spouse, kids, and smoking recipes. He also hunted squirrels as a kid. And yet they question me teaching my girls to shoot a BB gun.

Negangard stopped him and questioned how he got the internet report- it was from his family and Brewington had asked them to research Humphrey on the internet.
Brewington said that Prosecutor Negangard did not tell the truth when he said I did not get a mental health evaluation. The exhibits introduced at this point were Sept 30, 2009 and Oct 2009 encounters with Dr Henry Waite, psychiatrist. He said that Dr, Waite is and MD and can prescribe, unlike Dr. Connor who is a PhD psychologist. Judge Humphrey’s orders to get a mental health evaluation were from August 18, 2009. There is a letter in this exhibit from Dr. Waite that he wrote after finding out about my situation and also a CV (curriculum vitae) for Dr. Waite.
Another exhibit shows Waite being able to receive Connor’s evaluation. Jan 19, 2010 and March 2010 dates were on these items. The court was aware that he wanted to use Dr. Waite. On March 19, 2010 a hearing was set for June 14 2010 to get Dr. Waite approved. Humphrey recused himself 5 days before this hearing. He served as our judge for a year after he knew I was investigating him. There are 8 different entries on the CCS documents on my divorce from Dr. Waite. Waite describes me as being like a CEO- with and energetic personality. He says that I am no danger to my kids or others. Brewington also showed a letter from his treating physician Dr. Doug Logan and patient ledgers showing that he has not missed treatments since 2002. Granted this is just for ADHD.

It was stated that I attacked Dr Connor because of the custody issues. That is not true- I went after this report because of the numerous errors and oversights and then he charged us to correct them. He had inaccurate prescription usage and listed my brother Mark as a reference. My brother is Matt and I never gave his name as a reference. There were issues with eth office policy statement submitted by my wife and her attorney, Angela Loechel. Connor said this was an adjunct document… Judge Hill interrupted and wanted Brewington to get to pertinent information.

Brewington said they brought another inmate in here attesting to ridiculous allegations. They had Keith Jones on a drive-by on Judge Humphrey tip that was investigated by Shane McHenry and ATF agent. The jail management system in Hamilton County shows that we never came in contact in the Hamilton County Justice center. This is an example of the QUESTIONABLE conduct of the prosecutor. This exhibit shows that and also certified copies of Keith Jones arrest records.

Judge Hill said- the inmate at the Hamilton County jail and the one at DCLC are not a concern. I will NOT take any part of these into consideration in my sentencing.
All the exhibits on Dr Waite are admitted. It was not clear if the info on the Keith Jones case was admitted or not.

Exhibit J had four letters of character references from people who knew Brewington- Thomas Maloney- fire chief, Tim Haywood, a police officer, Jane ( and RN) and Wendell- ( couldn’t catch their last names).

The final Exhibit- K- is a picture of me and my daughters just before they were taken away. One of the girls would run back and forth to reset the timer on the camera. We took a lot of pictures- we do creative things- it’s who we were- and what we did. Brewington’ s voice cracked several times talking about his daughters. Barrett helped fill in with a question to ease him through.

Brewington went on- I will turn 38 soon and aside from a DUI in 1996 I follow the laws, I did say harsh things on the internet. I didn’t know it was against the law. No one told me to stop or if this falls into telecommunications harassment. Vigorous criticism by citizens is allowed. I was under the impression this would be a civil matter- not a criminal matter. Connor said he is an extension of the court system to Judge Taul so he is public. They ask what my intent with blogging was. I met a new friend ( Greg Morehead)through the blog- we connected over our custody experiences with Dr Connor. I was not stalking Dr Connor- I went to support Greg Morehead at his invitation to his hearing.

My speech was harsh- but not malicious in terms of violating the law. Brewington gave other opinions- Brandenburg vs. Ohio about yelling fire in a crowded theater. I did not threaten public safety- I did things from behind a computer- some called me a coward for that- but I signed all my writing.
I accept the punishment I get- under no circumstances did I knowingly commit a crime- I thought it was free speech.

Judge Hill asked if Dan Brewington had read his pre-sentencing evaluation- and was it accurate. He said yes. The only self reported crime was a DUI in 1996- yes- in Campbell County, KY.

Closing arguments:

Negangard:

Cited Richardson vs. state, Engelmeyer vs. state and Blakely vs. state you can look at a range of sentences. Charges in this case can go to 9-10 years maximum, depending on if they are concurrent or consecutive.

The state is concerned- even as we sit here today he accepts no responsibility. Melissa ( his wife) and the judge suggested he stop. He never accepts responsibility. He lied again when he said he didn’t know he had to get a court approved psychologist. Nor has he paid any sums ordered except child support. It shows his disdain for authority. To this day he has not done what was ordered by the court.

Negangard then talked about Judge Joan Humphrey Lefkow of Illinois. Negangard said that her pro se litigant felt bad, filed motions, a suit, and complaints to the attorney general. This guy went to her home and killed her husband and mother. The judge was not home.

There is psychological evidence for years now Brewington has paranoia and delusions and has yet to be evaluated to shed light on who he is or what makes him tick. Now he says it’s MY fault! ( Negangard’s fault) He has continually blogged since the trial. His intent is to intimidate and he lied to the grand jury when he testified and a jury found him guilty. Mr. Brewington has attempted to affect the outcome of the judicial process. Negangard then went back to Judge Lefkow having to be protected by US Marshalls. Brewington has no apologies- no acceptance of responsibility. He says- “If I knew I’d violated the law…” He’s proud that he hasn’t turned over the handgun to his wife as she’s psychologically unstable. It still hasn’t occurred to him that he should do this psych evaluation and see his kids. There is NO POINT IN PROBATION! It would just be more letters and targets. We need to protect the judicial system. We need a sentence to send a message. Connor and others won’t testify in court if they fear internet harassment. There is a shortage of doctors willing to testify across the state. When witnesses won’t testify- that will cause the republic to fall.

In blogging- the intent was no longer to stimulate public discourse. Hold him accountable for his attacks on the judicial system, He is not someone deserving of mercy. Melissa ( Brewington’s wife) thought it would be a good thing if he’d address his problems. Brewington could be wrong and he needs to be fixed.

Barrett:

gave a printed sheet of his background cases and argument- then spoke:

All his criticism- he put it in writing. The law is about aggravating and mitigating circumstances. All of these items are part of an episode of criminal conduct. The average is 18 months. The maximum is 4 years. Generally criminal history is the most significant factor. I don’t know how these acts made people feel. Negangard doesn’t agree. That’s why we have appellate courts.

Barrett said it was INAPPROPRIATE to consider Bacher vs. State 1997. The impact requires that it would require specific findings that were foreseeable to defendant. It is inappropriate for a trial judge to send a message as in Greg vs. Bay vs. state 1996. ( don’t hold me to spellings on this he was talking fast) Defendant’s jail time should be rehabilitative as well as punitive. Buchanon vs. state – talks about the absence of physical injury and minimal property loss in sentencing guides.

Barrett said his speech is protected- right or wrong- tasteful or not. He has no criminal history. This is NOT like Judge Lefkow that Negangard mentioned. ( for the story look her up on Wikipedia and the internet) This defendant ( Brewington) is likely to respond to his time already served. He has been in jail for 231 days including the Ohio time. We ask you to use the 231 days as time served and he will live with his mother in Ohio.

Judge Hill-
went over the mitigating circumstances. He found that Brewington did plan to harm them based on his voluminous amounts published. He said the circumstances are likely to reoccur as he still intends to write, even if it is not criminal. He referred to the judge in derogatory terms as often as possible in his posting about son of a bitch vs. child abuser. The probation issue is not a reasonable solution. He has been a law abiding citizen since before all this and the DUI is too long ago to even consider.

As to aggravating circumstances, Hill said there was significant harm done to people. There were ongoing comments and threat after threat for years. You twist the fact to manipulate the justice system to make yourself out to be the victim. Hill used IC 35-50-1-2 regarding consecutive and concurrent terms regarding offenses closely related in time and circumstance. He found that the perjury was separate from the other four charges.

Count 1 was 6 month in DCLC ( Connor)
Count 2 was 2 years IN DOC (Judge Humphrey)
Count 3 was 6 months DCLC (Heidi Humphrey)
Count 4 Obstruction of Justice was 2 years IN DOC
Count 5 Perjury was 1 year IN DOC

He went on about which ones were concurrent and consecutive to each other and ended up with 5 years with 231 days credit and 231 days good time credit.

The judge said there was 30 days from today to file a motion to appeal or correct errors. If a motion to correct error is filed, there is 30 days from then to file for appeal.

Brewington said he intended to appeal and asked for a public defender. Barrett suggested it be someone besides him, but that he has the motion for appeal ready to file.

Court adjourned at 4 PM

Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawrenceburg Township

Note: I attended the entire 4 day jury trial as well. Those 70 pages of notes are not posted. If you have any questions about the trial- please post them below in comments and I will be happy to refer to the trial notes to answer them.

24 October 2011 Dearborn County Plan Commission Meeting Notes

2011-10-24T21:06:00.002-04:00

24 October 2011 Dearborn County Plan Commission Meeting Notes

Present: Mike Hall, Chairman, Dennis Kraus Jr., Russell Beiersdorfer, Mark Lehman, Mike Hornbach, Jeff Hughes, Jake Hoog, Dan Lansing, and Ken Nelson

Also Present: Mark McCormack, Plan Director, and Arnie McGill, Attorney.

Request: Vacate Candlewood Court within Harvest Ridge Estates.
Applicant: JDJ Surveying / Owner: Maxwell Properties IV, Inc.
Site Location: Hearthstone Drive
Legal: Sec. 15, T7, R2, Map #02-15, Parcel #010
Township: Kelso Size: .288 Acres
Zoning: Residential (R)
STAFF REPORT
HARVEST RIDGE

Vacation Background:
1) The subject land area—Kelso Township, Township 7, Range 2, Section 15, identified as the
Candlewood Court street right-of-way in the Harvest Ridge Subdivision—is currently located
within a Residential (R) Zoning District.
2) The Harvest Ridge Subdivision was platted in 2006; the second phase was added in 2008.
3) The Petitioner is requesting to vacate:
 Candlewood Court—an unimproved, unmaintained (approximately 155-foot long)
street with a road right-of-way width of 50’ They plan to replat with a smaller number of panhandle lots.
4) Please refer to Article 2, Section 280 of the Dearborn County Subdivision Control Ordinance regarding vacation procedures.

At its meeting on October 3rd, 2011, the Technical Review Committee raised no objections or concerns with the Petitioner’s request to vacate this area of Phase II, for the purpose(s) of re-platting.
Financial guarantees are in place still for the development. Maxwell owns all the land surrounding it.

Jeff Stenger Surveyor presented for the applicant who was not present. MapleStreet Homes thought it would be cost effective to remove the street and end up with the same number of lots and two panhandles. They have the vacation plat and the replat is already drawn up as soon as this is approved. At the end of the street is a temporary cul de sac. Not sure what they will do with that part of the property yet. There will be a large gravel turn around there until they decide. It’s partially constructed now.

No discussion- favorable recommendation to vacate Candlewood Court. All ayes.

2. Request: Proposed changes to the Dearborn County Zoning Ordinance
and Subdivision Control Ordinance.

The petitioner’s application must:
1. State the reasons for and the circumstances prompting the request;
2. Include a survey that meets all of the requirements for a Certified Survey, as set forth in Article 2, section 260 of the order; in 260 of this order; and
3. Give the names and addresses of every other owner of land in the plat;
4. Contain a map or line drawing, as prepared by a registered Indiana Land Surveyor, showing the lots or plat areas that are intended to be vacated and their relationship to abutting parcels. This map or drawing shall also indicate the names and relevant deed or legal instrument references associated with the adjoining property owners.
Within thirty (30) days after receipt of a petition for a vacation of a plat, the plan commission staff shall schedule the petition to be heard by the Plan Commission at a public hearing. The Plan Commission shall follow the same public hearing procedure(s) to review proposed plat vacations as those requirements outlined (earlier) in this Article for the review of Primary Plats.
After hearing the petition, the Plan Commission shall approve or deny the plat vacation request. The Commission may approve the vacation of all or part of a plat only upon a determination that:
1) Conditions of the platted area have changed so as to defeat the original purpose of the plat;
2) It is in the public interest to vacate all or part of the plat; and
3) The value of that part of land in the plat not owned by the petitioner will not be
diminished by the vacation.
The Plan Commission may impose reasonable conditions as part of any approval. The
Commission shall furnish a copy of its decision to the County Recorder for recording.
A petitioner or other interested party may appeal the Plan Commission’s approval or
disapproval of a plat vacation in the manner prescribed by IC 36-7-4-1016

SECTION 282 –Vacation of Public Ways or Places
As identified in IC 36-7-3-12, persons who:
1) Own or are interested in any lots or parts of lots; and
2) Want to vacate all or part of a public way or public place in or contiguous to those
lots or parts of lots; may file a petition for vacation with the Dearborn County Board of Commissioners.
The petitioner’s application must:
1) State the circumstances of the case;
2) 2)Include a survey that meets all of the requirements for a Certified Survey, as set forth in Article 2, section 260 of the order;survey that meets all of the requirements h in Article 2, Section 260 of this order; and
3) Give the names and addresses of all owners of land that abuts the property
proposed to be vacated.
The Dearborn County Board of Commissioners shall hold a hearing on a vacation petition
within thirty (30) days after it is received. The clerk of the Commissioners shall give notice
of the petition and of the time and place of the hearing:
1) In the manner prescribed in IC 5-3-1; and
2) By certified mail to each owner of land that abuts the property proposed to be
vacated.
The petitioner shall pay the expense of providing the required notice.
The hearing on the petition is subject to IC 5-14-1.5. Any person(s) aggrieved by the
proposed vacation may object but only on the following grounds:
1. The vacation would hinder the growth or orderly development of the unit or
neighborhood in which it is located or to which it is contiguous;
2. The vacation would make access to the lands of the aggrieved person by means of
public way difficult or inconvenient;
3. The vacation would hinder the public's access to a church, school, or other public
building or place;
4. The vacation would hinder the use of a public way by the neighborhood in which it
is located or to which it is contiguous.After the hearing on the petition, the Board of Commissioners may, by ordinance, vacate
the public way or public place. The clerk of the Commissioners shall furnish a copy of each vacation ordinance to the County Recorder for recording and to the County Auditor.
Within thirty (30) days after the adoption of a vacation ordinance, any aggrieved person may appeal the ordinance to the circuit court of the county. The court shall try the matter de novo and may award damages.

Plan Commission suggested putting numbers 2 and 4 together so that it doesn’t appear that two maps be done. Approved with striking # 4 and revising #2 Under Petitioners application.

ADMINISTRATION:

Vehicular use areas have not been addressed yet until he gets direction from the PC Board. Hughes wants to drop the trees and obstructions in parking lots. He noted that Commissioner Orschell said they were a problem for snow removal also. McCormack said the interior parking islands were not so much an issue as the aesthetics around the buildings themselves. Lawrenceburg does not have these parking islands in their ordinance. He said he was not here 10-12 years ago when this ordinance was written, so he is not privy to the reasoning behind adding this in. Mature tree root systems cause problems in the pavement. Also droppings from the trees. Lehman suggested they could let this rest and do it with the entire revisions from the state law changes. McCormack said if it’s necessary for storm water reasons they can still put these in there, if they want to do so. Plan Commission recommended favorably to Commissioners to eliminate the interior planting section of the parking lots. All ayes.

Maxwell is renewing his financial guarantees and Old Orchard was taken care of.

One round of interviews for assistant planner position. Russell Beiersdorfer and Mike Hornbach to sit on the 2nd round. There was a really good bunch of candidates- best they’ve ever had per McCormack. He feels like whoever they get will be good.

Plan Dept working on three grants one for park around St. Leon and 2 for economic development. One large one and one for retention of economic development.

Meeting adjourned at 7:45 PM

Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawrenceburg Township

18 October 2011 Dearborn County Commissioners Meeting Notes

2011-10-18T13:01:00.001-04:00

18 October 2011 Dearborn County Commissioners Meeting Notes

Present: Jeff Hughes, President, Tom Orschell, and Shane McHenry
Also present: Gayle Pennington, Auditor, Bill Ewbank, County Coordinator, and Andy Baudendistel, Attorney.

OLD BUSINESS:

Private Real Property Rights Preservation Ordinance- Hughes asked to table this again. Tabled.

Revised Jail Expansion Project- Orschell- pre design phase is complete and will be presented to Commissioners at the Nov 1st meeting. Tabled until then.

Sick Time Donation- SueEllen said the committee has met and looked over all the departments input. They suggest that donated leave can be used after 12 weeks of sick and comp time are all used up. Approval of the donated leave would go for a max of 20 work days and would go in front of the personnel advisory board. The committee did not want to make any changes to the rest of the policy- just the donated time. The old policy had max of 60 days donated. The advisory Board was almost ready to get rid of the donated time as it has been abused so much. Hughes noted the lengthy discussion and said that this was the alternative to doing away with the policy entirely. McHenry thought this was a good alternative. Commissioners approved the recommendations of the Human Resource Director.

Building Commissioner – Bill Shelton- added to agenda by Hughes who forgot to put him on Late Arrivals. Crawl space drainage issue and the contractor won’t come back to fix it. Tey are looking for advice and help from the commissioners and the county attorney. The footer drainpipe is at the same level as the crawl space. The footer is sitting in the water as well. It’s not even a year old. The contractor lives in Greencastle. The excavator says, yes, there is a problem, but he won’t fix it. There are mold issues and the water is sitting on top of the plastic. It won’t pass the final inspection and there is no certificate of occupancy, though the resident is living in the house. Commissioners wanted bill Shelton to meet with Baudendistel to see what their legal options are and report at Nov 1st meeting.

Unnecessary Regulations Discussion- Hughes- Commissioners did not address this item.

NEW BUSINESS:

Mark McCormack Planning and Zoning:

Vacate ROW at West Street and two Alleys in Hardinsburg- petitioner was Terry Cornett represented by Dennis Kraus, Jr., Surveyor. The Plan Commission forwarded a unanimous favorable recommendation for this. There was no one here in protest. There had been an issue with one adjoiner , Travis Chrisman, that they believe has been resolved. Mr. Cornett was alright with the revision as requested by Chrisman on the West Street vacation. They also accommodated the Conservancy requirements. Some of the improvements to the levee are outside the area owned by the Conservancy district. Richard Butler, the attorney for the conservancy district was OK with the plans, except for this small piece of property about 16 ft long. They TABLED this until the drawings could be revised to each party’s satisfaction.

Proposed changes to the Dearborn County Zoning Ordinance Article 1 Section 160- there will be several revisions to reflect the state law changes in future months. For this they are adding one sentence that shows that waivers can have written commitments. This is just to show that as a possibility. Hughes asked about waivers vs. variances as Ken Nelson had mentioned at the PC meeting. McCormack noted that variances are granted by BZA and Waivers are granted by Plan Commission. Commissioners approved the amendment to Article 1 section 160.

McCormack said that street vacations would be covered by Commissioners and plat vacations by PC in the revised ordinances soon also.

Parks Board – 4H Shooting Range- Bill Ewbank spoke with Jim Red Elk. Park Board and 4 H met and are in the process of drafting a legal memorandum of understanding. He said that Commissioners should ask to see the MOU between 4H and Parks board and that these groups are handling this between the boards as they should. Bill Ewbank was directed to advise Park Board to allow Commissioners to review that MOU.

John Hoskins - Residents Improvement of York Avenue in Center Township- west of Aurora in Langley Heights. This is the only access to his property other than private ROW. He and other property owners will improve it by removing some dirt and adding gravel. This is not the area in contestation up in Langley Heights. This is in farming area. Todd Listerman and Tim Grieve looked over it. It’s an unmaintained ROW and he wants to build a drive access on this. He had asked Hoskins to appear at Commissioners to be sure the County approves. This goes in front of an existing house. Listerman will work with him and be sure it is done to our specifications. Commissioners were happy to allow this and motioned and approved this project.

Sandy Carley of PAWS- request to go to Council to review the 97 account with $119,000+ in it from PAWS and other donations for the shelter to be built. There were several organizations that contributed to this. They have accounted for this in all their budgets. The PAWS organization is asking for all of this to be turned over to them for the new shelter. Bill Ewbank said that In 2008 the resolution was specific to donate this to the shelter as designed by Darryl Sears. The county could continue that fund if they were to get more donations, but that could be stopped now that PAWS is in charge and can get their own donations. Baudendistel said the commissioners could pass a resolution to release that money to PAWS. Carley said there is $30,000 donated by Council that was merged with this fund a few years back. Commissioners will pass a resolution dissolving the fund and distributing it to PAWS. Then PAWS will go to Council also with this on Nov 22. Sandy said there is a lot of incoming animals right now.

Margaret Minzner GIS- Data Sharing MOUs (memorandum of understandings)- Switzerland County is sharing with us and wants us to share with them. Margaret recommended drsawing up MOUS with our other neighboring counties at the same time- Franklin, Ohio, Ripley County. This will get the regional map up and running. All approved including the Switzerland County agreement, Franklin, Ohio, and Ripley counties. Commissioners signed all 4.

HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT: Todd Listerman, Highway Engineer gave the following report:
Salt Building is complete our on Randall and 2,000 tons are being delivered now. More will be ordered late. Dearborn County Foundation ribbon cutting ceremony for this new building.
Received the radar speed trailer donated by Community Foundation also. They will get it into use soon.

Last property owner for Lower Dillsboro Road- meeting to get that in order by end of the year.
Also getting the last parcel for Bridge 34 resolved.

Tim Grieve- got quotes for truck chassis only. 5 quotes- and high is $127,500 and low is $109,910. $122,000+ is the Mack bid- in the middle of the road. Mack is a local dealer and has been responsive. Total cost $122,556 Grieve was approved to use his best judgment on this purchase from Lischge.

AUDITOR: Gayle Pennington- claims approved. Approved the JUNE 21st Commissioner meeting minutes.

There is a federal stipulation for HR called E-verify for illegal aliens. There is an amendment for the SRI service agreement and they have verified all their employees under this service agreement. Commissioners will have Baudendistel review it before they sign it. All potential employees have to go through this verification process. The county is compliant in this.

ATTORNEY: Andy Baudendistel- just some paperwork with some issues on boundaries- signed. This was unclear as to what it was!

COUNTY COORDINATOR: Bill Ewbank- meeting with INDOT on Nov 3rd 9 am or Nov 9th at 1 PM on transportation improvements in the county. Will set date and get back with commissioners.

COMMISSIONER COMMENTS- Shane McHenry said the CAC (Child Advocacy Center)- asked to have Barnes and Thornburg assist CAC for grants and go after funding for them. Approved. Bill Ewbank is to send email to them and if there are additional fees to get back to Shane.

LATE ARRIVAL INFORMATION- State is passing a law going away with Level 1,2,3 emergencies per EMA- Bill Black.

Bill Black EMA - Reverse 911 system- grant funded and we haven’t done this yet- and funding is drying up. We looked at Code Red a few years ago and the quote is $25,000 and after the first year it’s $35,000. This is a warning system on cell phones etc for severe weather. Sheriff was in favor. This also would be useful to notify people in an area when there has been a burglary or shooting. We no longer have control over cable TV for this. Comcast turned this off. Switzerland County uses this system. No point in getting a grant for just one year if we can’t sustain it. Hughes wants to coordinate it with region. Hamilton County has a different system. This would be run from the dispatch center and web based. Charlie Ashley 911 coordinator was in agreement to try this. Bill was given permission to move forward on this.

Orschell advised Commissioners that Ginny Daum was recovering from a cancer operation- they will send a card.

PUBLIC COMMENT- none

Meeting adjourned at 10:35 AM

Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawrenceburg Township

Agenda for October 18th Commissioners Meeting

2011-10-14T13:02:00.001-04:00

AGENDA
DEARBORN COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MEETING
October 18, 2011
9:00 a.m.
City of Lawrenceburg
Administration Building
230 Walnut Street, Lawrenceburg, Indiana

I. CALL TO ORDER

II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

III. OLD BUSINESS
1. Private Real Property Rights Preservation Ordinance
2. Revised Jail Expansion Project
3. Sick Time Donation
4. Unnecessary Regulations Discussion

IV. NEW BUSINESS
1. Mark McCormack – Planning & Zoning
a. Vacate Right of Way at West St. and Alley in Hardinsburg
b. Proposed changes to DC Zoning Ordinance Article 1, Section 160
2. Parks Board/4-H Shooting Range
3. John Hoskins – Residents Improvement of York Ave.
4. Sandy Carley – Request to go to Council
5. Margaret Minzner – DATA Sharing MOUs

V. HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT- Todd Listerman
Updates

VI. AUDITOR – Gayle Pennington
1. Claims/Minutes

VII. ATTORNEY - Andy Baudendistel

VIII. COUNTY COORDINATOR – Bill Ewbank

IX. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS

X. LATE ARRIVAL INFORMATION

XI. PUBLIC COMMENT

XII. ADJOURN

4 October 2011 Dearborn County Commissioners Meeting Notes

2011-10-04T20:27:00.002-04:00

4 October 2011 Dearborn County Commissioners Meeting Notes

Present: Jeff Hughes, President, Tom Orschell, and Shane McHenry
Also present: Gayle Pennington, Auditor, Bill Ewbank, County Coordinator, and Andy Baudendistel, Attorney.

EXECUTIVE SESSION@ 5:30 PM on Pending Litigation. Tabled for more information and attorney negotiations.

OLD BUSINESS:

Private Real Property Rights Preservation Ordinance- tabled again

Revised Jail Expansion Project- Orschell had a meeting last month and meeting Oct 12 for final plan hopefully. Will have something then- Tabled.

Med Ben- Wellness Program- Mike Kramer and Suellen - comfortably in budget and wanted to evolve to a wellness plan. Wanted to change the utilization review company also. Lab draws in the beginning and each employee gets results up front. Costs $34,000 for those labs. Another plan just reminds them of the 6 tests and just let their Physicians do them to avoid duplication. This keeps it more private for employees. There’s an $8,000 additional cost but is offset by not spending the $34,000. Cholesterol, Pap smear, mammogram, PSA, and colonoscopy are the 6 tests. There are still health coaches available. Going from Complete Care Management to I-Health. Commissioners approved.

Sick Time Donation-Gayle Pennington said the committee met again today and Suellen will type for next committee meeting. If approved they will come to the commissioners after that.

Unnecessary Regulations Discussion- Plan Commission will have public meeting and bring it to Commissioners.

NEW BUSINESS:

Brock Brown – Gallager Asphalt- not available tonight.

Hoosier Square Bid Presentation- Bill Ewbank- Seyferth of Cleves $ 264,732. Reconstruct steps and ramp- Seyferth $13,000. remove water in back lot and upgrade lighting for fed guidelines. Will submit to County Council for additional appropriation of $40-50,000 to finish this. If they approve then they will award it to Seyferth. County will be handling security devices on their own. Commissioners approved pending Council’s approval of extra funding.

Margaret Minzner- Data Sharing MOU and WTH contract- GIS will be more integrative with 911 and with sheriff’s department. They got the grant so the WTH contract for $11,200 was approved by Commissioners.

Data sharing with Hoosier Hills Regional Water Corp so they will share theirs with us also. Dennis Kraus, Jr. prepared that and Andy Baudendistel reviewed the agreement. Commissioners approved the data sharing with a memorandum of understanding with Hoosier Hills regional Water Corp. No liability for either side.

Monthly reports show more visits and requests on the GIS site. This will add money to the GIS perpetuation fund. They are looking on how to get larger maps to be able to print in a cost-effective manner. Fee for printing to a webmap as it takes server strength. They are still working this out.

Steve Renihan- DCRSD Request to go to Council regarding Contingency Fund 5- Sewer district needs additional out of their contingency fund that will put their balance back to $10,000. Budget less than $40,000 annually. This $10,000 helps with their small extras issues. Balance of $2,523.33 and they have a bill that came in on legal fees with West Harrison TIF project and the OKI regional project. IDEM still has to rule on that. That depends on how much we have to cover for the county. Frank Kramer does a lot for us- but he’s half the cost of our other attorney. Some users had not paid their sewer bills for awhile and now those bills are coming in. We set the rates affordably- but if only a few don’t pay, we don’t have excess to cover the loss. If the 3 companies go into the West Harrison TIF then they migt have about 400 jobs and more tax base for the county. Several legal fees exist with St Leon issues over the TIF sewerage out there. They want to get the fund back to $10,000. Renihan said maybe we should ask for $18,500 to cover the legal fees and still have a $10,000 cushion. Renihan said the county has to have representation even though the services are provided by the municipalities. The county does not want to be stuck with justteh problem areas that don’t really pay for themselves. Without DCRSD the unincorporated folks have no representation at all. Commissioners approved going to Council for the $18,500 request for operating expenses.

Sheriff Mike Kreinhop- Inmate Medical Fees-medical copayments by inmates to be raised for doctor and dental visits from $10-$15 and a new category of mental health have a fee for $15. Prescriptions copay from $3-$8. There are no more over the counter medications offered at the jail. If they are indigent they do not have to pay. Nurse charge of $10 remains the same. Commissioners approved the new fee schedule.

HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT: Todd Listerman, Highway Engineer gave the following report:

Received the design consulting contract on Bridge 138 – Bonnell Bridge from American Structurepoint for $139,195. Commissioners signed.

Working with auditor, assessor and attorney- on last property for North Dearborn. Looks to be completed.

Slips from spring floods. Stateline Road 80/20 approved by INDOT to repair the slip on Stateline hill for $212,000. We need to get 20% of this. Hogan Hill for $152,000 and $161,000 for West Laughery for 25%/75% will be reimbursed later by FEMA afterwards. Commissioners approved going to Council for total funding up front and also for Stateline so that they can be reimbursed upon completion.

Tim Grieve, Highway Superintendant – The tractor approved before we have quotes on now. Smith Implement in Greensburg was $1600 cheaper than Zimmer here for the tractor. They can give us a tractor NOW. Others thought spring time to get it in maybe. This is a John Deere- $27,789 total. Commissioners approved.

AUDITOR: Gayle Pennington- claims approved. She was in conference last week- nothing else.

ATTORNEY: Andy Baudendistel- Park Board and 4H provided you with statutes and also the deed that was supposed to be transferred. He will continue to look into it and hopefully they will sit down and come to an agreement. Hughes said he did see Mike Heffelmire at Aurora parade and he said I need to talk to you.

COUNTY COORDINATOR: Bill Ewbank- Public Surplus Auction- Completed records storage in water rescue building. So now they need to get things auctioned off faster. They want to list it on the website and let them sell them for us as they come up rather than age in the parking lot. There are about 5 vehicles to try on the Public Surplus website. References checked and they look good. Taxpayers should be proud that the stuff we use are used up so that most of it is junk. The first picture will tip them off that it’s junk. Commissioners approved trying this out.

New PAWS building open and all animals transferred. Effective start date of the 36 month contract to start Oct 1, 2011, when they opened. Approved. They will get $1500 to cover the week of transition time in late September.

COMMISSIONER COMMENTS- Tom Orschell- wants to have Mike Burgess VA officer to write a letter to the Bondurant family showing a letter of support for the sacrifices he made after being injured. Approved.

Hughes had a moment of silence for Miss Pody Freiberger who worked for many years from the county. She passed away this week.

McHenry- talked to the town board and they will get with Bill Ewbank- Trying to get building torn down or donated next to the bank in Moore’s hill as it has not been cleaned or rehabbed.

LATE ARRIVAL INFORMATION- none

PUBLIC COMMENT -Andy Baudendistel- Thanked Tom Orschell for coming to Drug Court last week and show support. They have 22 participants they are trying to help.

Meeting adjourned at 7:25PM

Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawrenceburg Township

Freedom of Speech on Trial

2011-10-01T01:23:00.001-04:00

With trial a few short days away I feel compelled to do my best to awaken the Citizens of Dearborn County to a gross violation of the civil rights of one Mr. Dan Brewington, currently being prosecuted for exercising his First Amendment Rights under the Constitution of the United States.

Some of you may have seen the occasional and sometimes voluminous posts of data pertinent to his prosecution. Some of you may have taken the time to read bits of his posts found at http://danbrewington.blogspot.com/, and a few, like myself, may have even taken the time to read most of what is there. So far, little direct commentary has been offered here on the subject, as we felt that the information and commentary elsewhere spoke for itself. We had fully expected that, at some point, those persisting in this prosecution would come to the realization that their efforts were both unwise and without foundation. Based on the attitudes exhibited in this post (http://danbrewington.blogspot.com/2011/09/how-to-fix-grand-jury-like-dearborn_29.html) it would seem that is not to be.

Perhaps it is a simple failing our educational institutions, but it seems odd that those who are at the core of our justice system in Dearborn County, supposedly possessing degrees in certification of higher learning could be so ignorant of what the Constitution really means in it's assertion of Free Speech. They profess a limit on this Freedom (and there surely are limits but not what they intend), then proceed to define that limit to serve their own interests. I offer what follows so that both you and they can understand the realities of the issue. Please bear with me and read on...

It is a grim time. It seems we live once again in a world like that of England of old, when a man could be imprisoned for criticizing the King or his Nobles. In those days such an act was called "Seditious Libel". These days, at least in Dearborn County, they call it "Intimidation". (When I compare the weblog postings upon which the prosecution depends, I can find little difference between what the prosecutor calls intimidation and the description of seditious libel below). In those days truth was not a defense and offenders were routinely crushed by those with the power to do so. It appears little has changed in all these years. While we have no Aristocracy (and certainly no nobility) to lord it over us, we have Sheriffs and Judges and a Prosecutor more than happy to take up that mantle.

Fortunately for the accused, these days we have something called the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, the very first amendment of which states:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

The following is a collection of excerpts relevant to Mr Brewingtons current situation from ...

Original Meaning: Freedom of Speech or of the Press

by P.A. MADISON on OCTOBER 18, 2008
http://www.federalistblog.us/2008/10/freedom_of_speech_and_of_the_press/

Summary: Freedom of Speech or of the Press can be defined as the freedom from seditious laws of libel so people can openly discuss or criticize government policy or conduct of public agents without fear of being charged with a seditious crime.

The biggest modern error in understanding freedom of speech comes from viewing it as a right to be heard (or even seen) or the unfettered right to gain information that might later be used to create a public discussion. Such was never the purpose of the constitutional freedom.

Freedom of speech and of the press served one purpose in America: To remove the fear of the common law doctrine of seditious libel so citizens could freely speak or publish their grievances or concerns regarding public affairs or conduct of public officials. One of the distasteful things found under the common law was the government practice of criminalizing any discussion they felt made people dissatisfied with their government.

Seditious libel (or criminal libel as it was sometimes called) was generally defined as “the intentional publication, without lawful excuse or justification, of written blame of any public man, or of the law, or of any institution established by law.” (Stephen, History of the Criminal Law)

In England, it could be dangerous to criticize government, or peaceably assemble or petition government for redress of grievances because anything one might speak or write could end up being used against them under the charge of seditious libel where truth would be of no defense.

...
How can we know for sure the freedom of speech or of the press means freedom from seditious libel? All early American laws over speech and the press dealt solely with breaches of the peace or public morality (blasphemy, obscenity, profanity, etc.), but never laws criminalizing public discussion of public measures, grievances or criticism of public officials.
...

Benjamin Franklin, writing in The Pennsylvania Gazette, April 8, 1736, wrote of the American doctrine behind freedom of speech and of the press:

Freedom of speech is a principal pillar of a free government; when this support is taken away, the constitution of a free society is dissolved, and tyranny is erected on its ruins. Republics and limited monarchies derive their strength and vigor from a popular examination into the action of the magistrates.

...
The Democratic-Republican caucus included the following in their 1800 platform: “An inviolable preservation of the Federal constitution, according to the true sense in which it was adopted by the states. … Freedom of speech and the press; and opposition, therefore, to all violations of the Constitution, to silence, by force, and not by reason, the complaints or criticisms, just or unjust, of our citizens against the conduct of their public agents.”
...

Thomas Cooley hit the ball out of park when he wrote of the freedom found under American constitutions:

Their purpose (of the free-speech clauses) has evidently been to protect parties in the free publication of matters of public concern, to secure their right to a free discussion of public events and public measures, and to enable every citizen at any time to bring the government and any person in authority to the bar of public opinion by any just criticism upon their conduct in the exercise of the authority which the people have conferred upon them. … The evils to be prevented were not the censorship of the press merely, but any action of the government by means of which it might prevent such free and general discussion of public matters as seems absolutely essential to prepare the people for an intelligent exercise of their rights as citizens.

Finally, as Mr. Brewington's prosecution now proceeds apace, I would suggest that regardless of the outcome of this trial the Citizens of Dearborn County will be the losers. If Mr. Brewington is convicted we will all be on notice that there are no limits to what we may suffer at the hands of our local justice system and those who operate it as if the Bill of Rights never existed. Open your mouth or get out of line, crime or no crime, and you can expect to spend six months in jail, even without a trial. If Mr. Brewington is convicted, given that the charges are almost completely baseless and his defense has been utterly incompetent, it will almost certainly be overturned on appeal, meaning all of our tax dollars spent on this pointless personal vendetta will have been wasted. Additionally, if the prosecution fails it will further bolster the Civil Rights suit Mr Brewington has filed against these individuals. It is a suit he will almost certainly win. We the tax payers of Dearborn County will bear that financial burden. We will deserve the cost of the judgment he will be awarded for having failed to make clear to our elected officials in the justice system that this sort of abuse of their authority is unacceptable in the first place.

As a former commissioner used to like to quote:

The penalty good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men. -Plato

A. Dearborn Citizen

Agenda for October 4th Commissioners Meeting

2011-09-29T13:55:00.000-04:00

AGENDA
DEARBORN COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MEETING
October 4, 2011
6:00 p.m., Commissioners Room
County Administration Building
215 B West High Street, Lawrenceburg, Indiana

EXECUTIVE SESSION @ 5:30 PM – Pending Litigation

I. CALL TO ORDER

II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

III. OLD BUSINESS
1. Private Real Property Rights Preservation Ordinance
2. Revised Jail Expansion Project
3. Med Ben – Wellness Program
4. Sick Time Donation
5. Unnecessary Regulations Discussion

IV. NEW BUSINESS
1. Brock Brown – Gallager Asphalt
2. Hoosier Square Bid Presentation
3. Margaret Minzner – Data Sharing MOU and WTH Contract
4. Steve Renihan – DCRSD Request to go to Council regarding Contingency Fund 5. 5. Sheriff Mike Kreinhop – Inmate Medical Fees

V. HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT- Todd Listerman
Updates

VI. AUDITOR – Gayle Pennington
1. Claims/Minutes

VII. ATTORNEY - Andy Baudendistel

VIII. COUNTY COORDINATOR – Bill Ewbank
1. Public Surplus Auction

IX. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS

X. LATE ARRIVAL INFORMATION

XI. PUBLIC COMMENT

XII. ADJOURN

Operation Thank You - Brett Bondurant - Local Soldier injured in Afghanistan

2011-09-29T10:00:00.002-04:00

We have a Indiana OTY (Operation Thank You) soldier that was critically injured in Afghanistan yesterday.

Please pray for Brett Bondurant and his family. He was seriously injured by an IED last night. He has lost both legs and suffers from various other injuries. He was with 3 other soldiers, one was KIA and the other two suffered severe injuries as well. Keep them all in your thoughts and prayers...The family has asked everyone including business's to display a Yellow Ribbon in his Honor.

I am asking everyone to get a Thinking Of You Card and get as many signatures as possible.
Please send them to our P. O. Box below and we will get them to him.
Thank You
Tim & Sue Nobbe

Brett Bondurant
C/O Operation Thank You Indiana
P.O. Box 93
Guilford, Indiana 47022

26 September 2011 Dearborn County Plan Commission Meeting Notes

2011-09-26T21:45:00.003-04:00

26 September 2011 Dearborn County Plan Commission Meeting Notes

Present: Mike Hall, Chairman, Dennis Kraus Jr., Russell Beiersdorfer, Mark Lehman, Mike Hornbach, Jeff Hughes, Jake Hoog, Dan Lansing, and Ken Nelson
Also Present: Mark McCormack, Plan Director, and Arnie McGill, Attorney.

NEW BUSINESS:

1. Request to vacate portions of streets and alleys in Hardintown by applicant Dennis Kraus for Owner, Terry Cornett. Site location is West Street in Lawrenceburg Township on 0.24 acres of M-3 zoned land.

Dennis Kraus. Jr. stepped down from the Board and left the room for this item of business.

Mark McCormack summarized:
1) The subject land area—Lawrenceburg Township, Township 5, Range 1, Section 2, identified as an alleyway and a portion of the West Street right-of-way in the Town of Hardinsburgh—is
currently located within a Manufacturing Three (M-3) Zoning District.
2) The Town of Hardinsburgh was platted in 1815; Findlay’s Addition was added in 1817. The
Petitioner’s request is located within the unincorporated area of Dearborn County—
immediately adjacent to the City of Greendale’s jurisdictional limits (separated by the
Lawrenceburg Conservancy District’s levee).
3) The Petitioner is requesting to vacate:
a. An unimproved, unmaintained (150-foot long) portion of the sixty-six-foot (66’)
wide West Street right-of-way—north of Walnut Street—in the Town of
Hardinsburgh
b. Two (2) unnamed 16.5-foot unimproved alleyways—one perpendicular to West
Street, between Lots 50 and 51, the other situated immediately parallel to West
Street (on the west side). The purpose is to clean up some encroachments on some buildings that are there and have been for a long time. The house is next to the Aztec Automotive business, with the alleyway alongside there.
4) According to the documents submitted by the Petitioners’ surveyor, West Street “…is a street
that has been “cut off” by the building of first the canal, then the railroad, and now by the
levee. There cannot be any development served by this street…There currently is no one using
this area for access.”

Oxbow representative is present as they are concerned with any development in their area. The conservancy district has been surveying in the area per McCormack.

Jeff Stenger, surveyor, presented for the applicant. He further described the alleys as ROW for streets. They seek to clean up surveys to correctly describe the plat lines. Mike Hall said he tried to get in contact with eth conservancy district, but has had no reply yet. He assumes there is no problem, or they’d be in contact as they were notified. There were some issues with monuments in the town and Kraus chose to go with the survey lines that match up in the entire town. There are some issues with the levee and there is a 20 ft easement they are to avoid encroaching upon. They want to have it on the survey in case someone buys the land in the future so they KNOW what is expected of them. The board checked to be sure the lots in the area has public access.

John Seymour representing Oxbow, Inc. and they are not here to lay any roadblocks to this. This area is prone to flooding and has been flooded in 1997. They want to go on record that this should not be developed and hope that eventually this area gets returned back to a usage that is NOT manufacturing as it is now. If they ever want to discuss putting a conservation easement on this land we would be willing to talk to you about that. It might be of some economic benefit to you in the future.

Hughes has no problem. Beiersdorfer wanted the easement added to the plat drawings- it’s a 20% easement parallel to the existing slope or boundary. Stenger will check with Richard Butler- the Conservancy District attorney.

Nelson motioned and Beiersdorfer seconded to forward a favorable recommendation to vacate the above alleyways and ROWs to the Commissioners conditioned upon a satisfactory easement for the Conservancy District to be put on the plat and recorded. All ayes.

Dennis Kraus, Jr. returned to the board.

2. Proposed Changes to the Dearborn County Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Control Ordinance- McCormack wanted to upgrade our code to match the changes enacted by our legislature.

Section 160 on appeals and waivers is to have a section say: As a condition of granting a waiver under this section, the PC may allow or require a commitment to be made (as outlined in IC36-7-4-1015.) This would allow it to be done as written commitments that are recorded and more accessible. These are optional. Kraus Jr. motioned and Lansing seconded to pass Favorable recommendation to the commissioners. All ayes.

Article 2 is to be subdivided into 2 sections – number 280 and 282. The state code allows the commissioners to do a vacation of ROW without going to the PC. This was confused when they were dealing with Happy Hollow and Langley Heights.

For 280- If all owners are in agreement on a plat vacation they can bypass PC and do so via a written instrument that is recorded. They can also go to the PC if all are not in agreement on the plat vacation. They still record the vacation is approved. They do not have to go to Commissioners for a plat vacation.

For 282- When Vacation is for a public way or place- it goes to the Commissioners. It can only go to the PC IF the commissioners want it to go to PC. If approved by Commissioners it still gets recorded and a copy goes to the auditor
.
In 280 and 282 there are different processes for appeals of the decisions.

The board wanted to have surveys of these plats or public ways and places- not just a map or line drawing.

Nelson motioned and Hughes seconded to get the tech review committee to look over these ideas before forwarding to the Commissioners . All ayes.

2. Proposed Changes to the fee schedule- had only one change- the waiver fee was $150. The GIS fees are already approved by Commissioners and McCormack just wants the Planning dept fees for the same services to match up. There was a big discussion regarding how expensive it is now for surveyors to get printouts compared to before. Hughes and McCormack suggested they get these issues to Margaret Minzner in GIS Dept. The idea was to charge $2/sq. ft. The surveyors needed more detail than these maps gave them now too. McCormack noted that the realtors and bankers were happy with the GIS information set up. The surveyors actually are paying more now for less information. He suggested the surveyors meet and get their concerns to the Commissioners who oversee GIS.
Nelson raised several issues with the entire fee schedule and wanting some reduced. McCormack said that the remainder of the fees had been in existence since before his tenure as director. He is willing to go over these whenever the board wants- but also noted that there is a significant amount of staff work on some of these requests. The idea was to not have the taxpayers subsidize individual requests.

Hughes motioned and Lansing seconded to accept the nee schedule updates. All ayes

ADMINISTRATIVE:

Assistant Planner Ron Ballard was promoted to zoning administrator.

Resumes are coming in already for the position opened for assistant planner.

Old Orchard financial guarantee is due Oct 1. They have not gotten it in yet.

Staff working with OKI with regional planning with HUD for $5million grant. McCormack has been attending meetings on this. They are doing some land use analyses, etc. they will discuss this further if they get the grant.

Grant assistance was provided for Animal Control.

Grant work for phase 1 of a 30 acre park for St, Leon and also one for Manchester.

Ordinances on landscaping and parking lots. Hughes relayed the lack of use of the tree planted area in the middle of a mall area in Florence. He thinks it’s too much regulation. McCormack said he also didn’t think Lawrenceburg had any in their city ordinance. McCormack said the problem is the front yard setbacks are so large that parking ends up there rather than in the side or rear yards. He outlined some of the reasoning on the islands. He thought the landscape needs to be more on the perimeter as buffer. The applicants have been given some flexibility unless there is a variance of more than 25% required.

McCormack said that he’d like to take a couple months to do it right. Hughes wanted to rescind the parking lot interior landscaping for section 2245. He was informed that the PC has to make the recommendation. They also have to advertise this for the Oct meeting. If the Commissioners asked for it- PC would have 60 days to respond. This will be on Oct agenda.

Meeting adjourned at 8: 50 PM

Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawrenceburg Township

Motions In Limine Filed and Approved at Pre-Trial by Judge Hill for Brewington Trial

2011-09-23T18:30:00.002-04:00

STATE OF INDIANA IN THE DEARBORN CIRCUIT COURT
Filed SEP -6 -2011 CLERK OF DEARBORN CIRCUIT COURT
CAUSE NO. 151002-1103-FD-084
COUNTY OF DEARBORN
STATE OF INDIANA
VS.
DANIEL BREWINGTON

MOTION IN LIMINE
Comes now the Defendant herein, Daniel Brewington, by Counsel, Bryan E.
Barrett, and moves the Court for an Order in Limine instructing the State of Indiana and
the State's Witnesses to refrain from making any reference whatsoever, directly or
indirectly, during voir dire, opening statement, closing statement, questioning of
witnesses, objections, argument, or at any other time during the trial in any manner
without first obtaining permission of the Court, outside the presence and hearing of the
jury concerning the following:
Any prior misconduct, charged or uncharged, any criminal convictions, or other prior bad acts of Daniel Brewington.

Wherefore, The Defendant, by Counsel respectfully requests the Court grant this Motion In Limine and prays for all other relief just and proper in the premises.
Bryan Barrett
Attorney for Defendant
Indiana Attorney #4325-73

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that A TRUE COPY OF THIS PLEADING HAS BEEN SERVED ON THE Rush County Prosecutor on this 2nd day of September, 2011

Bryan E Barrett

STATE OF INDIANA ) IN THE DEARBORN SUPERIOR COURT II
)
COUNTY OF DEARBORN)
)
STATE OF INDIANA )
)
v. )
)
DANIEL BREWINGTON ) CAUSE NO. 15D02-1103-FD-084
MOTION IN LIMINE
Comes now the State of Indiana by F. Aaron Negangard, Prosecuting Attorney
for the Seventh Judicial Circuit, and moves in limine that Defendant, counsel, and
witnesses, be prohibited during voir dire or trial, from mentioning, referring to,
questioning about, or otherwise conveying or attempting to convey to the jury, directly or
indirectly, the following:

1. Any reference the civil action pending in the United States District Court for
the Southern District of Indiana under Civil Action No. 1:11-CV-1144SEB-DML.

2. Any medical treatment or medication the Defendant has received while in the
custody of the Dearborn County Law Enforcement Center.

3. Any reference to criminal history or backgrounds of any of State's witnesses
except as permitted under Indiana Rules of Evidence, particularly during voir dire or any
other part of the trial, unless and until such witness has testified. Indiana Rule of
Evidence 608 and 609.

4. Opinions concerning intent, guilt or innocence of the Defendant, the truth or
falsity of the allegations, whether another witness has testified truthfully, or legal
conclusions. See Indiana Rule of Evidence 704(b). Specifically, the State requests the Court to Order Defendant to refrain from asking witnesses whether they believe
Defendant committed the charged offense (or any other similar question).

5. Any alleged witness statements or other evidence not disclosed to the State in
advance of trial, pursuant to this Court's Discovery Order. Hicks v. State, 544 N.E.2d
500 (Ind. 1989).

6. Any affirmative defense that has not been raised or disclosed to the State in
advance of trial, pursuant to statutory or trial rule requirements.

7. Any discussion concerning the penalties Defendant may face if convicted.
"Inasmuch as the jury in a felony case has no sentencing function it should not be
informed as to the range of sentences possible." Wisehart v. State, 484 N.E.2d 949
(Ind. 1985). "These instructions do not contain information concerning a possible
sentence. The Court alone is responsible for sentencing if there is a conviction."
INDIANA PATTERN JURY INSTRUCTION —CRIMINAL — INSTRUCTION NUMBER
13.25.

WHEREFORE, the State of Indiana moves the Court for an order in limine
as to evidence, statements and commentary outlined above.

Respectfully submitted,

F. Aaron Negangard
Prosecuting Attorney
Dearborn County Courthouse
215 West High Street
Lawrenceburg, IN 47025
(812) 537-8884
ISB # 18809-53

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Motion was served on, Counsel for
Defendant, Bryan Barrett personally or by U.S. mail, postage prepaid, this 19th
day of September, 2011.

2011-09-23T13:31:00.002-04:00

Hamilton County Jail Management System (JMS)
Movement History - 1421472 BREWINGTON,DANIEL

March 07 2011
Unscheduled Event HOUS-UNSCH occurred at 03/07/2011 15:32 - 03/0712011 15:32
Checked out of I on the way to DET-S22-MON-1-39 at 03/0712011 15:32
Completed event at 03107/2011 15:32

March 08 2011
Event HOUS-SCH ED (2292175) scheduled at 03108/2011 13:00 - 14:00 occurred at 03/0812011 13:06 - 03/08/2011 13:33
Checked out of DET-S22-MON-1-39 on the way to CJC-S52-H-52-002 at 03/0812011 13:06
Completed event at 03/0812011 13:33

March 09 2011
Unscheduled Event OTH R-CI RV occurred at 03/09/2011 9:00 - 03/09/2011 9:51
Checked out of CJC-S52-H-52-002 on the way to VIDEO ARR at 03/09/2011 9:00
Completed event at 03/09/2011 9:51
Event REL-RELEAS (2294253) scheduled at 03/09/2011 15:58 - 16:58 occurred at 03/09/2011 16:25 - 03109/2011 16:50
Checked out of CJC-S52-H-52-002 on the way to at 03/09/2011 16:25
Completed event at 03/09/2011 16:50

September 21, 2011 14:16
Hamilton County Jail Management System (JMS)
Inmate Summary - 1421472 BREWINGTON,DANIEL

Hamilton County Jail Management System (JMS)
Movement History - 1418841 JONES,KEITH L

February 11 2011
Jnscheduled Event HOUS-UNSCH occurred at 02111)2011 23:57 - 02111/2011 23:57

February 12 2011
Event HOUS-SCH ED (2268877) scheduled at 02/12/2011 19:00 - 20:00 occurred at 02112/2011 17:31 - 02/12/2011 18:34

February 13 2011
Event MED- BLOOD (2270038) scheduled at 02/13/2011 2:00 - 2:30 occurred at 02/13/2011 3:50 - 02/13/2011 4:13

February 15 2011
Event REL-RELEAS (2271045) scheduled at 02/15/2011 12:30 - 13:30 occurred at 02/1512011 10:52 - 02/15/2011 13:49
Unscheduled Event OTHR-OTH PLC occurred at 02/15/2011 14:28 - 02/15/2011 15:38
Event VI S-R EG (2272045) scheduled at 02/15/2011 19:00 - 19:45 occurred at 02/15/2011 18:32 - 02/15/2011 18:43

February 16 2011
Event CRTA-CRTAPP (2242136) scheduled at 02/16/2011 6:00 - 12:30 occurred at 02/16/2011 7:37 - 02/16/2011 10:13
Event M ED-BLOOD (2272255) scheduled at 02/16/2011 13:00 - 13:30 occurred at 02/16/2011 14:51 - 02/1612011 14:51

February 17 2011
Event M ED-BLOOD (2273217) scheduled at 02/17/2011 13:00 - 13:30 occurred at 02/17/2011 14:41 - 02/1712011 14:41

February 22 2011
Event M ED-M DSC (2277657) scheduled at 02/22/2011 13:00 - 13:30 occurred at 02/2212011 13:22 - 02/22/2011 14:28

February 24 2011
Event CRTA-CRTAPP (2268744) scheduled at 02/24/2011 6:00 - 12:00 occurred at 02/24/2011 7:34 - 02/24/2011 10:29

March 03 2011
Unscheduled Event OTH R-OTH PLC occurred at 03/0312011 14:31 - 03/03/2011 15:26
Checked out of CJC-N42-F-32-002 on the way to PAROLE ROOM at 03/03/2011 14:31
Completed event at 03/0312011 15:26
Unscheduled Event OTHR-C1 RV occurred at 03/03/2011 19:56 - 03/03/2011 21:08
Checked out of CJC-N 42-F-32-002 on the way to INTAKE at 03/03/2011 19:56
Completed event at 03/03/2011 21:08

March 04 2011
Unscheduled Event OTH R-OTH PLC occurred at 03/0412011 20:12 - 03/04/2011 21:11
Checked out of CJ C-N 42-F-32-002 on the way to INTAKE at 03/04/2011 20:12
Completed event at 0310412011 21:11

March 07 2011
Event CRTA-CRTAPP (2257169) scheduled at 03/07/2011 6:00 - 12:00 occurred at 03/07/2011 7:40 - 03/07/2011 12:27
Checked out of CJC-N42-F-32-002 on the way to CH280-HAM CO CRT HOU S at 03/07/2011 7:40
Completed event at 03/0712011 12:27

March 08 2011
Unscheduled Event OTH R-OTH PLC occurred at 03/08/2011 9:03 - 03/08/2011 9:09
Checked out of CJC-N42-F-32-002 on the way to RECORDS at 03/08/2011 9:03
Completed event at 03108/2011 9:09
Unscheduled Event OTH R-OTH PLC occurred at 03/08/2011 14:33 - 03/08/2011 16:21
Checked out of CJC-N42-F-32-002 on the way to INTERVIEW IN I NTK at 03/08/2011 14:33
Completed event at 03/08/2011 16:21

March 09 2011
Unscheduled Event OTH R-OTH PLC occurred at 03/09/2011 15:17 - 03/09/2011 15:58
Checked out of CJC-N42-F-32-002 on the way to INTAKE at 03)09/2011 15:17
Completed event at 03/09/2011 15:58

March 10 2011
Unscheduled Event MED-EKG occurred at 03/10/2011 15:34 - 03110/2011 16:53
Checked out of CJC-N42-F-32-002 on the way to MEDICAL at 03/10/2011 15:34
Completed event at 03/10/2011 16:53
Unscheduled Event MED-ER RUN occurred at 03/1012011 16:54 - 03/10/2011 19:01
Checked out of C.JC-N42-F-32-002 on the way to U C E/R at 03/10/2011 16:54
Completed event at 03/10/2011 19:01
Unscheduled Event HOUS-UNSCH occurred at 03/10/2011 19:49 - 03/10/2011 19:50
Checked out of CJC-N 42-F-32-002 on the way to OUT-UC-HOSP-1-002 at 03/10)2011 19:49
Completed event at 03/10)2011 19:50

September 21, 2011 14:11
Hamilton County Jail Management System (JMS)
Inmate Summary - 1418841 JONES,KEITH L

20 September 2011 Dearborn County Commissioners Meeting Notes

2011-09-20T12:56:00.002-04:00

20 September 2011 Dearborn County Commissioners Meeting Notes

Present: Jeff Hughes, President, Tom Orschell, and Shane McHenry
Also present: Gayle Pennington, Auditor, Bill Ewbank, County Coordinator, and Andy Baudendistel, Attorney.

Hughes congratulated County Attorney, Baudendistel on the arrival of his new baby.

Commissioners denied the Med Ben appeal from executive session that preceded this meeting.

OLD BUSINESS:

Private Real Property Rights Preservation Ordinance- tabled again at Hughes’s request

Revised Jail Expansion Project- Orschell met with RQAW and judges, etc. Judges want to focus on prevention and treatment such as J-cap. Footprint is the same. He also called Jud McMillin to check on legislation on Class D felons coming back to the county. He hopes to have something to the commissioners soon. Tabled for now.

Shooting Range- tabled – Commissioners scheduled to meet out at the site on Thursday 4:30 PM per Ewbank. McHenry and Orschell plan to be there. Ewbank to announce it in paper for the 48 hour rule.

NEW BUSINESS:

Gerry Bruns- January Prayer on the Square- Knights of Columbus requested this as their 2nd annual Prayer on the Square. It’s an ecumenical service – not just Catholics- on Jan 20th at 11AM. Approved.

Med Ben Wellness Program- tabled as rep is unavailable this morning to answer questions per Gayle Pennington.

Sick Time Donations- Gayle Pennington brought it back as it continues to bring up a lot of questions and problems. She wants them to reconsider it. She said it was put into place as a compassionate way to address catastrophic illnesses. It’s time consuming. She wants them to either change the procedure or not allow donation at all. She wants the Personnel Board ( HR, Auditor, 2 Council, 1 Commissioner) to decide it and have the employee get all the paperwork together. Food for thought- she said- Dearborn County is very generous that they have 1 day per month sick time- most have ½ and we pay out ¼ for unused, others don’t and we have an opportunity to bank time- it doesn’t disappear at the end of the year. Commissioners thought it would curb requests that were not critical or catastrophic to have the requests go to the Personnel Board. Baudendistel said they needed to notify employees first and have it effective the first of the year. Suellen (HR) said that the employees did get the handbooks etc. McHenry said that maybe we deny things if employees don’t abide by the rules. Part of the problem is the employees are paid on Fridays and that paycheck includes that Friday. [NOTE: Perhaps the county needs to become more like a real world employer.]

Todd Listerman- asked to speak- he noted that employees who save their days aren’t the ones asking for donations. If we pay ¼ for unused time when an employee leaves- but pay 4 times that when it’s donated- this affects the bottom line. There is disability insurance as an option for all employees.[NOTE: Are employees who save time pressured to donate?]
Thirty days of accumulated sick leave – 240 hours is the cap on what the county pays on departure.
Salaries paid by grants- they cannot give or donate sick time. Commissioners will wait to hear from Personnel Board on recommendations.

Candy Yurcak- Whitewater Canal ByWay Association- Grant Administration Information- 8 counties. INDOT said they can use any county as the LPA- (Grant administrator)- they are requesting Dearborn County be used as the administrator. They are to administrate the $60,000 grant. Pennington said it was OK- they have a whole file cabinet of people they help- administering grants. They are developing an amphitheater and working to tell the story of the whole Canal route. It will also promote what they have as assets in the valley. Approved for county to be administrator.

Parking Lot Island Regulations –discussion- Hughes brought this up as having attended a PC Meeting on this. Trees in the parking lot cost the business more to plant and to maintain. Mike Hall spoke also against the ideas of trees as impediments and also to allow PC to meet on it.
I also spoke in concurrence with this and Orschell would rather let PC come to them with the recommendations.
Hughes wants to send the recommendation to delete that section to PC to force a 45 day response. I suggested they not force the decision in a hurry. There doesn’t seem to be much county construction going on just now- at least not new projects. It was noted that PC could not vote till the Oct meeting- though they can discuss it at the Sept meeting under administrative.
Mark Scheper of Maxwell Construction said they have several projects and people are concerned with so many regulations.
Hughes said there are more rules he wants to look at. Commissioners voted to table this- with Hughes as a nay.

Transportation Department Priorities- Barnes and Thornburg Lobbyists- Bill Ewbank sat with Listerman and also the 2005 25 -year plan from INDOT and the OKI 2011 Major Freight Transportation. This is his recommendation:

1. Improvement of SR1 from 74 to 50, including Schuman Road intersection, Sawdon, Mt, Pleasant, and Salt Fork intersections.
2. 3rd lane on SR 1 hill
3. SR 1 corridor by Belleview road and the bridge access
$8,600,000 total cost.
4. Wilson Road to meet arterial standards for $10 million.
5. Stateline Riad from US 50 to Salt Fork Road to meet arterial standards for $10million
6. Pribble Road from SR 1 to SR 48 to be straightened. $9 million
7. Complete improvements on US 50 from L-bg to Aurora- some has been done. $70million remains about on the total $100million cost.
8. Commissioners want him to send the list to the mayors to see their reception.

HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT: Todd Listerman, Highway Engineer- gave the following report:

George Street Bridge will be ready for Farmer’s Fair.

Federal gov’t change on signage updates allows more time to change signs that have not run through their lifecycle. This saves some money for street signs like those in Aurora’s that are red, which isn’t allowed in the new rules. Hughes asked what happens if they don’t change. Listerman said they would lose federal monies if they don’t comply with federal regulations.

Bridge 34 and Lower Dillsboro bridge- he has been working with Baudendistel on acquiring ROW. Property owner wants the county to take it- as he does not want to sell it. The owner is getting tax credits on the land and does not want to jeopardize that if he sells it. Thus he is requesting we condemn it.

Permanent basketball goals in county ROW need to be addressed. Safety hazard for obstruction in ROW and kids playing in the street.

Ewbank is working with Tucker on Stateline Road ROWs and they have about 1/3 done so far. Hope to have then acquired by 2012 for 2013 construction.

McHenry asked about issues on Aurora Lumber and the intersection work. Mike Hall spoke and gave more details on the work there with the lumber barn moving and the lighted access. Waiting on Aurora Lumber to complete their section to finish up. Part of the problem was Bob Evans got theirs done faster. The access to Aurora Lumber is there- just go through the light and to the right. When it’s finished they will have a better access all the way around. Aurora has access thru the back for trucks. The county was at the mercy of the construction of the barn as Aurora selected their own builder. Can’t make it look good till the barn gets removed. State would not allow both openings once Bob Evans was done.

Listerman cited several changes that Aurora Lumber asked for and they accommodated. In reality they had a Sept 1 date originally. Commissioners asked for this in documentation form. Listerman and Hall agreed to get it to them.

AUDITOR: Gayle Pennington- Bright EMS approved for $40,000 contract.
Claims were signed with Hughes not reviewing them. Minutes were signed from May 17, July 19,and Aug 2. McHenry looked over May 17 and they approved it after he did.

ATTORNEY: Andy Baudendistel- discussion for sheriff’s dept to handle evidence for Dillsboro for $2500 for 25 cases. Additionals are at $100 a case. Oct 1- Sept 30 2012. Cover letter from Krienhop on the top. Approved. Pennington to get a copy to Kreinhop of the signed agreement.

COUNTY COORDINATOR: Bill Ewbank-Work Force 1 needs a local rep to it for Region 9 for economic growth. They will serve on the executive council. This serves till Dec 31, 2012. They also sign a local officials agreement. Hughes serves on it. He thinks it will help stimulate IT business. Commissioners reappointed Hughes and approved the agreement. Hughes thanked them for allowing him to sit on that board again.

County Animal Control will open around October 1. Animals will be moved Sept 23. Adoption closes until the inmates transfer to the shelter. Ribbon cutting and open house is at the shelter tomorrow.

Renovation of Hoosier Square bids will be due Sept 29. They have been able to tour it this week. Hope to have it done by end of 2011.

COMMISSIONER COMMENTS - none

LATE ARRIVAL INFORMATION- none

PUBLIC COMMENT- Mike Hall- surveyor – Cook Road want to fix it with the big rock baskets (Gambion baskets) and clearing all trees on 400+ feet of the creek bank. No geotech and the soil scientist tests are not enough. His parents and his concern is that the baskets will sit in a 6% creek bank, 20 feet high. The option was a core drill and piling rock. The baskets are not a permanent fix.
Hall’s parents are declining to have it done or give up the ROW. We will lose the grant money. He has to give Listerman an answer. Rip rap with concrete over it might be an option. The proposed fix when it fails will actually make a problem worse. The failure rate of other sites like this cause them grave concern. Bats fly in by November so nothing can happen there. We would have to use their design to get the money and this is not a good fix. They have to tell them today. Deadline is here. This is not a big priority- but we will figure out a way to get people in and out, said Listerman. Hall apologized for the turn down of the grant.

Meeting adjourned at 11:00 AM.

Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawrenceburg Township

19 September 2011 Pre –Trial Hearing for Dan Brewington- Notes

2011-09-19T17:02:00.002-04:00

19 September 2011 Pre –Trial Hearing for Dan Brewington- Notes

The pretrial hearing started at 1:35 PM instead of at 1 PM. Prosecutor Aaron Negangard and Bryan Barrett, Public Defender for Brewington, arrived along with Judge Brian Hill at the same time.

Brewington had been waiting since just before 1 PM in the courtroom attired as usual in his orange jail clothes and pink handcuffs. He had two large stacks of papers with him.

Judge Brian Hill said the jury trial is set for Monday Oct 3rd at 9 AM. The grand jury exhibits were released by the state (prosecutor) and are to be available to the defendant. There is a transcript of the grand jury in Hill’s office, should the Public Defender need that for copies.

The motion for confidentiality of juror’s names filed by Negangard was NOT opposed by Barrett for Brewington. Brewington himself, however, did object as he said there is a lack of evidence that he poses a threat to anyone. Judge Hill said there has been a history of exposing private information by Brewington and so he granted confidentiality for the names and identities of the jurors.

Summons for jurors go out today and the list provided to counsel will have redacted names and signatures per Judge Hill. Logistically, the jurors will be identified by numbered placards worn around their necks during the entire process.

If there is evidence or cause to reveal a juror’s name, they will address that in the judge’s chambers. The defense and the prosecution filed in limine and all were approved. [NOTE: The details of these motions filed were not discussed, but can be found in the court files later. Per Wikipedia: “A "motion in limine" asks the court to decide that certain evidence may or may not be presented to the jury at the trial. A motion in limine generally addresses issues which would be prejudicial for the jury to hear in open court, even if the other side makes a timely objection which is sustained, and the judge instructs the jury to disregard the evidence.”]

Brewington – as an aside - asked Barrett what those motions in limine were for the prosecution and Barrett said he just got a copy today and will get it to Brewington.

Judge Hill said there were no state issues or defense issues with his final instructions. Again this was not discussed.

Judge Hill said 80 jurors were summoned. He will have 40 in the morning and another 40 in the afternoon should that be necessary.

Negangard had no issues.

Barrett said that his client wished to address the court.

Judge Hill approved.

Brewington said in a prepared handwritten statement:

1. That he had no explanation of his alleged crimes
2. That there were no meetings for preparation- and has had less than 2 hours total with his public defenders ( Watson, then Barrett)
3. That there were no efforts to approach getting witnesses for his defense
4. That Barrett was not even meeting or getting information from Mrs. Brewington (his mother)
5. That he has not been given any exhibits during court
6. That there has been no attempt to defend him against the Keith Jones allegations
7. That a first amendment expert, a mental health expert have not been obtained
8. That Conner’s case file has not been subpoenaed
9. That there has been no depositions of state witnesses
10. That a motion to dismiss has not been filed and
11. That he has had no indication as to the strategy for his defense.

Judge Hill asked what relief was he seeking.

Brewington said he guessed a continuance because the public defender has not met with him, yet. He said that Mr. Watson failed to get his information to the 2nd public defender, Mr. Barrett.

Brewington said, “I have been prohibited from playing ANY role in my defense.” There is no way there is time to properly prepare for the defense. There has been little to no communication between me and Mr. Barrett. I do NOT KNOW what the defense even is? I don’t even know the basis of the charges in the grand jury transcript.

Judge Hill said, “I thought you were upset last time about the trial delay”.

Brewington said that was assuming my defense would be discussed (now that Barrett was back.) [NOTE: Background history: The public defender, Barrett, had a family emergency as his mother was dying. When he returned at the last hearing for the bond reduction, he called no witnesses on Brewington’s behalf, though the prosecutor had several. Barrett had not met with Brewington to prepare for the trial yet. It was apparent that he and Brewington were not on the same page at a couple points during this hearing.]

Judge Hill asked Prosecutor Negangard if he had anything to say about the continuance.

Prosecutor Negangard said the issue had been a continuance because Mr. Barrett had a family emergency and couldn’t get prepared before. The continuance was based on the emergency. Negangard said he didn’t know if Brewington was being honest with the court. Negangard said he would not take a position on this. The state is ready for trial on Oct 3rd as scheduled. He said Brewington’s integrity was an issue before and his complaining now is about keeping the case from going to resolution. [NOTE: Seems like Negangard did take a position on this.]

Brewington stated that you can check the DCLEC phone and visit records- they will document that I have had little to no contact with a public defender. At the last hearing the speedy trial rule was the issue. Now the issue is that I have had no time to prepare with my public defender, I have no idea of any witnesses to testify, and no specifics on the alleged crimes. [NOTE: Brewington apparently reasonably assumed that his public defender would meet with him between the last hearing and today.]

Judge Brian Hill denied the motion to continue the case and said there was two weeks to prepare for trial. All the information will be available to you at the end of the afternoon.

Brewington asked through his lawyer to have his handwritten statement to be made part of the public record. Judge Hill approved.

Court ended at 2 PM.

Barrett then said to Brewington that he’d see him at the end of the week. He also asked the jail officer that if he gave him the documents would he get those to Brewington. He said yes.

[NOTE: Something to think about: Per the Innocence Project: “The resources of the justice system are often stacked against poor defendants. Matters only become worse when a person is represented by an ineffective, incompetent or overburdened defense lawyer. The failure of overworked lawyers to investigate, call witnesses or prepare for trial has led to the conviction of innocent people. When a defense lawyer doesn't do his or her job, the defendant suffers. Shrinking funding and access to resources for public defenders and court-appointed attorneys is only making the problem worse.”]

Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawrenceburg Township

Agenda for September 20th Commissioners Meeting

2011-09-15T22:05:00.000-04:00

AGENDA
DEARBORN COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MEETING
September 20, 2011
9:00 a.m.
City of Lawrenceburg
Administration Building
230 Walnut Street, Lawrenceburg, Indiana

EXECUTIVE SESSION @ 8:30 AM – Med Ben Appeal

I. CALL TO ORDER

II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

III. OLD BUSINESS
1. Private Real Property Rights Preservation Ordinance
2. Revised Jail Expansion Project
3. Shooting Range

IV. NEW BUSINESS
1. Jerry Bruns – January Prayer on the Square
2. Med Ben – Wellness Program
3. Sick Time Donations
4. Candy Yurcak – Whitewater Canal Byway Assoc
Grant Administrator information
5. Parking Lot Island Regulations – Discussion
6. Transportation Priorities – Barnes & Thornburg

V. HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT- Todd Listerman
Updates

VI. AUDITOR – Gayle Pennington
1. Claims/Minutes

VII. ATTORNEY - Andy Baudendistel

VIII. COUNTY COORDINATOR – Bill Ewbank

IX. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS

X. LATE ARRIVAL INFORMATION

XI. PUBLIC COMMENT

XII. ADJOURN

Alan Miller Announces Candidacy For Judge Superior Court II in 2012

2011-09-13T19:02:00.000-04:00

Alan Miller Announces Candidacy For Judge Superior Court II in 2012
There are substantial problems with the administration of justice in our county. Our justice system is filled with inefficiencies that ultimately cost the taxpayers money. It is also filled with inequality, the costs of which cannot be measured. Such inequality undermines the public’s trust in the justice system and leads to a lack of faith in it.

After a great deal of reflection and discussion with others involved in the system, I have come to the conclusion that the task of fixing these problems can only be done from within. Therefore, I am announcing my candidacy for Judge of the Dearborn Superior Court II.

If elected, I pledge to run the court in an efficient manner, always keeping in mind that it is taxpayer money that keeps the lights on. I will strive to find places where the system can be streamlined and have the courage to make cuts, if necessary.

I also pledge to give every individual who appears before the court a fair shake and treat them with respect, regardless of their last name or lot in life. I will not place my thumb on the scales of justice to give anyone an unfair advantage or impose my personal opinion of a case on those involved.

I look forward to meeting and listening to the citizens of our county. With their help, we can restore the justice system we deserve.

Alan Miller

Make It Miller For Judge

millerforjudge2012@gmail.com

DAN BREWINGTON CASE TIMELINE PART II

2011-09-08T19:51:00.001-04:00

DAN BREWINGTON CASE TIMELINE PART II

On July 19, 2011 TIMELINE PART I was published; this is TIMELINE PART II dated Sept. 8, 2011:

27. A Bond Reduction hearing was scheduled for August 3, 2011.

a. Dan had only talked to Mr. Barrett 1 time since July 18, 2011 and that was because Dan kept calling the public defender’s office until Barrett picked up. A rational call from Mr. Barrett to explain that he had a family emergency would have been a courtesy. But we were left to guess with the bond hearing approaching, as well as the trial.
b. On August 1, 2011 after not hearing from Mr. Barrett since seeing him at the July 18, 2011 hearing I emailed him. I told him Dan did not want a continuance, that Dan had a lot of information and people that could be subpoenaed to testify as character and medical witnesses. I told him that Dan needed to talk to him that day and sent him my cell phone number, again. Dan had signed papers so Mr. Barrett could discuss his case with his Ohio attorney Robert G. Kelly or with me, Sue Brewington.
c. On August 2, 2011 I got a call from Mr. Barrett’s investigator, Justin Kerr, and he told me there would be no bond hearing because of Mr. Barrett’s family emergency.
d. He wanted Dan to continue his trial and he said that Dan had to decide today, Aug. 2, 2011.
e. If Dan were to continue his trial he could be in jail indefinitely because he would be giving up his right to a speedy trial and there would be all kinds of continuances, no bond reduction hearings…
f. Dan got information that was incorrect from Mr. Kerr
(1) Dan asked, through me, about filing a motion for him to be able to wear street clothes at trial. He responded with an email that explained that the CO that gave Dan the information about wearing street clothes to trial was either imaginary or didn’t know what he was talking about. I checked with Judges’ Cleary and Blankenship’s offices and was told that you did need something in writing to the court, from your attorney. In section 5.2 of the inmate handbook it says something in writing has to be submitted.
(2) Mr. Kerr told Dan that the state had 1 year to try someone but left out that they could only be kept in jail 6 months without trial if they did not file for any continuances. He tried to get Dan to file a continuance. There are 3 exceptions to this, see below.

28. I was reporting our story on the internet and Mr. Kerr didn’t like it so he wrote to say he couldn’t communicate with me anymore.

29. The trial was scheduled for Tuesday, August 16, 2011 at 8:30. Jury selection would be first.
a. Next – Dan had to file a Motion to Vacate the Bond Reduction Hearing that was scheduled for August 3, 2011.
b. The judge ordered this because the public defender was out of town on a personal matter and since the trial is set for August 16, 2011 there is no need for a bond reduction hearing.
c. An order vacating the August 3, 2011 Bond Reduction Hearing was filed on August 4, 2011.

30. Judge Brian D. Hill filed a Voir Dire Order on August 4, 2011. That is to convene a jury.

31. On Monday August 8, 2011, Norwood, Ohio Attorney Robert G. Kelly became licensed to practice before the United States District Court Southern District of Indiana. He took his oath of office in Indianapolis and went straight to Dearborn County Law Enforcement Center to see Dan. After almost 5 months Mr. Kelly could finally see Dan under attorney-client privilege.

32. On Tuesday, August 9, 2011 Mr. Kelly filed a Writ of Habeas Corpus with the United States District Court Southern District of Indiana, in Indianapolis.

33. On August 9, 2011 Deputy Prosecutor, M. Joseph Kisor filed a Motion for Confidentiality of Juror’s Names and Identities.
a. Once again Prosecutor Negangard’s office uses the charges as fact when asking for this motion.
(1) The defendant has previously attempted to interfere with the judicial process, including continuous and long-term harassment of witnesses, judges, and attorneys involved.
(2) The defendant has previously made threats against witnesses, judges, and attorneys involved in the current court proceedings.
(3) Juror’s safety would be jeopardized…
(4) To support his argument Prosecutor Negangard’s office uses the case of Carl A. Major Appellant-Defendant vs. State of Indiana, Appellee- Plaintiff. This case involved the shooting of 5 people, 3 died and they were executed, 3 shots to the back of the head. The court ruled that the trial court erred in impaneling an anonymous jury but that such error was harmless, and that Major’s sentence of 175 years was not inappropriate.
(5) The Appellate Court ruled that the even considering the horrendous nature of the crime impaneling an anonymous jury was wrong in this case but it was a harmless error. How could it possibly be appropriate in Dan’s case?

34. On August 10, 2011 Deputy Prosecutor M. Joseph Kisor filed a Motion to Release Grand Jury Exhibits to the Prosecuting Attorney for Dan’s trial. We don’t even know what that means because we can’t talk to Dan’s attorney.

35. On August 11, 2011 there is an Order Vacating Jury Trial because the public defender had a family emergency, which he truly did, and Judge Brian D. Hill wanted to make sure the Defendant would get his right of effective assistance of counsel at trial.

36. As part of the above order, Judge Brian D. Hill also set a Bond Reduction Hearing for Wednesday, August 17, 2011 at 10:00AM.

37. On Friday, August 12, 2011 Bryan E. Barrett called me in a 1 minute 17 second phone conversation to tell me that the trial had been vacated and that a bond reduction hearing was to be set for August 17, 2011 and he would be there.

38. There was not going to be any attempt to call character or medical witnesses for Dan.

39. No communication with the attorney until August 17, 2011

40. Bond Hearing – Wednesday, August 17, 2011
a. Dan came in with help from a CO trying to carry all of his documents because he didn’t know what counsel would want or what he intended to do. He was wearing pink handcuffs that would rub his wrists red because he had to constantly go through his 1400 pages of discoveries with no help and not being able to take off the handcuffs. No one even asked if that was possible.
b. Barrett never talked to Dan. Barrett sat in the spectator seats until the judge was ready to come in and then Mr. Barrett moved to his spot next to Dan.
c. Barrett had no witnesses to call for Dan. No character or mental health witnesses. They would have been available if there had been time to call them.
d. Negangard calls Det. Shane McHenry to the stand.
(1). He testified that they have a recorded interview with someone who was in Hamilton County Justice Center when Dan was there. The man’s name is Keith L Jones. The Cincinnati Police got a crimestopper’s call (they are all anonymous) with a story that someone in jail was trying to hire a person to do a drive by on a judge.
(2). That someone was “allegedly” Dan.
(3). The man supposedly had details so you would know that he talked to Dan, or overhead Dan talking to someone.
(4). Keith L. Jones supposedly said he knew someone and supposedly gave Dan 2 phone numbers.
(5). The police checked only one number and the person had never heard of Dan Brewington.
(6). Prosecutor Negangard gave the recording to the judge.
(7). Keith L. Jones has a criminal record pages long covering 2 counties in Ohio; Hamilton and Franklin and the Federal Government. Charges consist of taking the identity of another, forgery, insurance fraud, falsification, receiving stolen property, possession of criminal tools, multiple felony thefts, and probation violation.
(8). Keith L. Jones is an informant for the police but is now serving a 10 year prison sentence.
(9). Cincinnati Police didn’t pursue this further.
(10). The ATF officer didn’t pursue this further.
(11). The Hamilton County Prosecutor didn’t file charges nor did the Dearborn County Prosecutor file charges.
(12). The Dearborn County Sheriff formed a protective unit around the clock for Judge Humphrey from March 11, 2011 through March 18, 2011.
(13). During this time Dan was in custody in their Jail but they didn’t interrogate him. They just decided to listen in to all of his conversations for a week. They didn’t hear anything about a drive by.
(14). F. Aaron Negangard offered Dan a plea bargain in May through public defender #1, John Watson. Mr. Watson conveyed this information to Norwood attorney Robert G. Kelly. It was time served. Would Negangard offer time served to a person who tried to hire someone to do a drive by on a judge?????
(15). He used it at the Bond Hearing to try to promote his argument that Dan is dangerous.
(16). For unofficial transcribed minutes to this hearing see
http://dearborncounty.blogspot.com/2011/08/17-august-2011-dan-brewington-bond.html

41. On Friday, August 19, 2011 at 3:23PM Dan filed a complaint and jury demand(lawsuit), by his Norwood, Ohio Attorney Robert G. Kelly, in the United States District Court Southern District of Indiana naming:
a. Judge James D. Humphrey – Family Court Judge Dearborn County, Indiana
b. Edward J. Connor – Child Custody Evaluator from Erlanger, Kentucky working in Indiana without a license.
c. F. Aaron Negangard – Prosecutor of Dearborn County, Indiana
d. Michael Kreinhop – Sheriff of Dearborn County, Indiana
e. Heidi Humphrey – former member of the Indiana Supreme Court Ethics and Professionalism Committee in September,2009.
f. Angela Loechel – divorce attorney, Lawrenceburg, Indiana.
g. Dearborn County, Indiana
John Does 1-25 For a complete copy of the complaint and jury demand (lawsuit) go to
http://dearborncounty.blogspot.com/2011/08/brewington-federal-lawsuit-filed-august.html

42. Order Denying Bond Reduction – filed August 23, 2011.
a. State presented evidence the Defendant has a history of refusing to follow court orders and disdain for authority of the court.
(1). Negangard made a point that Dan didn’t have the court ordered mental health exam and Dan’s attorney made no attempt to be able to ask Dan what he had done.
(2). Negangard made a point that Dan had not paid his ex $122,000 that he was ordered to pay to her immediately. Note: Dan has a public defender because he has no money.
(3). Dan has not paid Angela Loechel the $40,000 the court ruled he owed her.
(4). The first 3 all pertain to Dan’s divorce decree, filed August 18, 2009.
(5). He is current with child support payments, has never missed a payment.
(6). Disdain for the court is subjective. As far as bond goes, showing disdain for the court matters only if that disdain supports that a defendant wouldn’t show for trial. It is ridiculous to suggest that someone, who doesn’t take a plea for time served and states that he wants to go to trail to proclaim his innocence, would run from trial.
(7). The state also presented evidence that since his arrest, the defendant may have contemplated violence towards at least one alleged victim in this case. See testimony of Det. Shane McHenry.
(8). The court concurs with Judge Sally Blankenship’s Bond. If she knew about the “alleged” drive by she didn’t mention it.
(9) What happened to Dan’s right to be released on or about September 11, 2011 because he has been in jail for 6 months and had not asked for a continuance? Judge Hill solved that issue by ruling that this case fell under the category of emergency so he invoked the emergency clause and Dan wasn’t going to get out in the 6 months the law demands, through no fault of Dan’s.

43. Order to Release Grand Jury Exhibits – Filed August 23, 2011 – We still don’t know what that means.

44. There is an order that sets the Jury Trial for October 3, 2011 and the pretrial for September 19,
2011. There is a deadline for witness lists and subpoenas and Dan has only talked briefly to his attorney, who still hasn’t subpoenaed any witnesses, either character or medical. The attorney is supposed to visit this week, we will report later on this.

45. Judge Ted Todd, in Jefferson County, denied my motion to set aside the divorce decree, even though it violates my right to due process regarding the money and the farmland so my finances are still frozen. It was filed with the Ripley County Clerk’s Office on September 6, 2011. I can’t sell land or borrow money because of the lien that was placed on my husband’s trust because of the divorce. For more information on this issue please see the blog post “When a Trust Becomes A Nightmare” http://danbrewington.blogspot.com/2011/05/when-trust-becomes-nightmare.html Judge Todd took over 6 months to rule on this.

Submitted by Sue Brewington 9/8/11

6 September 2011 Dearborn County Commissioners Meeting Notes

2011-09-07T08:03:00.003-04:00

6 September 2011 Dearborn County Commissioners Meeting Notes

Present: Jeff Hughes, President, Tom Orschell, and Shane McHenry (arrived late- at 6:50PM due to a home robbery and shooting in the county)

Also present: Gayle Pennington, Auditor, Bill Ewbank, County Coordinator, and Andy Baudendistel, Attorney.

Rearranged the 4H item due to McHenry being tied up on an incident for the sheriff’s dept.

OLD BUSINESS

State Drainage Law- Baudendistel had rewritten the ordinance as requested and commissioners approved it. They also approved the fees for investigating a storm water nuisance- $50. These will also go to council for their approval due to the fees involved. They also need to be advertised for two weeks after council approves.

Private Real Property Rights Preservation Ordinance- Hughes had an email that he wanted to pass on that a state did and not a county. Just more information- tabled it AGAIN.

Revised Jail Expansion Project- Orschell will meet with RQAW and the sheriff on Sept 14- tabled AGAIN until after that meeting.

NEW BUSINESS:

Sheriff’s dept- Beautification Project- wants to put two awnings up to cover the keypad at entry and also the picnic area. These are removable. It is all funded by the Main Street Lawrenceburg ( about $16,000) and some ($1310) out of jail fund. Commissioners approved.

Animal Control Truck Purchase request- Marlene Underwood had a grant for $22,400. Haag Ford truck for $27,028 will be what they purchase including the money in Animal Control fund. It will have the Animal Control part put in the chassis in Texas and then shipped.Approved.

Mike Burgess- Veteran’s Officer- Vehicle Purchase Request- Has received a grant $73,500 from the DC Foundation for the purchase of 2 vans. Superior Van and Mobiles will be using Ford units and equip it for them . $83,354 is total cost- he has some funds already to cover this and he will reimburse the foundation for any unused funds. Commissioners approved the purchase.

Lifetime Housing- Ratify Owner Occupied rehabilitation Property Declarations- several had come in and Bill Ewbank had Hughes sign them as they were time sensitive. There were several properties that qualified for these. Commissioners ratified Hughes’s signatures from before.

4H Shooting Range lease- Mike Heffelmire- Hughes had hoped to wait for McHenry- but he still had not arrived.

Heffelmire sent an email letter with maps from the County Farm/park Board meeting to commissioners and 4H:

Wanted to let you know that during our last joint meeting “The County Park Board” informed us that they intend to close the Youth Complex and purchase land at the end of Latire Road to build a new “Public Range”, I’m on the agenda for the Commissioners Meeting Tuesday Evening, at 6:30 to try and talk them into taking the Youth complex out of the Park Boards Control and lease or deed it to County 4-H. It was suppose to be removed from the County Farm at the same time the YES Home, Highway Department and Dog pound was.
It may help if we show up in numbers to protest closing it. Bring everyone you can. An estimate of how much time and money you guys have put into it would be nice also. I have what we have spent and the Foundation.
Thanks
Mike

CF Proposed Land Use Plan.pdf
782 kb Download

Preliminary Range Plan .pdf
638 kb Download

Heffelmire , a member of 4H and the County Farm Committee said that on Feb 21, 1985 they incorporated the DC Youth Complex. $38,000 plus has been spent since the Park board took over by the 4H range. The Park Board was in favor of these expenditures. On July 6th they met and found out the Park Board wanted to remove it as it was unsafe. The road they graveled only goes to Youth Complex and to a local farmer who has an easement there for access. County Parks wants to purchase land along Lattire road. They want to move the shooting range there and the 4H does not want to move there. They want a new lease to keep this totally in 4H hands. They do not want a public shooting range for the kids. Baudendistel said that it has been deeded to the Park Board but it is still County land. Their old lease expired.

Jim RedElk of the Park Board gave an overview of what the Park Board was up to. The County Farm Committee is a subcommittee of the Park Board. They are updating their 5 year plan. They have compiled all the ideas that have come to them in a map. They think that as time goes on more people will use the parks and the shooting range may become an issue in its current location. Some of these uses may never happen and County Farm may remain as is. In deference to the County Farm Committee due to their years managing it, the Park Board decided to involve the County Farm Committee in the long range planning for that park. That map showed all these ideas preliminarily. At the end of it there were not any real specific objections to it at that time. They also were trying to make sure recreation was available to everyone. We found out they came to you with their objections rather than us. That’s where we are in this process. The other piece is 13 acres and council was helping finance that so the 4 H has more land. It is also hilly rather than flat as is the current range.

At 6:50 PM McHenry arrived.

4H/Park Board continued. Red Elk said they would build the new range first and then move.

Steve Walker- Park Board President- passed out the following letter that went to 4H participants:

To 4H Shooting Sports Participants,

Having recently received a request from Mike Heffelmire requesting your attendance at the Commissioner's meeting tomorrow, the Park Board believes that there are a number of corrections that need to be made and issues that need to be addressed. We hope you will consider these carefully before committing to the public action that has been requested.

1) First, and most emphatically, the Park Board has no intention of closing the facility currently used for 4H shooting sports at any time in the near future, likely measured in years, and possibly never for the archery component. At no time do we anticipate that anything in this process will be permitted to interfere with ongoing 4H shooting sports activities.
2) While we have begun the process of planning for the conversion of the County Farm property for use as a public park, all such plans and proposals are preliminary. So that you will know the general tenor of our discussions and the full nature of the information we provided to the County Farm Committee, drawings and other materials have been included to detail the uses for which the Board believes the landscape of County Farm may best be suited. Please keep in mind that the drawings represent very preliminary usage suggestions. You should expect to see more of this in months (and years) to come in the form of surveys and public meetings as we attempt to assess and meet the needs and desires of area and regional residents.

3) This being said, the one true thread of the e-mail is that our preliminary assessment of land use has forced us to evaluate the role of the range at it's present location. It is our opinion at this time that the current location of the range for firearms sports represents a significant impediment to ANY use of the property north of Co. Farm Road for public recreation, both for psychological as well as safety reasons. As you will see on the attached map of suggested uses, the area east of the range is the segment of the property best suited for field sports given the flat topography.
4) The Board recognizes the significant personal investment that 4H and its volunteers have made to that facility. You should know that the Board has been and will continue to be a strong supporter of organized youth activities. Accordingly, we have made a commitment and repeatedly affirmed that the Board intends to replace the infrastructure with equivalent or better facilities at any new location. It is our hope that 4H will view this as an opportunity. We will be counting on the experience and expertise of SAFE and others to make any new facility a success.

5) A new facility, at the Lattire location or anywhere else, would likely only be public in the sense that it would also be open to other public organizations contributing to its success, perhaps including Boy Scouts, area police departments and similar organizations able to regulate and insure their members. Given the long standing investment of 4H in the shooting sports and youth training, the Board intends to continue operations in such a manner that 4H will have priority in scheduling.

6) Our actions have not been preemptive or without consultation. The preliminary plan to acquire the property on Lattire and its purpose in the overall plan for the future of the park system has been presented and matching funds approved by County Council. This necessary first step to ensure that the possibility existed was followed by a joint meeting with the CFC as the legacy managers of the property to let them know our thoughts give them an opportunity to offer theirs. Our impressions from that meeting were that, given our commitment to provide an installation "as good or better", the general direction of our planning was acceptable to those gathered.

These are the facts of the situation from the viewpoint of the Dearborn County Park Board. We hope you will take the time to review the attached materials. If you do, given the beautiful setting and a topography nearly purpose-built for shooting sports of the location we have been looking at, it is my expectation that you will come to see the same opportunities in this new location that I do. Much is yet to be resolved and will likely be years in the making, but the Board views this as an effort requiring 4H as an active partner. We hope you are looking forward to teaming with the Park Board as well.

If you have forwarded the e-mail from Mr. Heffelmire to others not in the distribution list for this message, the Board would ask that you forward this message to those persons as well, or to anyone you may have advised by other means.

Please visit us occasionally at http://parks.dearborncounty.in.gov, send us an e-mail or attend one of our monthly public meetings. We will make every effort to provide updates on events and progress at your county parks.

Sincere Regards,

James S. Walker
President
Dearborn County Park Board.

NOTE: For a photo tour of the Lattire property under acquisition visit: http://parks.dearborncounty.in.gov/Parks/Images/PhotoSection.pdf (this file is over 9mb in size)

Walker stressed that they were not asking 4H to go anywhere. And certainly not anytime soon. They are committed to building one as good or better, if they build a new Shooting Range. The current range is 2-3 acres right in the middle of a larger portion that could be used. There haven’t been any accidents because no one has been on the property. It’s likely that this will conflict with future public uses. The terrain on Lattire Road property would help control any possible accidents due to the hills. DNR has up to $100,000 available for shooting ranges. The Park board members are committed to 4H and youth activities.

Mike Heffelmire said the current range is not in the middle of the farm it’s on the edge. He does NOT want to share the 4H range with the public. He wants the 4H to be safe.

McHenry says he has been out there and wants to speak with Walker and Heffelmire.

A park board member also suggested researching Title 14 in Indiana Code.

Heffelmire said this year the range was used 14 times and for 3 hours at the longest time. That would be 42 hours or less for about ¾ of a year.

Commissioners said they want to go out and view it- they will make it a public noticed meeting so the commissioners can go together. Baudendistel can’t commit to the next meeting due to the impending birth of his child. He will have research by the 2nd October meeting on Oct 18th at 9 AM.

HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT: Todd Listerman, Highway Engineer reported:

Had a meeting with INDOT and Fed Hwy Adm. Dept of Justice are making all public agencies develop a transition plan that was supposed to happen in 1995 regarding ADA compliance. (Handicapped accessible) All county roads and sidewalks are to be compliant as are all parks etc. He and Bill Ewbank will be meeting with all the local agencies and departments to get a plan to get us in compliance. We haven’t gotten it done in the last 16 years. This will affect all our federal grants and funds if we do not have this up-to-date transition plan. Cities and towns have to do this as well. This will affect the 2013 budget.

Three change orders as they relate to George St Bridge. 80/20 each:
South abutment mortar repointed- $2500. Approved.
Sidewalk had to be widened to be ADA compliant and had to adjust existing sidewalk $4724.60 Approved.
No charge change order but specs for painting changed due to new Indiana standards – but the changes had to go in the contract. Approved.

The bridge should open in by end of Sept- BEFORE Farmer’s Fair.

AUDITOR: Gayle Pennington- claims approved.

ATTORNEY: Andy Baudendistel- nothing

COUNTY COORDINATOR: Bill Ewbank- requested 2012 Holiday schedule because the Courts are scheduling and need it. This is the same as last years but with revised dates. Approved.

Orschell asked Ewbank to send thank you letters to the DC Foundation for the significant grants the county has received. He agreed and also will mention the GIS one as well.

Letter to attorney for Frick and Associates proposing settlement as discussed in their last executive session. Baudendistel to review.

COMMISSIONER COMMENTS- McHenry said this has been a tragic day in DC and to keep those folks in your thoughts.

LATE ARRIVAL INFORMATION- Andrea (??last name)- introduced Beth Carpenter and spoke of her son Jack who was hit by a distracted driver last year. They are organizing a run to raise money for this cause on education about driver distractions at Bright Christian Church Saturday. They have a final route and the road has been marked. There was some concern atroad safety on Sneakville and part of Stateline which is closed. They will only take 2 hours tops. They will mark the roads with cones etc. Orschell will try to get informational signs on those closed roads. Bill Ewbank will also be a contact for questions from neighbors on the letter they are distributing on Thursday.

PUBLIC COMMENT- none

Meeting adjourned at 7:30 PM

Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawrenceburg Township

TEA PARTY MEET CITY CANDIDATES Sept 8th- OPEN TO THE PUBLIC

2011-09-02T10:09:00.000-04:00

OPEN TO THE PUBLIC

What: We the Hoosiers – General Meeting
When: Thursday – September 8 at 6:30 P.M.Where: Meeting Room of the Lawrenceburg Fire Department W. Tate Street across from the Adult Center in Lawrenceburg

Residents of Aurora, Lawrenceburg and Greendale have the opportunity to meet their candidates seeking election or re-election to the office of Mayor for their cities. All candidates have been invited to attend and discuss the issues facing their communities. The meeting is open to the public.
Remember to display an American flag on Sunday, September 11, 2011 - ten-year anniversary of 9/11.Hope you can join us this week and/or in the future. At this time, we plan to have a General Meeting every 2nd Thursday of the month.Check our website: www.wethehoosiers.com

Agenda for September 6th Commissioners Meeting

2011-09-02T10:07:00.000-04:00

AGENDA
DEARBORN COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MEETING
September 6, 2011
6:00 p.m., Commissioners Room
County Administration Building
215 B West High Street, Lawrenceburg, Indiana

I. CALL TO ORDER

II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

III. OLD BUSINESS
1. Private Real Property Rights Preservation Ordinance
2. Revised Jail Expansion Project
3. State Drainage Law

IV. NEW BUSINESS
1. Mike Heffelmire – 4H Shooting Range Lease
2. Sheriff’s Dept. – Beautification Project
3. Animal Control – Truck Purchase Request
4. Mike Burgess, Veteran’s Service Officer – Vehicle Purchase Request
5. Lifetime Housing – Ratify Owner Occupied Rehabilitation Property Declarations

V. HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT- Todd Listerman
Updates

VI. AUDITOR – Gayle Pennington
1. Claims/Minutes

VII. ATTORNEY - Andy Baudendistel

VIII. COUNTY COORDINATOR – Bill Ewbank
1. 2012 Holiday Schedule

IX. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS

X. LATE ARRIVAL INFORMATION

XI. PUBLIC COMMENT

XII. ADJOURN

Order For Trial Date and Ruling on Criminal Rule 4A for Brewington Case

2011-09-02T07:49:00.002-04:00

Filed AUG 26 2011

STATE OF INDIANA
COUNTY OF DEARBORN
STATE OF INDIANA,
Plaintiff
DEARBORN SUPERIOR COURT II
CAUSE NO. 15D02-1103-FD-084
VS
DANIEL BREWINGTON,
Defendant

ORDER SETTING TRIAL
COMES NOW THE COURT on its own Motion and FINDS as follows:
1. The Defendant has been incarcerated on these charges since on or about
March 11, 2011 with no continuances being made on his motion or delays
caused by his acts.
2. This matter had been previously set for Jury Trial to commence on Aug.
17, 2011 which would have been within the six month time frame outlined
in Indiana Criminal Rule 4(A).
3. The Court FINDS that the family emergency of defense counsel which
required counsel to be away from his office and work for the two weeks
prior to that previous jury setting to be an emergency under Indiana
Criminal Rule 4(A). Due to this emergency, the Defendant shall not be
released from custody without posting bail prior to trial.
4. This matter shall be set for Final Pretrial Conference on September 19,
2011 at 1:00 p.m. with Jury Trial to commence on October 3, 2011 at 9:00
a.m.
5. Exchange of information, including witness and exhibit lists, shall be
completed within seven (7) days of this order.
6. Any Motions in Limine shall be filed by September 5, 2011

ALL OF WHICH IS ORDERED this 23 rd day of August, 2011.

BRIAN D. HILL, Special Judge
Dearborn Superior Court II

Distribution:
Dearborn Superior Court Clerk
Honorable Brian D. Hill
Prosecuting Attorney
Bryan E. Barrett

Chronological Case Summary for Dan Brewington as of August 30, 2011

2011-09-01T07:55:00.001-04:00

Tue Aug 30 2011 14:27:45 Page: 1

CHRONOLOGICAL CASE SUMMARY
CRIMINAL DOCKET, DEARBORN SUPERIOR COURT 2
FOR CAUSE NO: 15D02-1103-FD-00084
STATE VS BREWINGTON, DANIEL
JUDGE BRIAN D HILL

ACTION: CLASS D FELONY
CT I: INTIMIDATION
35-45-2-1(a)(1) Class A Misdemeanor
CT II: INTIMIDATION OF JUDGE
35-45-2-1 (a)(2)(b)(1) Class D Felony
CT III: INTIMIDATION
35-45-2-1(a)(1) Class A Misdemeanor
CT IV: ATTEMPT TO COMMIT OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE
35-44-3-4 Class D Felony
CT V: PERJURY
35-44-2-1(a)(1) Class D Felony
CT VI: UNLAWFUL DISCLOSURE OF GRAND JURY
PROCEEDINGS
35-34-2-10 Class B Misdemeanor

DATE FILED:
ORIG FILE DATE:
3/7/2011
3/7/2011

ENTRY/FEE BOOK: PAGE: JUDGE BRIAN HILL
BOOK: 0 PAGE: 0
BOOK: 0 PAGE: 0

ATTORNEYS PARTIES
18809-15
4325-73
F NEGANGARD
PROSECUTING ATTORNEY'S OFC.
DEARBORN CO. COURTHOUSE
LAWRENCEBURG IN 47025
812-537-8858
BRYAN E BARRETT
RUSH CO PUBLIC DEFENDER OFFICE
101 EAST SECOND ST., ROOM 315
RUSHVILLE IN 46173
765-932-4163

PLAINTIFF
STATE OF INDIANA

DEFENDANT
DANIEL BREWINGTON
2529 SHERIDAN DRIVE
NORWOOD OH 45212

CHRONOLOGICAL SUMMARY OF FILINGS AND PROCEEDINGS Case Images
03/07/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
INDICTMENT FILED;
APPEARANCE FORM FILED BY STATE;
BENCH WARRANT ISSUED; KM
03/07/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
PRAECIPE FILED BY STATE; BR
03/08/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND INDICTMENT FILED BY STATE; BR
03/11/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
WARRANT SERVED ON DEF ON 3/11/11; BR
03/11/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
INITIAL HEARING ORDER SIGNED; UNDER ADVISEMENT; BR
03/11/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
AMENDED COUNT I; BR
03/11/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
NO CONTACT ORDERS (2) SUBMITTED VIA INCITE; CK
03/11/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
ORDER SETTING BAIL; BR
03/11/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
ORDER ON MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND INDICTMENT. EA
03/15/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
ORDER APPOINTING PUBLIC DEFENDER SIGNED; BR
03/16/2011 Notice: A RJO: N
NO CONTACT ORDER SENT TO PETITIONER 3/16/2011; KM
03/16/2011 Notice: A RJO: N
NO CONTACT ORDER SENT TO PETITIONER 3/16/2011; KM
03/17/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
REQUEST FOR APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL JUDGE BY THE INDIANA SUPREME COURT. EA
03/18/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
APPEARANCE FORM (J. WATSON) FILED ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANT; CK
03/18/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
DISCOVERY ANSWER FILED BY DEFENDANT; CK
04/18/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
ORDER APPOINTING SPECIAL JUDGE WESTHAFER; BR
04/20/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
ORDER CONT. P/T CONF SET FOR 4/26/11 RESET TO 5/11/11 AT 11:00 AM SIGNED
BY SPECIAL JUDGE J. WESTHAFER.MB
05/13/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
APPLICATION FOR REDUCTION OF BAIL FILED BY DEF; BR
05/13/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
MOTION FOR DISCOVERY AND REQUEST FOR RULE 404 AND 405 EVIDENCE FILED BY
DEF; BR
05/23/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
DISCOVERY ANSWER FILED; CK
05/23/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
DISCOVERY ANSWER FILED BY DEF; BR
05/23/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
MOTION TO WITHDRAW FILED BY J WATSON; BR
05/25/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
ORDER OF RECUSAL SIGNED BY SPECIAL JUDGE WESTHAFER;BR
06/01/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
QUALIFICATION BY SPECIAL JUDGE SIGNED;SPECIAL JUDGE BRIAN HILL.MB
06/01/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
ORDER SETTING HEARING FOR JUNE 17, 2011 AT 1:30 P.M.;ORDER SIGNED BY
SPECIAL JUDGE B.HILL.MB
06/03/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
ORDER APPOINTING SPECIAL JUDGE BRIAN HILL; BR
06/17/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
PRE-TRIAL ORDER SIGNED;
BOND REDUCTION HEARING; 7/18/11; 1:30 PM;
FINAL PRE-TRIAL 7/18/11 @ 1:30 PM; PLEA DEADLINE 7/18/11;
JURY TRIAL 8/16/11 @ 8:30 AM;
BR
06/17/2011 Notice: N RJO: N N
ORDER TO PRODUCE EVIDENCE SIGNED;
ORDER ON WITHDRAW SIGNED; BR
06/20/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S REQUEST FOR APPOINTMENT OF PUBLIC DEFENDER SIGNED BY
SPECIAL JUDGE B.HILL.MB
0,2
06/28/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
MOTION TO CONTINUE BOND REDUCTION HEARING FILED BY STATE; BR
06/29/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
SUPPLEMENTAL DISCOVERY ANSWER FILED BY State.kb
07/18/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
APPEARANCE FORM FILED BY BRYAN BARRETT;;
;BR
07/18/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
FINAL PRE-TRIAL HEARING; DEF W/ATTY B BARRETT; STATE BY J KISOR; COURT TO
RESCHEDULE BOND REDUCTION HEARING TO AUGUST 3, 2011 AT 1:30 PM; SPECIAL
JUDGE HILL; COURT TO PREPARE ORDER; BR
07/21/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
ORDER TO CONTINUE FILED; BOND REDUCTION HEARING RE-SET FOR AUGUST 3, 2011
AT 1:30 PM; CK
08/04/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
VOIR DIRE ORDER SIGNED BY SPECIAL JUDGE HILL; BR
08/04/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
MOTION TO VACATE HEARING FILED BY DEFENDANT; BR
08/04/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
ORDER VACATING HEARING SIGNED; BR
08/09/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
MOTION FOR CONFIDENTIALITY OF JUROR'S NAMES AND IDENTIFIES FILED BY STATE;
BR
08/10/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
MOTION TO RELEASE GRAND JURY EXHIBITS FILED BY STATE; BR
08/11/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
ORDER VACATING JURY TRIAL SIGNED; BR
08/17/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
HEARING ON BOND REDUCTION; DEF W/ATTY B BARRETT; STATE BY A NEGANGARD;
SPECIAL JUDGE HILL; WITNESSES SWORN; EVIDENCE HEARD; EXHIBITS 1 THROUGH 8
ADMITTED; COURT TAKES UNDER ADVISEMENT; BR
08/23/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
ORDER TO RELEASE GRAND JURY EXHIBITS FILED; CK
08/23/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
ORDER DENYING BOND REDUCTION FILED; CK
08/26/2011 Notice: N RJO: N
ORDER SETTING TRIAL SIGNED; BR

STATE OF INDIANA
COUNTY OF DEARBORN, SS:
I, the undersigned Clerk of the Dearborn Circuit Court, do
hereby certify the above …..
and signed by Philip Weaver

BOND REDUCTION DENIED AND GRAND JURY EXHIBITS RELEASED IN BREWINGTON CASE

2011-08-24T14:46:00.001-04:00

BOND REDUCTION DENIED AND GRAND JURY EXHIBITS RELEASED IN BREWINGTON CASE

STATE OF INDIANA
COUNTY OF DEARBORN
STATE OF INDIANA,
Plaintiff
vs
DANIEL BREWINGTON,
Defendant
DEARBORN SUPERIOR COURT II
CAUSE NO. I5D02-110 3-FD-084
AUG 2 3 2011
Comes now the State appearing by Prosecuting Attorney, Aaron Negangard and
the Defendant appearing in person and by counsel, Bryan E. Barrett, on Defendant's
Application for Reduction of Bail. A hearing was conducted on this matter on the 17th
day of August,2011.Evidence was presented and argument was made.
And the Court having heard the evidence and being duly advised in the premises
now FINDS and ORDERS as follows:
1. State presented evidence that Defendant has a history of refusing to follow
Court Orders and distain for the authority of the Court. The State also presented evidence
that since his arrest,the Defendant may have contemplated violence towards at least one
alleged victim in this case.
2. The Court concurs with all of the findings set forth in the original Order
Setting Bail of March 11, 2011 issued by the Honorable Sally A. Blankenship.
3. Defendant's Application for Reduction of Bail is hereby DENIED and
Bond remains set at $500,000.00 Surety and $100,000.00 cash bond with all other
conditions of bond remain in full force and effect.
The posting of cash bail is subject to the following conditions:
(1) The bail shall be posted in the name of the Defendant;
(2) The bail shall be considered a personal asset of the Defendant;
(3) The bail shall also be available for payment of Court costs, fines,
restitution, and necessary attorney fees should a finding of guilt be
made;
(4) Bail is subject to revocation and the Defendant shall be re-arrested
upon failure to appear in Court when ordered or a commission of a
criminal act before the time of trial or violation of any other conditions of bail.
ALL OF WHICH IS ORDERED this 18th day of August,2011.

BRIAN D. HILL, Special Judge
Dearborn Superior Court II

Distribution:
Aaron Negangard
Brvan E. Barrett

ALSO:

STATE OF INDIANA
) ss.
COUNTY of DEARBORN
)
STATE OF INDIANA
v.

DANIEL BREWINGTON

CAUSE NO.15DO2-1103-FD-084, AUG 2 3 2011

ORDER TO RELEASE GRAND JURY EXHIBITS
All Grand Jury Exhibits for Cause Number 15DO2-1103-FD-084 are to be
Released o the Prosecuting Attorney

ORDERED THIS 17th day of August, 2011.
Brian D. Hill, Special Judge
Dearborn Superior Court No.2

Dan Brewington Trial and Pre-trial Dates Set

2011-08-23T16:48:00.001-04:00

Per Judge Brian Hill's Office:

Dan Brewington's trial date is set for Oct. 3 at 9:00 in Dearborn County.

The pretrial is set for Sept. 19, 2011 at 1:00.

OBITUARY- MICHAEL DAVIS-VISITATION AUG 23 and SERVICES AUG 24

2011-08-23T09:06:00.003-04:00

Michael Davis- Obituary

Michael Davis
Born: January 2, 1945

Died: August 19, 2011

Services: August 24, 2011 at 11:00 AM

Michael Davis, 66, of Lawrenceburg, Indiana, passed away Friday, August 19, 2011.

He was born Tuesday, January 2, 1945, in Cincinnati, Ohio, son of the late Louis and Lucy (Stanfill) Davis.

He served his country in the US Coast Guard as an EN-2 during the Vietnam Era.

He was the past Chapter Chairman of the Dearborn and Ohio County American Red Cross; President of the Bright Volunteer Fire and EMS; Secretary of the Dearborn County Fire Chief's Association; active member of the Dearborn Hills UMC; Treasurer of the Dearborn Hills United Methodist Men; the Emmaus Community; collector of many things; enjoyed working outdoors around the family homestead; member of the Wilmington SkyWarn Spotter Organization; and was a high school Sunday School teacher.

Mike was a member of the Advisory Board of Dearborn County Emergency Management; the Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC); District 9 Planning Council for Indiana Homeland Security; also an Instructor & Member of the Community Emergency response Team (CERT);

He retired in 2003 as Safety Manager at Fluor Fernald but recently had worked two part time jobs: he was a school bus driver for the Sunman-Dearborn School District (employed by K & B Enterprises); and maintenance technician at Dearborn Hills UMC.

He is survived by his loving wife, Carol Davis; 2 sons, Jonathan (Mandy) Davis, and Matthew (Ashley) Davis; Daughter, Anna (Jeff) Beeler; brother, Edward (Terri) Davis; sister, Anna Davis; and 4 grandchildren, Madison, Allison, Emerson, and Colten.

Friends will be received Tuesday, August 23, 2011 from 4:30pm to 8pm at the Dearborn Hills United Methodist Church, Lawrenceburg, Indiana.

Funeral services will be held at Dearborn Hills United Methodist Church, Wednesday, August 24, 2011 at 11am.

Interment will follow in the Gibson Cemetery, Bright, Indiana.

Contributions may be made to the Dearborn Hills UMC, Dearborn & Ohio County Chapter of the American Red Cross, or Bright Volunteer Fire and EMS.

BREWINGTON FEDERAL LAWSUIT FILED AUGUST 19th

2011-08-22T19:43:00.003-04:00

BREWINGTON FEDERAL LAWSUIT FILED AUGUST 19th

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
CASE NO. 1 :11 -cv- 1144SEB –DML

COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND
DANIEL BREWINGTON
2529 Sheridan Drive
Norwood, Ohio 45212 Plaintiff

-vs.-

F. AARON NEGANGARD,
individually and in his representative
capacity as Prosecutor of Dearborn
County, Indiana
215 West High Street
Lawrenceburg, Indiana 47025
and
MICHAEL KREINHOP,
individually and in his representative
capacity as Sheriff of Dearborn
County, Indiana
301 West High Street
Lawrenceburg, Indiana 47025
and
JAMES HUMPHREY
1406 Indian Woods Trail
Lawrenceburg, Indiana 47025
and
HEIDI HUMPHREY
1406 Indian Woods Trail
Lawrenceburg, Indiana 47025
and
ANGELA LOECHEL
310 West High Street
Lawrenceburg, Indiana 47025
and
EDWARD J. CONNOR
34 Erlanger Road
Erlanger, Kentucky
and
DEARBORN COUNTY, INDIANA
c/o Andrew Baudendistel
Dearborn County Attorney
230 West High Street
Lawrenceburg, Indiana 47025
and
John Does, 1 through 25
names & addresses unknown
Defendants

Now comes the Plaintiff, by and through undersigned counsel, and for his
complaint states as follows:

PARTIES
1 Plaintiff, Daniel Brewington, is a resident of the City of Norwood, Hamilton County, Ohio, and is currently housed in the Dearborn County Law Enforcement Center, Dearborn County, Indiana, and is referred to throughout this complaint as Brewington.
2. Defendant F. Aaron Negangard is/was the prosecutor for Dearborn County, Indiana, and, upon information and belief, is a resident of Dearborn County, Indiana, at all times pertinent to this complaint and is referred to throughout this complaint as Negangard.
3. Defendant Michael Kreinhop was the chief deputy of the Dearborn County Sheriffs Department, the sheriff of Dearborn County, or a detective assigned to the Special Crimes Unit located in Dearborn County, Indiana, at all times pertinent to this complaint and, upon information and belief, is a resident of Dearborn County, Indiana, at all times pertinent to this complaint and is referred to throughout this complaint as Kreinhop.
4. Defendant James Humphrey is an individual who resides in Dearborn County, Indiana, and is the husband of Defendant Heidi Humphrey, and is referred to throughout this complaint as J. Humphrey.
5. Defendant Heidi Humphrey is an individual who resides in Dearborn County, Indiana, and is the wife of Defendant James Humphrey, and is referred to throughout this complaint as H. Humphrey.
6. Defendant Edward J. Connor is an individual who resides in the Commonwealth of Kentucky, holds himself out to the public as a psychologist and performs custody evaluations for courts in the State of Indiana and is referred to throughout this complaint as Connor.
7. Angela Loechel is an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of Indiana at all times pertinent to this complaint and is referred to throughout this complaint as Loechel.
8. Defendant John Does 1 through 25 are unknown defendants, male and female, whose identities through due diligence could not be discovered prior to the filing of this complaint but are individuals who conspired and participated with Defendants Negangard, Kreinhop, J. Humphrey, H. Humphrey, Connor and Loechel to deprive Brewington of rights guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States, the United States Code, the laws of the State of Ohio, and the laws of the State of Indiana.
9. Defendant Dearborn County, Indiana, is a corporation organized pursuant to, inter alia, Title 36 of the Indiana Code.
JURISDICTION
10. This action arises under the First Amendment, the Sixth Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution; 18 U.S.C. §241; and 42 U.S.C.
3 §§1983, 1985 and 1986; and the common law of Indiana.
11. Jurisdiction over Counts II, Ill and IV of this action is conferred on this Court by 42 U.S.C. §§1985, 1986, and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended 42
U.S.C. §2000e et seq., respectively, and 28 U.S.C. §1331 because the actions arise under the laws of the United States. Jurisdiction over the state law claims is invoked pursuant
to the doctrine of pendent jurisdiction.
12. Venue is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1391 in the Southern District of Indiana, Southern District, because Defendant Dearborn County is doing business at 215 West High Street, Lawrenceburg, Indiana, and all other Defendants are residents of Dearborn County, Indiana, and some of the claims alleged herein arose in Dearborn County, Indiana.
FACTS
13. Brewington married Melissa Brewington on August 10, 2002, and two children were born of the marriage: M.B., born October 30, 2003, and A.B., born February 6, 2006.
14. Melissa Brewington filed a petition for dissolution of marriage in the Ripley County Circuit Court on January 8, 2007.
15. Judge Carl Taul, Judge of the Ripley Circuit Court, was assigned to hear the Plaintiffs divorce and later recused himself from hearing the Plaintiffs divorce action as the result of ex parte communications with the Defendant Connor.
16. Prior to Judge Taul recusing himself from the Plaintiffs divorce, Taul issued an order filed February 28, 2007 with the Ripley County, Indiana Clerk, awarding temporary custody of the Plaintiffs two minor children to Melissa Brewington and granting the Plaintiff visitation with the minor children.
17. After Judge Taul's order of February 28, 2007, the Plaintiff exercised parenting time with Plaintiffs minor children every Wednesday, Friday, and every third Monday beginning at 6:25 a.m. and ending at 8:00 a.m. the following day, without interruption or any intervention by the Court.
18. Plaintiff additionally exercised equal parenting time to the children's mother, Melissa Brewington, on weekends with parenting time commencing on Friday at 6:25 a.m. and ending on Sunday evening at 8:00 p.m. without interruption or any intervention by the Court.
19. In addition to Plaintiffs parenting time set forth in paragraphs 17 and 18, the Plaintiff also provided childcare for the children when the children's mother was unavailable to care for the children rather than have the children placed in daycare.
20. The Plaintiffs parenting time set forth in paragraphs 17 and 18 continued throughout the divorce action until the filing of the final decree issued by Judge James Humphrey on August 18, 2009.
21. On or about May 14, 2007, Plaintiff and Melissa Brewington signed an agreed order for a custody evaluation to be performed by Defendant Connor at Connor and Associates, PLLC.
22. The Plaintiffs custody evaluation described in paragraph 21 commenced on June 5, 2007.
23. Defendant Connor was not licensed to practice psychology by the State of Indiana when Judge Taul assigned the Defendant Connor as a custody evaluator to the Plaintiffs divorce case.
24. Defendant Connor failed to disclose to Brewington that Defendant Connor was not licensed to practice psychology in the State of Indiana at the time Connor was
assigned to conduct the custody investigation in Brewington's divorce action.
25. Defendant Connor was repeatedly assigned as a custody evaluator for domestic relations cases in Southeast Indiana and appointed to perform psychological evaluations in criminal cases in Southeast Indiana although Defendant Connor was not licensed to practice psychology in Indiana, and none of the Defendants determined the licensing of Defendant Connor to practice psychology in the State of Indiana prior to Connor's assignment or engagement to perform psychology services in the State of Indiana. If the Defendants did determine the licensing status of Defendant Connor in Indiana, the Defendants appointed Defendant Connor despite his not being licensed to practice psychology in the State of Indiana.
26. The Plaintiff was unaware that the Defendant Connor was not licensed to practice psychology in the State of Indiana when assigned to the Plaintiffs domestic relations case by Judge Taul. If the Plaintiff had been aware of the unlicensed status of Defendant Connor, the Plaintiff would have objected to the appointment of Defendant Connor.
27. The Plaintiff signed a contract with Defendant Connor to serve as an impartial expert in a custody evaluation on June 18, 2007. A copy of said contract is attached hereto and marked Exhibit A. Defendant Connor did not advise the Plaintiff that Defendant Connor was not licensed in the State of Indiana, and Defendant Connor concealed his unlicensed status from Brewington.
28. The Defendant Connor's contract provided that Defendant Connor would provide to the Plaintiffs attorney a copy of the case file from the custody evaluation performed.
29. Defendant Connor, after the Plaintiff executed the contract described in Exhibit A, sent a letter to Judge Taul on April 16, 2008, wherein Defendant Connor confirmed that the Plaintiffs contract described in Exhibit A stated Defendant Connor would release the case file to the representing attorney.
30. Defendant Connors contract with the Plaintiff provided the cost of copying the case file is ten cents a page, postage fees, and a twenty dollar office fee, which the Plaintiff or his counsel was willing to pay at all times pertinent hereto.
31. Defendant Connor, during the course of the custody evaluation process, interviewed the Plaintiffs ex-wife, Melissa Brewington, Melissa Brewington's parents (on three occasions), and Melissa Brewington's sister, Jennifer Smith (on one occasion).
32. Defendant Connors evaluation report alleged that Connor reviewed Melissa Brewington's health records from two health care professionals, letters from a work supervisor and a coworker, and a letter from Jennifer Smith.
33. Defendant Connor did not attempt to contact or review any information from any of Plaintiffs references, family members, or health care providers, although the Plaintiff provided the contact information to the Defendant Connor.
34. Defendant Connor released a child custody evaluation report on the Plaintiffs divorce on August 29, 2007 to Judge Taul of Ripley County, in the State of Indiana.
35. Defendant Connors custody evaluation report recommended that Melissa Brewington should have sole custody of the Plaintiff's minor children, M.B. and A.B., but Defendant Connor recommended that Plaintiff continue to care for the children every Wednesday, Friday, every third Monday, and equal weekends with Melissa Brewington.
36. Defendant Connor was not a licensed psychologist in the State of Indiana or a licensed medical professional in any state at the time of the delivery of the custody evaluation report to Judge Taul of Ripley County, Indiana.
37. Defendant Connor's custody evaluation opined that Plaintiffs "extreme Attention Deficit Disorder' and very high Ritalin dosage was a major reason as to why joint custody was not an option for the Plaintiff.
38. Defendant Connors custody evaluation report is devoid of any example or conduct of the Plaintiffs ADHD that negatively impacted Plaintiffs parenting ability, nor does it identity any health care professional who spoke with Connor concerning any medical condition or disability of the Plaintiff.
39. Defendant Connor failed to contact Plaintiffs treating therapist, medical doctor, or any other health care professional to address any concerns about Plaintiffs treatment for ADHD and/or prescription history to determine if the Plaintiffs prescription level for Ritalin was "very high" to determine whether Plaintiffs Ritalin use was "very high."
40. Defendant Connor failed to report to the Plaintiffs physician or therapist to any regulatory agency or board concerning improper treatment or for over-prescribing medication to the Plaintiff as alluded to in the case evaluation report prepared by Connor.
41. The Plaintiff reviewed Defendant Connor's initial custody evaluation and determined that the evaluation was riddled with errors, misstatements, and lies when it was submitted to Judge Taul, including but not limited to the following:
A. Listed an attempted telephone call to Plaintiff's brother "Mark" on August 10, 2007, and the Plaintiff does not have a brother named Mark.
B. Failed to include a telephone conversation with Plaintiffs treating therapist, Anita Dempsy, at The Affinity Center.
C. Failed to include in the evaluation that Defendant Connor advised Anita Dempsy that she did not have to provide Defendant Connor with a summary of Plaintiffs treatment at The Affinity Center.
D. Failed to include any references to interviews with the Plaintiff which took place on June 26, 2007 and August 9, 2007.
E. Alleged the Defendant Connor reviewed numerous court records and bank statements indicating that Plaintiff transferred $510.00 into Plaintiffs checking account on November 13, 2006, and there are no records of any withdrawal of any monies on November 13, 2006.
F. Defendant Connor claimed that he reviewed a packet of information compiled and authored by "Plaintiff' which included a letter from Melissa Brewington's counselor, Mary Jo Pollock, and the Plaintiff was never in possession of a letter from Mary Jo Pollock.
G. Defendant Connor stated that Plaintiff claimed to take the children to half of the children's doctor visits, and the Plaintiff made no such statement to the Defendant Connor, as court documents and testimony demonstrate that Plaintiff did not take children to half of the doctor visits.
H. Defendant Connor stated that Plaintiff took "a very high dose" of Ritalin, but Defendant Connor is not trained in the correct dose of Ritalin and not qualified to make any such determination.
I. Failed to communicate with the Plaintiffs treating doctor at the Affinity Center or review Plaintiff's prescription drug history.
J. Defendant Connor stated "Of concern, is that Plaintiff would drink any alcohol at all given the high dosage of Ritalin he is taking." Defendant Connor has no training concerning the interaction of Ritalin with alcohol nor any information that the Plaintiff consumed alcohol while taking Ritalin.
K. Defendant Connor failed to consult with Plaintiff's treating physician or therapist regarding concerns with alcohol negatively impacting Plaintiffs prescription use of Ritalin.
L. Defendant Connor never scheduled an appointment to meet with Plaintiffs mother.
M. Defendant Connor claimed that Plaintiff stated that he had applied for a concealed carry permit on November 6, 2006. Said statement is a lie and it was never investigated by Defendant Connor.
N. Defendant Connor stated how Melissa Brewington's sister described M.B. "as an average four-year-old who plays well with the other children" when the child was only three years old at the time of the interview.
0. Defendant Connor stated "Wife has no drug or alcohol history," although Melissa Brewington fled the scene of an accident in 1998 when she was intoxicated.
P. Defendant Connor claimed that Plaintiff stated, "that [Wife] does not allow him [Plaintiff] to have the girls for three overnights in a row," to which Wife responded "She does not decide this and that their work schedules dictate this more than anything else."
42. In a letter to Judge Taul dated February 21, 2008, Defendant Connor stated, "Plaintiffs documents indicate that there are numerous errors and oversights in our report," and Defendant Connor recommended conducting additional sessions to correct the errors in the evaluation at the parties' expense.
43. Defendant Connor sent repeated communications to Judge Taul during the Plaintiffs divorce action without sending the communication to the Plaintiff and without the Plaintiffs knowledge in an attempt to conceal the Defendant Connor's incompetence in the preparation of the case evaluation report.
44. Plaintiff, having reviewed Defendant Connors custody evaluation report, attempted to secure the case file of Defendant Connor to determine what work, investigation, or interviews were actually conducted by the Defendant Connor based on the error-ridden report that the Defendant Connor had initially produced to Judge Taul. and the Defendant Connor refused to produce the case file to the Plaintiff although the Plaintiff was appearing pro se in the divorce action.
45. Defendant Connor sent a letter dated February 25, 2008 to the Plaintiffs attorney and to Melissa Brewington's attorney advising the Plaintiff that "with this letter please be advised that Hon. Judge Carl Taul contacted me on 2/22/08 to convey his agreement for the review of the above-captioned case."
46. Defendant Connors contact with Judge Taul was not disclosed to the Plaintiff at any time, and Defendant Connors ex parte communication with Judge Taul on February 22, 2008 does not appear on the record of the Clerk of Courts of Ripley County, Indiana.
47. Plaintiff, after becoming aware of the Defendant Connor's ex parte contact with Judge Taul on February 25, 2008, made his first request for a copy of the evaluation case file from the Defendant Connor.
48. Defendant Connor sent a letter to the Plaintiff dated March 11, 2008, refusing to provide the Plaintiff with the evaluation case file related to the Plaintiffs divorce case.
49. Defendant Connor, in refusing to provide the Plaintiff with the custody evaluation file, stated that the custody evaluation file cannot be released to the Plaintiff without Melissa Brewington's consent, as the evaluation case file contains confidential information about her as well as the Plaintiffs children.
50. On March 26, 2008, the Defendant Connor changed his position concerning the release of the case evaluation file and advised the Plaintiff that he would release the case evaluation file if Defendant Connor received verification from the Court of the Plaintiffs pro se status. Once Defendant Connor received confirmation of the pro se status of the Plaintiff, the Defendant Connor "would be happy to" release the chart records to Plaintiff.
51. On or about March 26, 2008, Defendant Taul advised Defendant Connor that the Plaintiff filed an appearance naming himself as Plaintiffs own attorney, L e., the Plaintiff was pro se in the divorce action.
52. Defendant Connor once again changed his position on release of the custody evaluation file upon learning of the Plaintiffs pro se status, and he refused to provide the Plaintiff with the case evaluation file after the letter from Judge Taul advising the Defendant Connor of the Plaintiffs pro se status in the divorce case.
53. Defendant Connor on April 1, 2008, once again wrote to Judge Taul without communicating with the parties, notifying Judge Taul that, based on Judge Taul's letter dated March 26, 2008 in which he stated that Plaintiff is entitled to the evaluation only, that Defendant Connor will not be releasing the case file to Plaintiff.
54. At no time did Judge Taul place a protective order of record in the Plaintiff's divorce case that prohibited Defendant Connor from releasing the custody evaluation case file to the Plaintiff.
55. Plaintiff, on April 4, 2008, filed a motion in his own divorce action to permit release of Defendant Connors case file, and Judge Taul set Plaintiffs motion for hearing on June 13, 2008.
56. Defendant Connor wrote a letter to Judge Taul dated April 16, 2008 affirming the Defendant Connors contract with the Plaintiff, and Defendant Connor stated that "Plaintiff is correct in stating that our (Plaintiff Brewington and Defendant Connor) contract indicates we would provide the file to the representing attorney. However, given the circumstances, we believe that a Court order is necessary to release the file to Plaintiff, given that he is representing himself pro se."
57. Judge Taul, during the June 13, 2008 hearing on Plaintiffs motion to release the case evaluation file, stated that "the Order to [Connor] to release was to release that which Defendant Connor was obligated to do under Kentucky law," and Judge Taul was not going to undertake ruling on the matter because Judge Taul stated he was "not familiar with what obligations Defendant Connor has under Kentucky law."
58. Judge Taul appointed the unlicensed Defendant Connor as the case evaluator without determining whether the Defendant Connor was licensed in the State of Indiana or qualified to conduct a custody evaluation in the State of Indiana, and he failed to enforce Indiana law in deference to the unlicensed Defendant Connors interpretation of Kentucky law.
59. Judge Taul appointed an unlicensed custody investigator and impaired, impeded, and hindered the Plaintiffs ability to a fair trial by appointment of an unlicensed custody investigator, and Judge Taul refused to permit the release of the case evaluation file based on Kentucky law while the Plaintiffs case was pending in an Indiana Court.
60. Judge Taul did not place of record any order requiring the Plaintiff or any party to the Plaintiffs divorce action to follow the laws of Kentucky concerning custody evaluations.
61. At the June 13, 2008 hearing before Judge Taul, Melissa Brewington's counsel, Angela Loechel, submitted a signed Office Policy Statement from Connor and Associates to urge the Court not to release the case evaluation file to the Plaintiff, but the Plaintiff never signed the Office Policy Statement presented to the Court by Angela Loechel, and the Defendant Connor never presented the Office Policy Statement to the Plaintiff for signature at any time during the custody evaluation process.
62 Defendant Connor finally obtained a license to practice psychology in the State of Indiana on July 8, 2008.
63. After Defendant Connor obtained a license to practice psychology in the State of Indiana, Judge Taul made no further mention of following Kentucky law concerning the release of the custody evaluation file.
64. Judge Taul, after stating he was unaware of Kentucky law at the June hearing, filed an order on July 21, 2008 denying the Plaintiffs motion to permit release of the custody evaluation file stating, "The Court does not believe it appropriate to order the divulsion of a physician or therapist's entire file, without citing one case to support his position or legal justification for his ruling."
65. The Defendant Connor was neither a licensed physician nor therapist in the State of Indiana when the report was prepared or when he acquired information.
66. Judge Taul's order dated July 21, 2008 stated that Plaintiff was not specific as to what information Plaintiff was seeking to obtain from Defendant Connors custody evaluation case file as a basis for denying the Plaintiff the file prepared by Defendant Connor.
67. Plaintiff was unable to articulate for Judge Taul the items sought to be reviewed from the custody evaluation file in the possession of Defendant Connor, as the Plaintiff was unaware of the contents and therefore could not identify the documents the Plaintiff sought to review.
68. Defendant Connor, in a letter dated August 4, 2008, advised the Plaintiff that the custody evaluation file would not be released without a court order from Judge Taul or the consent of Melissa Brewington per state and HIPAA laws and regulations.
69. The Plaintiff became increasingly exasperated with the ex parte contacts between the Defendant Connor and Judge Taul, the refusal to release the custody evaluation file to the Plaintiff to prepare for trial, appointment of an unlicensed psychologist to conduct the custody evaluation, and the endless hurdles placed in the path of the Plaintiff to obtain the case file of Defendant Connor by Judge Taul to protect Defendant Connor and place the Plaintiff at a disadvantage in the trial of the Defendant's divorce case.
70. On September 3, 2008, Plaintiff created a website, www.dadsfamilycourtexperience.com , to share his experiences with Defendant Connor's conflicting statements in the custody evaluation Defendant Connor had prepared and provided to the Court purporting to be accurate in the Plaintiffs divorce case, the errors contained in Defendant Connors report, the machinations of Judge Taul concerning the release of the custody evaluation report, and the actions of Judge Taul instructing the Plaintiff to follow the laws of the State of Kentucky concerning the release of the custody evaluation report.
71. The Plaintiff was appearing pro se in the divorce action on September 3, 2008, and Judge Taul permitted the Plaintiff to be treated as counsel of record for some issues and denied the Plaintiff the rights accorded counsel for a party in other circumstances with the issuance of orders such as "Delivery to counsel is the same as delivery to the party personally, but refused to order the release of the custody investigation file to the Plaintiff."
72. Defendant Connor sent a letter to Plaintiff dated September 9, 2008, advising the Plaintiff that Defendant Connor did not have a "signed Office Policy Statement for you (Plaintiff) on file" and the Office Policy Statement was never provided to the Plaintiff to sign, which Defendant Connor acknowledged.
73. Defendant Connor has attempted to characterize documents generated by his office, such as the "Office Policy Statement" as an "adjunct document to the Court order in which you (Plaintiff) and Ms. Brewington agreed to participate fully in a custody evaluation to be conducted at this office."
74. Defendant Connor sent another ex parte communication to Judge Taul on September 10, 2008 and attached a letter Defendant Connor sent to the Plaintiff dated September 9, 2008. In the communication to Judge Taul, Defendant Connor attacked the Plaintiff for the following:
A. Questioning the Defendant Connors sloppy office practices and the poor quality of Defendant Connor's report, despite the numerous errors contained in the custody evaluation report.
B. Defendant Connors failure to be properly licensed in the State of Indiana to practice psychology.
C. Defendant Connor testifying in Indiana courts when the Defendant Connor was not licensed to practice psychology in Indiana courts.
D. Defendant Connor accepting appointments to conduct psychological evaluations from Indiana courts when the Defendant Connor was not licensed in Indiana, and the Indiana courts' failure to determine the Defendant Connors ability to practice psychology in Indiana prior to the Defendant Connors appointment by the judiciary of the State of Indiana.
75. Defendant Connor, in the September 10, 2008 letter to Judge Taul, attacked the Plaintiff for the Plaintiffs refusal to accept Defendant Connors failure to be licensed as inconsequential, failure to accept the Defendant Connors slipshod custody evaluation as fact, when it was riddled with error, and the Plaintiffs failure to accept the deliberate false statements in Defendant Connors custody evaluation file as factually accurate.
76. Defendant Connor stated to Judge Taul in the September 10, 2008 letter that Defendant Connor was disturbed by the Plaintiffs failure to accept as inconsequential the Defendant Connors unlicensed status in Indiana, the overreaching of the Defendant Connor to assert as fact medical opinions concerning the medications taken by the Plaintiff when the Defendant Connor has no medical training, the refusal of the Plaintiff to accept the Defendant Connor's ex parte communications with the trial judge as inconsequential, and the deliberate false statements in the custody evaluation report prepared by Defendant Connor as innocent errors or simply incompetence.
77. Defendant Connor, using a thought process known only to Defendant Connor, found it perplexing that the Plaintiff failed to recognize the Defendant Connor as professional despite being unlicensed to practice psychology in Indiana, refusing to provide the custody evaluation file to the Plaintiff, the repeated ex parte communications with the Judge assigned to the Plaintiffs divorce case, and the Plaintiffs refusal to accept as fact statements in the custody evaluation report submitted by the Defendant Connor that the Plaintiff or any reasonable person knew to be false and that the Defendant Connor represented to the Court as truthful.
78. Plaintiff attempted to obtain a copy of the case evaluation file of Defendant Connor by filing a motion to compel Defendant Connor to deliver case evaluation file to Plaintiff.
79. Judge Taul stated in open court that the Defendant Connor was required to follow Kentucky law concerning the release of the custody evaluation file, and at a hearing on November 24, 2008 on Plaintiffs motion to compel, Taul stated, "I have previously ordered that you are not entitled to that case file."
80. Judge Taul interrupted Plaintiffs argument during the June 13, 2008 hearing claiming that the order instructed the Defendant Connor, at the time unlicensed in Indiana, to follow Kentucky law, and Judge Taul stated he was unaware of Connor's obligations under Kentucky law, although Judge Taul appointed the unlicensed Defendant Connor in an Indiana divorce case.
81. On December 5, 2008, Plaintiff filed his motion for a change of judge following numerous accounts of ex parte communication between Defendant Connor and Judge Taul and the indifference of the Indiana judiciary to the appointment of an unlicensed psychologist practicing in the Indiana courts and to permit the Plaintiff to adequately prepare for trial.
82. On December 5, 2008, Judge Taul recused himself from the Plaintiffs divorce case and issued an order naming a three-judge panel for the parties to strike for the selection of the succeeding judge to hear the Plaintiffs divorce action.
83. On December 15, 2008, Plaintiff filed his motion in limine requesting the Court to exclude "any evaluation reports, letters, testimony, and or other evidence relating to the child custody evaluation performed by Defendant Connor of Connor and Associates PLLC" due to the ex parte communication between Defendant Connor and the Court, and Plaintiffs inability to obtain a copy of Defendant Connors case file because Plaintiff was acting as his own attorney.
84. On December 17, 2008, an order was issued naming Dearborn Circuit Judge James D. Humphrey as Special Judge, and Judge Humphrey accepted the appointment on December 29, 2008.
85. The appointment of Judge Humphrey proved to be problematic, as he possessed as little respect for the Plaintiffs rights as a litigant as Judge Taul.
86. In a letter to the Kentucky Board of Examiners of Psychology dated, December 22, 2008, Defendant Connor stated that he consulted with "two professional peers experienced with ADHD treatment" concerning Plaintiffs Ritalin prescription.
However, Defendant Connor refused to disclose the identity of the individuals, and the Plaintiff never had the opportunity to determine whether the "two professional peers" ever
existed, consulted with Connor or possessed the ability to assess the Plaintiffs Ritalin use.
87. Defendant Connor has continued to refuse to disclose the "professional peers" consulted through and including the current date.
88. Defendant Connor refused to provide the Plaintiff with the custody evaluation case file to enable the Plaintiff to prepare for trial and to review the competency or lack thereof of the Defendant Connors evaluation, and the judge (Humphrey) appointed to replace Judge Taul denied the Plaintiff the right to examine the custody investigation file.
89. Defendant Connor lied to the Plaintiff during the course of the Plaintiffs divorce by asserting in written correspondence to the Plaintiff the "Office Policy Statement" was an adjunct document to the Court order and then testifying at Plaintiffs divorce trial on May 27, 2009 the "Office Policy Statement" was not an adjunct document to the Court order.
90. Defendant Connor testified at the Plaintiffs divorce trial that the "Office Policy Statement" was an "adjunct document" to the custody evaluation, then the Defendant Connor testified "It's an adjunct — it's not an adjunct to a court order. It's -- it's adjacent to what we do when people come in" which was a fabrication at best and a deliberate misstatement by Defendant Connor to attempt to portray himself as competent to the Court.
91. Defendant Connor provided the "Office Policy Statement" to the Melissa Brewington's attorney prior to the June 13, 2008 hearing before Judge Taul to prevent the release of Defendant Connor's custody evaluation file without the Plaintiffs knowledge and then testified at the trial that Melissa Brewington's signing of the document was incorrect and not valid.
92. Defendant Connor attacked Plaintiff at trial for alleging that Defendant Connor's conduct was unethical and/or illegal when the Defendant Connor knew or should have known that he had failed to comply with the terms of the contract between Plaintiff and Defendant and attacked the Plaintiffs postings related to Defendant Connor on the Internet.
93. Judge Humphrey referenced Connor's letter dated December 22, 2008 in a May 14, 2009 order denying the Plaintiffs motion in limine.
94. Judge Humphrey prohibited the Plaintiff from questioning Connor concerning the December 22, 2008 letter during Connor's testimony on May 27, 2009, although Defendant Connors letter is untruthful concerning Defendant Connors repeated refusal to release the case evaluation file on repeated occasions, including but not limited to, 3/11/2008, 3/27/2008, 4/1/2008, 4/16/2008, 8/4/2008, 9/9/2008,10/2/2009 and 11/11/2009.
95. On January 9, 2009, Judge Humphrey scheduled a final hearing on the Plaintiffs divorce case for May 27, 2009.
96. On February 24, 2009, Judge Humphrey set a hearing for April 29, 2009 on Plaintiffs motion in limine.
97. Judge Humphrey delayed a hearing on Plaintiffs motion in limine until February 24, 2009, although the motion was filed on December 15, 2008.
98. Plaintiff created the web blog "www.danbrewington.blogspot.com " on or about 12/15/2008 to share Plaintiffs court experiences and dealings with Defendant Connor with the public.
99. Plaintiff issued a subpoena for Judge Taul to expose Defendant Connor's ex parte contacts with the Court and the deliberate misrepresentations of Defendant Connor to the Court and to establish that Judge Taul's own actions in engaging in ex parte communications with Defendant Connor precipitated the need for Taul's testimony during the final hearing.
100. Judge Humphrey quashed the Plaintiffs attempt to subpoena Judge Taul and denied Plaintiffs motion to reconsider quashing the subpoena filed on April 16, 2009.
101. On April 16, 2009, Melissa Brewington filed a motion for temporary restraining order, requesting Judge Humphrey to force the Plaintiff to cease and desist in publishing information about the proceedings on the Internet and also requested that Judge Humphrey force Plaintiff to remove any previous content from the blog/website created by the Plaintiff.
102. On April 29, 2009, Humphrey heard arguments on Plaintiffs motion in limine and Wife's motion for temporary restraining order
103. During the hearing on Wife's motion for temporary restraining order, Humphrey asked Plaintiff, "What is of primary concern here to you, getting this message out through the Internet or whatever might be in the best interest of your children?"
104. Humphrey indicated without any evidence that he believed that the interests of the parties' minor children were somehow adverse to Plaintiffs Internet writings regarding the Court and Defendant Connor.
105. Humphrey denied Plaintiffs oral motion, during the April 29, 2009 hearing, to appoint a guardian ad litem to represent the children's best interests.
106. Humphrey denied the Plaintiffs motion in limine and wife's motion for temporary restraining order.
107. During the April 29, 2009 hearing, Judge Humphrey interrogated Plaintiff about what part of Defendant Connor's case file Plaintiff was seeking access to, and Plaintiff continued to state that Plaintiff wanted the entire case file as provided in IC § 31-17-2-12, since in the absence of the ability to review the file, it is impossible to determine if any psychological and/or medical information is contained in the file.
108. The Defendants Humphrey and Connor cannot point to any evidence that Plaintiffs Internet writings pose any risk to the Plaintiffs children or any children, and Plaintiffs writings are critical of Judge Humphrey and the Defendant Connor concerning their reasoning or lack thereof and the slovenly and unlawful administration of justice in Dearborn County, Indiana.
109. The Plaintiff, observing the lack of judicial integrity on the part of Judge Humphrey, filed a motion on May 21, 2009, to withdraw his appearance in the divorce action and sought the assistance of the Court to obtain counsel for the following reasons:
A. Defendant Connor's evaluation stated that Defendant Connor had difficulties communicating with Plaintiff because of Plaintiffs ADHD.
B. Connor's letter to Taul dated 9/10/2008 stated, it is very perplexing that he is unable to understand or accept the basic premise of confidentiality that protects Ms. Brewington's records from being released without her consent or without a Court order."
C. As Defendant Connor claimed that he could barely communicate with Plaintiff and Plaintiff was unable to understand matters concerning confidentiality, Plaintiff requested an interpreter or representative to assist Plaintiff in understanding Defendant Connors complex policies.
D. Connor indicated that Plaintiffs ADHD inhibited Plaintiffs ability to understand procedures dealing with the legal process.
E. Plaintiffs motion stated, "It would be a violation of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act to force the [Plaintiff] to represent himself in court if he was unable to fairly participate due to a disability as diagnosed by the Defendant Connor."
110. On May 29, 2009, Judge Humphrey denied Plaintiffs motion to withdraw his appearance in the divorce action.
111. Judge Humphrey denied professional assistance to assist Plaintiff with the Plaintiffs alleged disability (ADHD) that made it difficult for the Plaintiff to comprehend legal matters concerning Defendant Connors confidentiality policies, the policies of the Court to protect Defendant Connor, and to deny the Plaintiff meaningful access to the courts, according to Defendant Connors communication.
112. The final hearing on the Plaintiffs divorce took place on May 27, June 2, and June 3, 2009.
113. Defendant Connor testified on May 27, 2009 in the divorce action, the Plaintiff objected to the admission of Defendant Connors evaluation and testimony at the trial as the Plaintiff did not receive a copy of the custody evaluation case file per IC § 31-17-2-12.
114. Judge Humphrey admitted the Defendant Connor's evaluation and Defendant Connors testimony in the divorce trial.
115. Defendant Connor testified that he did not see a problem with Plaintiff continuing to care for the Plaintiffs children and that "As far as I'm able to discern about the safety issues of the children [while in the care of Plaintiff], that seems to be fairly okay. My concerns are more so with the — the — with [Plaintiffs] personality in trying to cooperate in
any type of a joint custody arrangement. That is my primary concern."
116. Defendant Connor testified that Plaintiff never made any false accusations against the children's mother. Defendant Connor testified that he did not observe any harassing or threatening behavior by Plaintiff during the evaluation process. Defendant Connor testified that Plaintiff properly handled the medical needs of the parties' children, and Defendant Connor testified that the parties' children could suffer emotional trauma if the children's time with their father were reduced or eliminated. Defendant Connor testified, "I think our recommendation indicates that the children do love [the Plaintiff] and that [the Plaintiff] love[s] the children. There is a bond there."
117. Defendant Connor was the only "professional" to offer evidence and/or testify in matters pertaining to the parties' children.
118. No witness who testified during the course of the three (3)-day final hearing provided evidence or testimony indicating that the Plaintiff abused, neglected, or mistreated the parties' minor children. There was no evidence or testimony that Plaintiff ever refused the mother parenting time with children. There were no accusations that the Plaintiff was ever delinquent on child support payments.
119. In the time between the provisional hearing by Judge Taul on 2/9/2007 and the final hearing by Judge Humphrey on 5/27/2009, 6/2/2009 and 6/3/2009, no one contacted social services or petitioned the Court to modify Plaintiffs parenting time or made any claims of parental neglect or abuse by the Plaintiff.
120. There was no evidence presented during the divorce action by Melissa Brewington to terminate the Plaintiffs parenting time with the minor children.
121. There were no accusations in the divorce that Plaintiff ever harassed Melissa Brewington at home, work, in public, or any other location, or her family, friends, coworkers, or any party to the action.
122. After the final hearing in the divorce, the Plaintiff continued to care for his children with the same parenting schedule that had been followed since March 2007.
123. On August 18, 2009, Judge Humphrey entered a judgment and final order on the decree of dissolution of marriage, finding the Plaintiff "to be irrational, dangerous and in need of significant counseling before he can conduct himself as a parent," and the Plaintiff shall not be entitled to visitation until he undergoes a mental health evaluation with a Mental Health Care Professional approved by the Court and the purpose "of this evaluation is to determine if he [Plaintiff] is a possible danger to the children, Wife, and/or to himself."
124. Judge Humphrey, after abusing his authority and office and in an attempt to require the Plaintiff to close his website, then stated, "If the Mental Health Care Provider determines that [Plaintiff] is not a danger to the children, Wife, and/or to himself, [Plaintiff] may have supervised visitation in a therapeutic setting for four (4) hours per week, in increments of two (2), two (2) hour visits per week" appointed himself a god to determine or "make this determination after reviewing the evaluation" and conditioned any motion for unsupervised visitation " with the children, upon compliance with the recommendations of Mental Health Provider and recommendations of the supervised visitation, that unsupervised visitation may safely occur with the children"and ordered the removal of all postings created by Plaintiff from the Internet concerning the children before any unsupervised visitation may commence and/or continue."
125. Judge Humphrey gave the following reasons for ordering the termination of Plaintiffs parenting time:
A. The Plaintiff has severe Attention Deficit Disorder that affects his ability to focus and concentrate.
B. He rambles and forgets and is given to impulsive and incoherent thought.
C. Could not communicate with mother with the skills necessary to conduct joint custody, The Psychometric Test Results of the Plaintiff reported in the Confidential Custody Evaluation of August 29, 2007.
D. Defendant Connors testimony indicates that Plaintiff has a degree of psychological disturbance that is concerning and does not lend itself to proper parenting.
E. The Plaintiffs writings are similar to those of individuals who have committed horrendous crimes against their families.
F. Plaintiff has posted information about the dissolution proceeding on his website, on his blog, and on various other sites, and continued to post information even after the hearing for a temporary restraining order wherein the Court's Order stated that the Court may also consider evidence presented at this hearing regarding the temporary restraining order in regard to the Court's decision as to visitation and custody and how Plaintiffs actions may affect the best interest of the children now and in the future.
126. Judge Humphrey made his decision on the content of Plaintiffs Internet writings critical of the Defendant Connor and the deficient administration of justice in the Plaintiffs divorce action to strip the Plaintiff of his parental rights and impose draconian hurdles for the Plaintiff to see/visit with his children without evidence that the Plaintiff presented a risk to the children.
127. The Plaintiff, once he received the decision of Judge Humphrey, continued to post on his blog/website concerning his opinion of Defendant Connor, Judge Humphrey, the administration of justice in Southeast Indiana, and the appointment of an unqualified custody investigator to the Plaintiffs divorce case.
128. At no time did Judge Humphrey during the process of the divorce feel intimidated, seek law enforcement assistance, or otherwise file a complaint with any law enforcement agency concerning the Plaintiffs conduct during the course of the trial.
129. Judge Humphrey terminated Plaintiffs parenting time because Plaintiff publicly stated that Connor did not tell the truth in the report submitted to the Court and for the Plaintiffs blog/website criticism of Defendant Connor and the acceptance of Defendant Connor's report as factually accurate, while Plaintiff was deprived the right to review the file prepared by Defendant Connor.
130. Judge Humphrey terminated Plaintiffs parenting time because of Plaintiffs "severe" ADHD, but he denied Plaintiffs petition for special courtroom assistance to help Plaintiff participate in the hearings, although ADHD is recognized by the Americans with Disabilities Act as a disability.
131. On August 23, 2009, the Plaintiff distributed a letter on the Internet explaining that Judge Humphrey terminated Plaintiffs parenting time without warning or any evidence of neglect, and he encouraged people to send letters of complaint/concern to the Indiana Supreme Court Ethics and Professionalism Committee Advisor located in Dearborn County.
132. Defendant Heidi Humphrey, wife of Defendant J. Humphrey, is the Committee Advisor in Dearborn County Indiana Supreme Court Ethics and Professionalism Committee
Advisor located in Dearborn County and one of only four such advisors total, who are wives of Judges, to serve on the Ethics and Professionalism Committee in the State of Indiana.
133. Appellate Justice Margaret Robb served as the foregoing Committee's liaison to the Indiana Court of Appeals.
134. Approximately one month after Plaintiff encouraged people to contact the Committee Advisor in Dearborn County Indiana Supreme Court Ethics and Professionalism Committee Advisor, the four advisors, who were wives of Judges, disappeared from the committee in their respective home counties.
135. Justice Robb would later rule on Plaintiffs appeal after the Plaintiff encouraged complaints about Judge Humphrey and after Justice Robb served with Defendant H. Humphrey on the Indiana Supreme Court Ethics and Professionalism Committee Advisor.
136. In a letter to Connor dated September 15, 2009, Plaintiffs attorney, in a separate legal action, requested a copy of Connor's case file for a legal hearing in Hamilton County, Ohio.
137. In a letter to the Plaintiffs Ohio attorney dated September 21, 2009, Connor stated, "Please be advised that [Plaintiff] was provided with copies of the records you are requesting and thus, should have them in his possession for your review."
138. In a letter to the Ohio attorney dated September 28, 2009, Connor stated, "I will have the records for [Plaintiff] prepared by Friday October 2, 2009."
139. Connor also stated in the September 28, 2009 letter, "However I am quite perplexed as to why this is necessary given that [Plaintiff] already has copies of all his records"
140. In a letter to the Ohio attorney dated October 2, 2009, Defendant Connor flipflopped again concerning the release of the custody evaluation file, and Defendant Connor informed the Ohio attorney that Connor was unable to release the records.
141. Connor stated in the October 2, 2009 letter, "After conducting a cursory review of the records you requested, it is apparent that there are numerous references to [Plaintiffs] children by name as well as information about the mother interspersed throughout the documents."
142. Connor stated that before he could release the records in the case file, the Ohio attorney needed to provide Connor with:
A. A Court order directing me to release the specific records to you"; OR
B. A consent form signed by the mother permitting me to release documents directly to you that contain information about her and the children."
143. The Plaintiff reported the activities of Defendant Connor and Humphrey on the Plaintiffs website concerning the divorce and Defendant Connors refusal to release his custody evaluation file to the Plaintiff.
144. Defendants Humphrey, Loechel, and Connor, in an attempt to have the Plaintiff shut down the Plaintiffs blog site, complained to the Dearborn County Prosecutor Negangard on or about August 24, 2009.
145. The Defendant Negangard was the head of the Dearborn County, Indiana Special Crimes Unit and assigned the complaints of Defendants Connor, Loechel, and Humphrey to Defendant Kreinhop to investigate concerning the Plaintiffs blog.
146. On October 8, 2009, Dearborn County Special Crimes Unit Detective Defendant Kreinhop contacted Plaintiff.
147. Kreinhop told Plaintiff that there was an investigation of Plaintiffs writings or postings on the Internet.
148. Kreinhop wanted the Plaintiff to meet Defendant Kreinhop in Dearborn County to discuss an alleged complaint about the Plaintiffs Internet postings.
149. Kreinhop refused to provide Plaintiff with any details of the investigation into the Plaintiffs Internet writings.
150. Kreinhop refused to tell Plaintiff who had filed the complaint.
151. Neither the Plaintiff nor Melissa Brewington had ever resided in Dearborn County, Indiana.
152. None of Plaintiffs Internet postings were transmitted from Dearborn County, Indiana, or the State of Indiana.
153. Plaintiffs Ohio attorney informed Defendant Kreinhop that Plaintiff would not meet with Kreinhop unless Kreinhop gave an explanation as to the nature of the case and what Kreinhop was investigating.
154. On October 13, 2009, Humphrey vacated a hearing set for October 27, 2009 stating that the Court did not have jurisdiction to hear the motion while the case was before the Indiana Appellate Court.
155. Defendant Humphrey failed to disclose that he made a complaint to Defendant Negangard concerning the Plaintiffs Internet postings and failed to recuse himself after complaining about the Plaintiffs Internet postings to Defendant Negangard.
156. On or about October 22, 2009, Connor communicated with Circuit Court and Loechel, unbeknownst to Plaintiff.
157. On or about November 2, 2009, Defendant Kreinhop traveled to Plaintiffs residence in Ohio, despite being advised by Plaintiffs Ohio counsel the Plaintiff would not speak with Defendant Kreinhop, to speak to Plaintiff.
158. Defendant Kreinhop disregarded Plaintiffs Ohio attorney's statements and traveled to Ohio to meet with Plaintiff. Kreinhop failed to notify the Ohio attorney or notify local law enforcement that Defendant Kreinhop was attempting to meet with Plaintiff.
160. Kreinhop informed Plaintiff that Kreinhop spoke with Connor about Plaintiff.
161. Connor did not have Plaintiffs consent to share Plaintiffs confidential information with Detective Kreinhop.
162. Kreinhop did not have a valid subpoena or court order that would have allowed Kreinhop to obtain information about Plaintiff while being a client of Connor.
163. In a November 11, 2009 letter to Plaintiffs Indiana appellate counsel, Kendra Gjerdingen, Connor stated, "In order for me to release the 'entire' case file, I will need a Court order that supersedes both the Honorable Judge Taul's order as well as the Honorable Judge Humphrey's order."
164. On January 19, 2010, Plaintiff filed a motion in his divorce case to release the custody evaluation case file from Connor and Associates to Dr. Henry Waite, MD.
165. Plaintiff requested that Dr. Waite be able to review the files to help Dr. Waite determine if Plaintiff presented a danger to the parties' children.
166. Humphrey denied Plaintiffs motion on January 28, 2010, although Defendant Humphrey was involved in reporting alleged criminal activity of the Plaintiff posting commentary on the Plaintiffs website, and once again Defendant Humphrey failed to mention his involvement in the investigation of the Plaintiff while Defendant Humphrey continued to issue orders in the Plaintiffs divorce case.
167. Humphrey stated that Plaintiff needed to seek permission from the Indiana Court of Appeals for Humphrey to consider Plaintiffs motion.
168. On or about March 9, 2010, Ryan P. Ray filed an appearance to represent Plaintiff in the Appellate Court in Indiana.
169. On or about March 11, 2010, Ryan P. Ray filed an appearance to represent Plaintiff in trial court.
170. On or about March 11, 2010, Ryan Ray filed a motion for relief from stay and request for approval of Dr. Henry Waite as mental health care provider in the divorce.
171. On or about March 19, 2010, Humphrey set a hearing on the motion for relief for June 14, 2010.
172. On or about April 5, 2010, Plaintiff filed a brief in the Indiana Appellate Court concerning Plaintiffs appeal of Judge Humphrey's decision in the Plaintiffs divorce case.
173. On or about May 1, 2010, Melissa Brewington filed her appellate brief in the Indiana Appellate Court.
174. On or about May 25, 2010, Plaintiff filed his reply brief in the Indiana Appellate Court.
175. On or about May 27, 2010, the Internet Protocol (IP) address registered to the Indiana Supreme Court appeared on www.danshelpskids.com ., the Internet website of the Plaintiff.
176. Supreme Court IP address 207.250.133.30 is registered through TW Telecom Holdings, Inc.
177. Supreme Court IP address 207.250.133.30 accounted for a total of 187 hits on 33 web pages on www.danhelpskids.com .
178. Supreme Court IP address 207.250.133.30 is one of two IP addresses registered to the Indiana Supreme Court that visited www.danhelpskids.com .
179. Plaintiff registered web domain www.danhelpskids.com on December 6, 2009, approximately four months after Defendant Humphrey issued the decree of divorce.
180. Plaintiff published the content on www.danhelpskids.com nearly six (6) months after the filing of the final decree.
181. The content of www.danhelpskids.com does not appear on the court record in any proceeding before Judge Humphrey.
182. On or about June 9, 2010, Humphrey phoned the attorneys of both parties to the divorce case to inform them of Humphrey's recusal due to an alleged police investigation of the Plaintiff started by Defendant Humphrey in August 2009.
183. On or about June 9, 2010, Supreme Court IP address 207.250.133.30 visited www.danhelpskids.com .
184. On or about June 11, 2010, Humphrey's order of recusal was filed with the clerk.
185. Humphrey's order made no mention of the alleged investigation.
186. Humphrey stated that he recused himself "to avoid any appearance of impropriety," although the appearance of impropriety did not prevent the Defendant Humphrey from ruling on prior motions filed post decree by the Plaintiff.
187. On or about June 23, 2010, the Plaintiffs appeal of his divorce case was transmitted to Indiana Court of Appeals.
188. On or about June 28, 2010, Judge Taul unilaterally appointed Judge John A. Westhafer of Decatur Circuit Court to the Plaintiff's divorce case.
189. On or about July 6, 2010, an order and qualification by Special Judge Westhafer, assuming jurisdiction of the case, was placed of record in the Plaintiffs divorce case.
190. On or about July 6, 2010, Plaintiff sent a public records request to Dearborn Prosecutor F. Aaron Negangard for the records pertaining to the alleged investigation of Plaintiff.
191. Defendant Negangard heads the Dearborn County Special Crimes Unit where the Defendant Kreinhop was assigned.
192. In a letter dated July 7, 2010, Prosecutor Negangard denied Plaintiffs request for records, stating Indiana law prohibits the release of investigatory records.
193. On or about July 12, 2010, Plaintiff sent a written response to Prosecutor Negangard's refusal to release records to the Defendant Negangard and other county officials.
194. Plaintiff in his letter dated July 12, 2010, informed Negangard that Indiana law does not prohibit the release of investigatory records.
195. IC 5-14-3-4 states that investigatory records of law enforcement agencies are subject to release at the discretion of the investigating agency.
196. At approximately 4:45 PM on July 12, 2010, Defendant Negangard sent Plaintiff an email that was addressed to "all county officials" from Negangard's Verizon Wireless Blackberry, that Defendant Negangard told Plaintiff that Negangard would "make every effort to prosecute" Plaintiff, if Plaintiff broke the law.
197. Defendant' Negangard's email stated the following:
"Please be advised that Dan Brewington is currently under investigation by the Dearborn County Sheriffs department. Once he (Plaintiff) was advised of this by Judge James Humphrey who had to recuse himself from his case only recently he has attacked me or my office. [sic] I take this an effort to get me not to do my job of prosecuting those who violate the law. I assure you his efforts will not succeed. If he has violated the law then I will make every effort to prosecute him. However I will point out that this matter is still under investigation and until such time he is convicted he is presumed innocent. [Plaintiff] is also incorrect regarding his request. He clearly asked for records pertaining to his investigation that are not to be disclosed under Indiana law. If any of you need any further information regarding this matter. Please do hesitate to contact me." [sic]
198. On July 13, 2010, Supreme Court IP address 207.250.133.30 visited www.danhelpskids.com .
199. On July 20, 2010, Supreme Court IP address 207.250.133.30 visited www.danhelpskids.com .
200. On or about July 20, 2010, the Indiana Appellate Court affirmed the trial court's ruling in the Plaintiffs divorce.
201. The Indiana Appellate Court stated in its opinion in the Plaintiffs divorce case, "During the pendency of the proceedings, Daniel posted information concerning the dissolution on his website and blog, in response to which Melissa sought a protective order and temporary restraining order on more than one occasion."
202. On September 9, 2010, Supreme Court IP address 207.250.133.30 visited www.danhelpskids.corn. and www.danbrewington.blogspot.com .
203. On or about September 27, 2010, Supreme Court IP address 207.250.133.30 visited www.danhelpskids.com .
204. On or about October 8, 2010, Plaintiffs petition to transfer his divorce case with the Indiana Supreme Court was filed.
205. On or about November 1, 2010, Supreme Court IP address 66.162.57.78 visited www.danhelpskids.com ., and it was the first time that IP address 66.162.57.78
appeared on www.danhelpskids.com , the foregoing IP address is registered to Indiana Supreme Court.
206. On or about November 17, 2010, the Plaintiffs Petition was transmitted on transfer to the Indiana Supreme Court.
207. On or about November 22, 2010, Supreme Court IP address 66.162.57.78 visited www.danhelpskids.com .
208. On or about December 16, 2010, the Indiana Supreme Court denied transfer of the Plaintiffs divorce action.
209. Defendant Negangard, acting as Prosecutor of Dearborn County, Indiana, had the Plaintiff indicted on or about March 7, 2011, for a variety of criminal charges all related to the Plaintiffs Internet postings.
210. That any prosecutor or lay person would recognize the well-established right of a citizen of the United States to exercise the First Amendment right to free speech.
211. That the Defendants, acting individually or collectively, conspired to deprive the Plaintiff of his rights guaranteed under the United States Constitution to free speech, and when the Plaintiff refused to take down his website, the Defendants conspired to have the Plaintiff investigated and arrested for exercising his First Amendment rights.
212. Once the Plaintiff was arrested, Defendant Dearborn County, Indiana, failed and refused to appoint the Plaintiff counsel at the Plaintiffs arraignment on the spurious charges perpetrated by Defendant Negangard in conjunction with the other named Defendants and John Doe Defendants and denied the Plaintiff the right to counsel or appointed counsel.
213. That Defendant Negangard or his employees sat quietly in the courtroom while the Plaintiff was denied the right to counsel and permitted the Plaintiff to be arraigned by a Judge (Blankenship) who is an acquaintance of the Defendant J. Humphrey and permitted the Judge to set a bond at $600,000.00 without any opposition by the Defendant Negangard or his employees, all while the Plaintiff was without counsel.
214. That the Plaintiff has been incarcerated in the Dearborn County Law Enforcement Center, Dearborn County, Indiana, since March 11, 2011 without the aid or assistance of counsel, and the Plaintiff has been denied access to counsel by the Defendant Kreinhop.
215. That the Defendants acted in concert to deprive the Plaintiff of his rights guaranteed under state and federal law.
216. Defendant Negangard continues to seek to restrain the Plaintiffs liberty through representations to the Court that are false in an attempt to require the Plaintiff to capitulate to a plea deal with Defendant Negangard.
217. That Defendants Negangard, Humphrey, and Loechel are all licensed attorneys in the State of Indiana and know or should know that the Plaintiffs Internet writings are protected speech, that Defendant Connor should know that the Plaintiffs Internet writings are protected free speech, that Defendant Negangard, as Prosecutor of Dearborn County and as a licensed attorney, knows or should know the consequences of incarcerating an individual when a crime has not been committed, and Defendant Krienhop, as the Sheriff of Dearborn County, Indiana, has a duty to prevent the Plaintiffs rights from being violated under state or federal law and stop criminal activity in Dearborn County, Indiana, and Dearborn County knows or should know its obligation to appoint counsel to an indigent defendant such as the Plaintiff in a criminal proceeding at all critical phases, and the Defendants did nothing.
218. That Defendant Negangard has attempted to continue to have the Plaintiff incarcerated for exercising rights guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution and the laws of the United States including, but not limited to, the Plaintiffs filing of a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and the Defendant Negangard's acknowledgment that the Plaintiffs postings on the Internet are protected speech. Defendant Negangard's problem is with the content of the speech critical of Defendant Negangard or elected officials in Dearborn County, Indiana.
219. Defendants acted knowingly and intentionally without regard to Plaintiffs legal rights in conspiring to deprive the Plaintiff of his liberty for Plaintiff's postings on the Internet/blogsite, that any average citizen would consider protected speech and the Defendants took action against the Plaintiff to purposely deprive the Plaintiff of rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and the laws of the United States that are so grounded in history and legal jurisprudence it is common knowledge.
220. Defendants John Does 1-25 are unknown defendants whose names and addresses are unknown and with reasonable diligence could not be identified by the Plaintiff, but said defendants acted in concert with the Defendants in the foregoing actions.
221. That the named Defendants conspired in malicious combination in the foregoing acts and appeared in a grand jury proceeding or provided information to the Defendant Negangard that all Defendants knew or should have known was not criminal action by the Plaintiff but acted in concert to pursue criminal charges against the Plaintiff in an attempt to deprive the Plaintiff of his rights guaranteed under state and federal law.
222. Dearborn County, its officials, agents and employees exercised no oversight concerning the actions of the Defendants Negangard, Kreinhop, John Does employed by Dearborn County, Indiana, or its elected officials or judges to prevent the denial of the Plaintiffs civil rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and laws of the United States at all times pertinent hereto.

COUNT I
INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL HARM
223. Plaintiff realleges herein all of the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 222 of this complaint as if fully set forth herein, and further, the Plaintiff alleges that the jurisdiction of Count VI is invoked pursuant to the pendent jurisdiction of this Court.
224. The conduct of the Defendants and unknown Defendants John Does alleged herein and above constitutes intentional, knowing and reckless infliction of emotional distress as the Defendants' conduct in conspiring to have the Plaintiff indicted was extreme and outrageous conduct done intentionally or recklessly, and it caused severe emotional distress and harm to the Plaintiff, and the Defendants' conduct went beyond all reasonable bounds of decency.
225. As a direct and proximate result of said intentional, reckless conduct that exceeds all bounds usually tolerated by a decent society and an average member of the community would arouse his resentment against the Defendants by the Defendants' outrageous conduct, Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer damages including, but not limited to, anxiety, serious mental distress and emotional trauma in an amount to be more fully determined at trial.
COUNT II
VIOLATION OF 42 U.S.C. 1983
226. Plaintiff realleges and reaffirms each and every allegation contained in Paragraphs 1 through 225 as if fully set forth herein.
227. Defendants at all time acted under color of statute, ordinance, regulation, custom or usage of the State of Indiana to subject the Plaintiff to the deprivation of rights, privileges or immunities secured by the Constitution and law and caused injury to the Plaintiff, including but not limited to, the injuries previously set forth herein, including but not limited to the Plaintiffs incarceration in violation of the First Amendment, Sixth Amendment, Fourteenth Amendment, and 18 U.S.0 §241.
COUNT III
VIOLATION OF 42 U.S.C. 1985
228. Plaintiff realleges and reaffirms each and every allegation contained in Paragraphs 1 through 227 as if fully set forth herein.
229. Defendants conspired for the purpose of impeding, obstructing or defeating the due course of justice in the State of Indiana with intent to deny to the Plaintiff, a citizen of the United States, the equal protection of the laws, and/or to injure the Plaintiff or his property for lawfully enforcing or attempting to enforce his rights and the rights under the United States Constitution and to the equal protection of the laws as set forth herein and as a result thereof caused injury to the Plaintiff, including but not limited to the injuries previously set forth herein.
COUNT IV
VIOLATION OF 42 U.S.C. 1986
230. Plaintiff realleges and reaffirms each and every allegation contained in Paragraphs 1 through 229 as if fully set forth herein.
231. Defendants are persons who had knowledge that the wrongs conspired to be done and mentioned in 42 U.S.C. §1985 were about to be committed, and having power to prevent or aid in preventing the commission of the same, neglected or refused to do so, which said Defendants by reasonable diligence could have prevented, but the Defendants did nothing and as a result thereof caused injury to the Plaintiff, including but not limited to the injuries previously set forth herein.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Court to:
1. Enter a judgment finding that Defendants violated federal and Indiana law as set forth above;
2. Award compensatory damages that will reasonably compensate Plaintiff for his damages, including loss of employment, lost back wages or back pay, liquidated damages, and losses arising from adverse health effects, mental and emotional distress, and for humiliation, embarrassment, loss of reputation and loss of self-esteem;
3. Award Plaintiff an amount to be determined at trial for humiliation, embarrassment, loss of reputation, loss of self-esteem, emotional distress and pain and suffering in an amount that exceeds the minimum jurisdictional amount of this Court and as more fully proven at the trial of this matter for the Plaintiffs false arrest;
4. Award Plaintiff punitive damages in an amount to be determined at the trial of this matter, attorney fees and costs of this action;
5. Grant Plaintiff such other and further relief as may be just and equitable.

Daniel Brewington, after being duly cautioned and sworn, states that the allegations contained in the within complaint are true and accurate to the best of his knowledge and belief and he swears to same under penalty of perjury

Robert G. Kelly (00 a 167)
Trial Attorney for Plaintiff
4353 Montgomery Road
Norwood, Ohio 45212
513-531-3636
513-531-0135 Fax
E-mail address: rgkellycolpa@aol.com

JURY DEMAND
Plaintiff demands a trial by jury.
PRAECIPE:
Please serve all Defendants by certified mail return receipt requested at the following
addresses:
F. Aaron Negangard
individually and in his representative
capacity as Prosecutor of Dearborn
County, Indiana
215 West High Street
Lawrenceburg, Indiana 47025
Michael Kreinhop
individually and in his representative
capacity as Sheriff of Dearborn
County, Indiana
301 West High Street
Lawrenceburg, Indiana 47025
James Humphrey
1406 Indian Woods Trail
Lawrenceburg, Indiana 47025
Heidi Humphrey
1406 Indian Woods Trail
Lawrenceburg, Indiana 47025
Angela Loechel
310 West High Street
Lawrenceburg, Indiana 47025
Edward J. Connor
34 Erlanger Road
Erlanger, Kentucky 41018
Dearborn County, Indiana
do Andrew Baudendistel
Dearborn County Attorney
230 West High Street
Lawrenceburg, Indiana 47025
John Does, 1 through 25
names and addresses unknown

Attachment:
PROVISIONS TO SERVE AS AN IMPARTIAL EXPERT IN A CUSTODY EVALUATION
You, your child(ren) and the other parent are about to undergo a custody evaluation with Dr. Ed Connor and Dr. Sara Jones-Connor. As an impartial evaluator appointed by the Court, or agreed to by legal counsel or both parties, we make every reasonable effort to advise the Court on what is in the best interest of your child(ren). In order to conduct a competent and thorough evaluation, we must be free to access any and all information, from any available source that we consider pertinent to reaching our final conclusion. We may interview all members of the immediate family, contact extended family members such as grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins, etc. We may also interview others who have had direct contact with the child(ren) or observed the child(ren) with either parent such as a friend, neighbor, supervisor, co-workers, housekeeper, baby sitter, law enforcement officials, day care provider, teachers, physician or mental health professional. The information we collect from you, your child(ren) and any collateral source, if deemed pertinent by us to substantiate the final recommendation, may be included in the final report to the Court. Each party, or person interviewed in my office, shall agree to sign a Release of Information and Consent Form. If a telephone interview is conducted the interviewee is informed that what is said may be included in the final recommendations sent to the Judge and a copy to each attorney (and the Guardian ad Litem if applicable). Your signature below indicates that we have your permission to release the custody report to the appropriate parties and contact any person we deem necessary.
EES:
The fee for conducting the entire custody evaluation, which includes interview sessions, parentchild observations, test Administration, scoring and interpretation, document review, collateral interviews, telephone interviews, a home visit with each parent (if within a 30 mile radius), possible school or day care visits, review of records, report preparation, typing and dictation is $110.00 per hour. The cost for a custody evaluation is $3200.00. **See note below. There is a $250.00 non-refundable payment due at each party's first interview and an additional $250.00 payment due at each party's second interview or $1000.00 by the parent who is courtordered to pay the entire evaluation fee. The report will be finalized as soon as the bill is paid in full. The evaluation takes about 90 to 120 days so please make arrangements to pay your bill within that time frame. We will not finalize the report until each party has paid their bill in full.
**Note: If sexual abuse or domestic violence allegations against either party is asserted or has been substantiated during the course of the custody evaluation, additional sessions and assessment will be required. The cost for the additional sessions and/or assessment will be incurred by the parties equally or the party ordered to pay for the evaluation in full on an hourly rate.
DISPOSITION OR TESTIMONY FEE;
If your attorney Subpoenas either and/or both examiners) for a deposition or for testimony at the final hearing, your attorney will be asked to submit a $750.00 retainer per doctor no late: than two weeks prior to the deposition or court appearance. The fee for a deposition is $125.00 per hour scheduled deposing time and $125.00 per preparation hour, not to exceed 3 hours. The fee for testimony is $125.00 per hour door-to-door and $125.00 per preparation hour, not to exceed three hours. Following the deposition or final hearing, the remainder of the fee, if any, will be billed to your attorney. Be sure to inform your attorney of this procedure, as he/she will probably, in turn, bill you. Please note that our schedules are usually booked four weeks in advance and we will need a minimum five-week notice for a deposition or testimony.
ADDITIONAL PEES:
If your attorney requests a copy of the file please be advised that The American Psychological Association prohibits us from releasing psychological test data to non-psychologists. However, we are permitted to release the data to another Psychologist after their name and address has been provided to us. Please note that we are not permitted to release your ex-spouse's test data without their consent even to another psychologist. The cost for file copying_ is 100 per page, • postage and a $20.00 administration fee to be paid in advance.
ABOUT TEEE EVALUATION PROCESS:
It is our opinion that in a Custody dispute there are no winners. Everyone loses something. The law requires that we who are involved act in the "best interest of the child," which may sometimes go against our wishes or desires. Regardless, each adult involved in any Custody case must act in a thoughtful and rational manner and protect the child from undue stress and emotional harm The best advice we can give you is to be totally honest throughout the course of this evaluation.
1. Please do not ask your child what he/she and the doctor talked about during his/her sessions.
If a child feels this type of pressure from a parent during a custody evaluation they often "shutdown" which significantly complicates the evaluation process. Our advice to you as a parent is to simply tell your child that he/she is going to the "Talking Doctor" together with you to see how your family is doing.
2. We will not discuss our thoughts about possible recommendations during the evaluation process_ so please do not ask. When the report has been submitted to the proper authorities, you may then ask your attorney for feedback from the report. After the final custody judgment has been rendered, we will be happy to review your psychological test results with you free of charge.
3. will review any documents, audiotapes or videotapes. However, we will only review documents or tapes if You Provide us with a copy of each item. These copies will not be returned to you at the conclusion of the evaluation. These items become part of the file and must remain in your file.
4. At no time is anyone permitted to tape record a session without our knowledge. If permission is granted to tape record, we will inform both attorneys of the procedure. Your signature below indicates that you agree to adhere to this policy.
5. After you have reviewed the final report with your attorney, you are encouraged to submit, in writing, if there are any errors, i.e., demographics, ages, time at one job, historical dates, etc. After receiving your statements in writing, we will then make note of such errors in your file and write an Addendum if necessary.

Your signature below indicates that:
I. You have read the "Provisions To Serve As An Impartial Evaluator in a Custody Evaluation" and that you fully understand the document and have therefore willingly
signed this document.
2. You have read the "Release of Information and Consent" form and fully understand the document.
3. You agree to fah-111 your financial obligation and pay your portion of the assessment fee as stipulated by the Judge/Commissioner, while freely acknowledging that Dr. Connor and/or Dr. Jones-Connor may not support your position in this case.

Thank You,
Ed Connor, Psy.D., R.C.E.
Licensed Psychologist
KY License 41007
Registered Custody Evaluator
Sara Jones-Connor. Ph.D. •
Licensed Psychologist
KY License 41256
Signature of Mother 'Date
Custcontrac:t(HRLY).do:.^.

17 August 2011 Dan Brewington Bond Reduction Hearing Notes

2011-08-19T08:56:00.002-04:00

17 August 2011 Dan Brewington Bond Reduction Hearing Notes

10 AM -11:20 AM

Judge Brian Hill presiding ( from Rush County)

Prosecutor: Aaron Negangard

Dan Brewington represented by public defender, Brian Barrett (Chief Public Defender, Rush County)

Dan Brewington was sworn in from his seat. He was attired in jailhouse orange and remained in pink handcuffs throughout the hearing.

Barrett asked a series of questions with the following answers: Brewington is 37 years old and has been incarcerated since March 11. He was bonded out of the Hamilton County justice center for $1,000 paid on a $10,000 surety bond after his March 7th arrest. Bonding out was March 9. He has been incarcerated for 171 days. His residence is at 2125 Sheridan Dr. in Norwood, at his mother’s home, for about 18 months prior to his arrest. He also stays at the family farm in Milan at times. These are the only 2 places he’s lived. He has connections to family and friends in both places, He has no passport. He has an OH driver’s license. His only other record is for a DUI in 1995 or 1996 in Campbell County, KY. He owns no property. His bond in Dearborn County was set at $500,000 surety and $100,000 cash. He has no funds to post bond and his family does not due to the legal issues with the lien on his mother’s trust. He may be able to get $1,000 cash. He was not employed prior to his arrest, though he did some contract work for Continental for a show production, but was unable to pursue that further due to his arrest. He is aware that there would be no contact orders for witnesses 9 direct or indirect or by internet) and he would not be able to leave the area. He has never failed to appear in court.
If released he will be looking for work and trying to prepare a case for his jury trial. He wants to clear his name of all of this and will appear at all court hearings. He wants $1,000 cash and not surety. He agreed to waive his right to fight extradition from OH and noted that Dearborn is the midpoint between Norwood and Milan.

Negangard asked questions:
The court ordered you on August 17, 2009 to not have visitation with your children until a mental health professional released you for it. You did not get one approved by the court.
You owe $122,280.80 – ordered to pay to your wife. Brewington said he cannot access his mother’s trust for this.

Barrett: If Judge Hill gave you a list of court approved mental health evaluators, would you do that? YES.

Negangard- You have not held a job since the divorce. NO- have been working on the divorce case.

Negangard passed out several pieces of evidence to the court.

Brewington – with cuffs on – was working thru his stack of evidence as well.

1. Dissolution Decree Judgment
2. Court of appeals decision
3. Letter from Dr. Conner on the divorce proceeding
4. Grand jury testimony in this case’
5. Internet postings and all grand jury exhibits
6. Current CC entry Ripley county divorce Proceedings
7. Current writ of habeas filed by Dan Brewington
8. Copy of inmate interview ( this was added at McHenry’s questioning)

Negangard called Detective Shane McHenry who was sworn in and answered questions with the following information: On March 9, 2011 he was called in to assist in the investigation. They had received a call from Crime Stoppers via Detective Dan O’Brien of the Cincinnati Police Dept. And inmate from the Hamilton County Jail-

Barrett objected to this as hearsay- and after discussion McHenry was allowed to proceed.

The inmate said that Brewington was looking for someone to do a drive-by on a judge. He contacted ATF and talked to an agent and they both interviewed the inmate. A copy of the interview DVD was added to the list of evidence. The inmate knew a lot of information about Brewington and that he was being arraigned for threatening a judge. He knew the judge’s wife was on an ethics committee and people were sending letters to that committee. Brewington allegedly asked him if he knew of anyone interested in doing a drive-by on a judge’s residence. He also knew about the grand jury hearing and how he had upset the prosecutor at that hearing. He told the inmate he had the judge’s address from the assessor’s site. The inmate told him he could help him and provided him with 2 phone numbers. McHenry followed up with the inmate’s daughter and there was no contact from Brewington.

Barrett: What was the inmate’s name? Keith Jones. What was his criminal history? He previously provided info to the police in the past. Was he ever paid or did he receive benefits from providing info? What did he get in exchange? Not known.
Jones said others might have overheard. Did you inquire as to who else was arraigned that day? No
Was there any other affects from this conversation? Not that Shane McHenry knows of. McHenry was not involved in the criminal matter of this case before this.
Has OH pursued anything with this and the ATF agent? No- nor did the feds or the state. And the Dearborn County prosecutor has not pursued this? No.

Negangard called Chief Deputy David Lusby who was sworn in. He was identified as former sheriff also. Kreinhop was out of town for this investigation though he knew about this. He called in Terry Van Winkle to set up a security detail for the judge’s house 24/7 for about 1 week. Even though Brewington was incarcerated- they had security. They monitored all his phone calls – all inmates know this is done. After a week the security detail was terminated and no phone calls indicated anything. They still monitor them and there has been nothing- no threats that he is aware of. Lusby has not been in contact with Hamilton County regarding the alleged threats.

Major Terry Van Winkle was called and sworn in. He described the security detail from 6 PM March 11- midnight March 18. ( Brewington was in jail March 11 forward to present day)He knows of no threats etc.

Negangard called Angela Loechel- attorney for Melissa Brewington during the divorce. She was sworn in and said she has been her attorney since about 2007. Shortly before she was to depose his mother, Dan Brewington told her he believed he had spoken to her husband regarding firearms training. She took it that he was trying to intimidate her. He had not identified himself when he contacted her husband. (He had a business on the internet for firearms training)

Barrett objected to her testimony as she was giving her opinions as to motives etc.

Loechel stated that Brewington later quoted her husband in a letter and she went on to talk about firearms and the two little girls saying that when they were taught to shoot, the wife didn’t like it and the 4 year old wasn’t enjoying it either. She said that after Brewington was evaluated by Dr Conner and Conner completed a custodial evaluation, Brewington sent a number of letters trying to get confidential sections released. He asked for a change of judge. Loechel said she was most concerned about the confidential health records of the wife as Brewington had published a lot including her diagnosis.

Negangard: Brewington started with attorney Streiter, then Blondell, and then represented himself. Did he ever get out of line with the court? Loechel said there was an outburst and yelling at court- demanding his rights at the final hearing. She said the divorce took 3 days- the longest divorce hearing she’s ever been involved in since starting in 1997. Negangard asked if the court had asked him to stop contacting Conner. She said she did not know about that.

Negangard said there were 3 judges- Taul, Humphrey, and now Todd. In the final decree his parental rights were not terminated- he was ordered to undergo a mental health evaluation with a court approved mental health provider. Then if approved he can have 4 hour visits twice a week and so on with various steps approved by the court. This was ordered August 17, 2009. There has been no mental health evaluation in the past 2 years. Loechel says- not that she knows of. She said he has sent letters to school so he can have access to the girl’s school records…

Negangard- Was Brewington ordered to return a 357 magnum handgun? Loechel- that was the only thing not returned of the entire household inventory.
There is $122,000 judgment not completed (there is a lien on the mother’s trust)
46640 from the daughter’s account ordered to return.
No expenses paid to Dr Conner
No portion of Loechel’s attorney fees were repaid
Failed to comply with the court order evaluation
Child support payments are current
The Supreme Court has denied transfer of the case as well?

Barrett: all of this is from the divorce proceedings. Has Brewington ever threatened you? Loechel no- not directly- just the call for gun training. Have you ever heard Brewington threaten anyone? No- there were some incidents t hat the divorce client mentioned. (the wife)
Barrett- but no threat that you are going to pursue as it is your legal right? No. Discussion about changing venue in divorce trial and Barrett noted that Brewington acting as his own attorney did what attorney’s sometimes do- as a legal strategy- change venue.

Barrett- you filed a temporary restraining order and the judge denied that request with the stipulation that it would be considered at the end of the trial. He has a right to pursue his rights too- as his own lawyer- to get records.

Barrett summed up- I have heard NO evidence to indicate he is a danger to anyone. There is a difference between orders in a civil case and orders in a criminal case. There is no indication that he is a threat to anyone. Mr. Brewington appears to be one of those people who gets under other people’s skin- it is not a crime to pursue your rights. He has waived his right to fight extradition from Ohio, he will have no contact with witnesses and he will stipulate to a mental health evaluation from a court approved evaluator. Asked for reduced bond of $1,000.

Negangard- he has disdain for the court’s authority- evidence shows that he only accepts what he agrees with. He will lash out, free speech has limits such as in child pornography and yelling fire in a crowded theater. He intimidated a judge and a witness, he boycotted the attorney’s office, he writes about Blondell and his position on a Catholic School board. Negangard read extensively form Conner’s evaluation and stated that Brewington wouldn’t comply. He represented himself and had to be admonished during a 3 day court trial. He taught the 4 year old to use firearms over the wife and child’s concerns. The test results of the husband show a degree of psychological disturbance- he cited a lot of behavioral traits. He admits to posting on facebook with comment about playing with gas and fire and him being a pyromaniac, and other internet postings. He needs to be evaluated. The gun has not been returned. Is it in a safe? Now we are on our 3rd judge and 2nd attorney in this case, because he doesn’t accept personal responsibility and mind the court. (Brewington did not request any judge or attorney to withdraw in this case)

He has exhausted his appeal remedies. Negangard thinks Brewington is a danger and is not confident he will appear at future hearings. He feels the bond is appropriate as is.

JUDGE BRIAN HILL: I will take this under advisement and will rule by the end of the week. We will set trial between mid Sept to early October when there is no witness availability problems. As to Criminal Rule 4A I am going to push this out a few weeks due to the emergency with the public defender. (Barrett’s mother passed away) we will schedule pretrial about 15 days before trial.

Court ended at 11:20 AM

Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawrenceburg Township

16 August 2011 Dearborn County Commissioners Meeting Notes

2011-08-16T11:30:00.003-04:00

16 August 2011 Dearborn County Commissioners Meeting Notes

Present: Jeff Hughes, President, Tom Orschell, and Shane McHenry
Also present: Gayle Pennington, Auditor, Bill Ewbank, County Coordinator, and Andy Baudendistel, Attorney.

Executive session preceded thi s meeting regarding pending litigation- commissioners voted to take no action at this time.

Regarding the Personnel matter from executive session- commissioners voted to have human resources discuss the situation with the employee.

OLD BUSINESS:

Private real property rights preservation ordinance- tabled again

Revised jail expansion project- tabled again

GIS fee schedule- Baudendistel presented the ordinance for signature with the additional revisions suggested by commissioners. Commissioners signed the ordinance 2011-08.

Happy Hollow Road Vacation- Baudendistel said the statute says the commissioners MAY vacate it- allowing them discretion on this. If the commissioners want to they can make no decision at this time. Hughes said with the information from affidavits etc. he wanted to deny the petition to vacate. Orschell said that because of the discrepancy in the surveys- he said that wouldn’t be fair to make a decision- McHenry agreed with Orschell. Hughes said- surveying is not an exact science. Hughes noted people other than the county have worked on that road. He thinks it would cause hardship if there was an intersection there. If Mr. Lykins can let his son build a home along the road, why can’t Mr. Engle have that option for his son as well. Commissioners voted to do nothing- that leaves the row and road as is. Essentially they tabled it. If there is a court order, they will decide.

NEW BUSINESS:

Dennis Kraus, Jr., Surveyor- New state law regarding drainage- Indiana adopted some new laws this year and revised some old laws. They need a way to handle this unfunded mandate officially- with a $100 fee- to work on cases of a nuisance and/or changes to drainage flow. THE DRAINAGE BOARD is 3 commissioners and the surveyor.
Surveyor has to go out and investigate per law. He wants the fee to be low enough to be affordable and high enough to keep people from just harassing their neighbors with these. The landowner requesting the investigation must first request the neighbor remedy it. Then they can approach the surveyor. The surveyor will also have to approach Council for the filing fee approval. McHenry has a problem with the $100 fee. Kraus. Jr. said that with decreased tax revenues we need to look at ways to offset services for these specific items. McHenry asked if other counties are doing this. Franklin has one- but Ripley doesn’t. Ohio and Switzerland are well drained- not aware of a board there. The county does not have to fund this- Kraus, Jr. said. So the filing fee would fund this. Commissioners questioned what happens if their decision is not followed. Hearings are held on the petition of an obstruction of waterway or in the case of storm water nuisance nothing was written as to procedures. Kraus, Jr. was amenable to the commissioners changing the fee amount to what suited them. Ewbank said this is another unfunded mandate so this would be a way of paying for the services. Ordinarily these disputes get handled through litigation. Now the county drainage board mediates. Baudendistel said in the courts it would be $165 and court costs. McHenry said to move forward with a $50 fee. Commissioners tabled until Baudendistel could revise the ordinance for next meeting. Pennington will research if this goes to county general or a special fund.

Grant request- Indiana Criminal Justice Impaired Driving – Hughes signed the IN Criminal Justice grant and needs ratification. It is for seat belt enforcement nd drunken and impaired driving enforcement. It will be administered by Lawrenceburg. This is between Lawrenceburg and the county- and maybe the other municipal police forces. Commissioners ratified Hughes’s signature.

2012 Compensation Recommendation to County Council- the last cost of living adjustment was in 2009. Inflation is at over 5% in that time period. This new recommendation is for 2- 3% tops. Hughes wants to make evaluations part of the decision on how much of a raise they get in each department. Hughes wants to have then have an incentive to do a good job. McHenry said that would be good if we have people willing to step up and tell people if they are NOT doing a good job. Individuals who work and really achieve should be recognized for it, Hughes said. Commissioners voted to forward this with the recommendation that the evaluation process of the handbook be followed. Hughes said this will probably be a HR nightmare- but that’s OK.

HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT: Todd Listerman, Highway Engineer, gave the following report:

Awarded the 2011 line striping contract. 5 bids and the low bidder was IN Sign and Barricade $70,697.32. The high bid was over $120,000.

Unfunded mandate to meet reflectivity standards. He was concerned that it would be required of all roads or just those that are required to be striped. This would perhaps affect the extra roads we striped- as in we would only stripe the REQUIRED roads. This affects stimulus on federal projects.

ADA requirements mandated to make all county sidewalks ADA compliant. This will affect any federal dollars we receive in the county. He will find more out next Tues on that. We have to have a program to get non-compliant facilities into ADA compliance.

We have 17 bridges in dire need of replacement and repair. 4 bridges are on Lake Tambo $51,700 Schwipps $ 56,300, Platt $ 54,300, and Woliung Road $59,700 -Barth and Associates are the low bid on designs for these 4 bridges. Approved to draft contracts to award.

There is a structure to be designed that qualifies for federal funding for structure along Burzelbach and Bonnell. American Structurepoint can design for $139,200. We pay for design to get it shelf ready to go to the feds and INDOT. This puts us higher on the list for funds.

Solid Waste driveway- In the past we did the work and they paid for the materials. We need permission to do this. Hughes wants them to have a cost of our manpower so we know what we’re donating in kind. This will be done when we have the time to do it,

Obverting Road needs one of our boom mowers for Greendale. We need a letter from insurance and a letter held harmless from Greendale for that. Commissioners approved assisting the city of Greendale for this at the dept convenience. Hughes asked Grieve about this. Grieve said we are short handed and have machinery breakdowns. It will have to be on OUR schedule- when we have the time. Grieve will decide when it gets done. Commissioners want to be helpful to all entities in the county and they will be helpful to us at times when we need help.

Bridge at Stuart Street is being worked on for next spring. Bridge on Holt road completed- really nice- per Orschell.

Hughes wants a list of roads that really need to be done. Grieve said the slips are priority too. Orschell asked about Stateline slip. Grieve said Stateline may qualify for fed dollars on that as a mitigation project. Grieve listed several others they are looking for mitigation funds for.

AUDITOR: Gayle Pennington- Claims approved.

Data sharing MOU- Memorandum of understanding with Boone County, KY- an agreement to share data of street center lines and address points. This would be beneficial for Planning and Zoning and GIS. They haven’t heard back from Hamilton County. The adjoining IN counties will share this also. We are agreeing NOT to share theirs with anyone else. Agreement is for one year. Commissioners signed the MOU with Boone County, KY.

ATTORNEY: Andy Baudendistel- nothing to report

COUNTY COORDINATOR: Bill Ewbank resolution # 7 from 2011 from Dillsboro- that allows Bill Shelton- be their building inspector also. Commissioners accepted and approved this. These are documents from the state and their approved format from Homeland security.
Shane asked-Have any dept heads gotten with Barnes and Thornburgh and identified their needs for grants or federal funding? They have gotten with highway dept first per Ewbank.

COMMISSIONER COMMENTS- Per Orschell- PAWS facility -Brand new water heater leaked and extensive water damage to be repaired. It will delay their opening.

LATE ARRIVAL INFORMATION- none

PUBLIC COMMENT- Jeff Stenger- asked do the citizens have a right to drive down the unmaintained ROW on Happy Hollow Road. They cannot obstruct the county ROW even beyond the maintained section. Commissioners all agreed on this as the rules on public ROW.

Meeting adjourned at 10:20 AM

Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawrenceburg Township