DCRSD GETS TAXPAYER FINANCING FOR SEWERS

DCRSD Gets Taxpayer Financing for Sewers

At the 21 June 2006 County Council meeting 2.5 hours of discussion resulted in a negotiated deal to get money for DCRSD to “get into the game.” Cost to the taxpayers could be $4.5 million. DCRSD plans to use the $4.5 million to leverage more money at the Lawrenceburg bond bank. Council thinks the set-aside account would show good faith for DCRSD to negotiate with SDRSD and St. Leon Sewer Board.

The vote was 4 to 2. Fehrman, as chair, wasn’t required to vote, though he was clearly supportive. Fehrman left the room and talked to various supporters in the hall and around the room as the discussion was going on. Nay votes came from Cheek and Lansing due to unresolved issues with Greendale. There was also a desire to wait till August to see the sewer Study master plan.

The bulk of the discussion centered on membership in SDRSD, which is threatened by a nay vote from Greendale should DCRSD not agree to Greendale’s agreement to be able to serve 4 subdivisions that they’d planned on serving and to allow Greendale to keep HVL, a current customer. This resulted from DCRSD taking over “all areas not currently served.”

Economic development issues were also discussed. Jim West, Bill Ritzman, John Rahe, Richard Butler, and Mike Rozow represented DCEDI, the Redevelopment Commission, and the Chamber of Commerce. Mike Hankins, Brett Fehrman, and Rodney Dennerline represented DCRSD.

Hankins referred to SDRSD’s governance as being “antiquated” more than once in his presentation, because it requires a unanimous vote for a member to join. From the outside that may appear to be the case. Inside the SDRSD, it protects their initial investments, customer rates, and expansion from members unable to carry their share of the load.

DCRSD is a relative neophyte in the sewer business. They have yet to build a firm foundation. They elected to hurry up and take over all areas not currently served by sewers in November 2005. This occurred at a Commissioners meeting without being on the agenda. The wording for the commissioners to use was provided by DCRSD’s attorney, Lisa Lehner. At a recent meeting of commissioners, Lehner submitted an amendment to the minutes of the November meeting to show discussion on the issue to reflect it being done for health and safety of the residents.

In their hurry DCRSD failed to consult the local cities and towns to see what their utility plans were. Greendale, for example, had a plan because developers had requested service. They laid pipes for a gravity system along SR1 also. Gravity systems are expensive to lay out, but are cheaper to maintain. DCRSD should have consulted them before essentially negating their investment.

What about expansion of the cities themselves? How can they annex areas served by the county? Has anyone thought about who owns the pipes and who gets to bill the customers then?

The DCRSD letter to Council notes: “At present, County residents outside municipal jurisdictions are serviced by a municipal service provider, often at a higher cost than local residents pay. We would attempt to reduce that inequity.” DCRSD surely has noticed that taxes paid by residents in the local cities are higher than those in the county outside. The city residents get a reduced rate partially due to their taxes and the economies of scale along with their high density of living. DCRSD will find that providing sewer service and maintaining lines is costly. Someone has to pay. It may truly be more efficient and less expensive to add on to the cities rather than duplicate services.

If you look at the county as a whole, there are very few areas that couldn’t be served by EXISTING sewer providers in Aurora, Dillsboro, Lawrenceburg, Greendale, LMH, Moore’s Hill, and St. Leon. Most areas remaining are rural or farms. DCRSD needs to widen the circle around the towns to allow them some breathing space and potential expansion room.

Greendale has made DCRSD an offer that sounds beneficial to both. It lets Greendale recoup their investment in lines that will serve 4 subdivisions and retain existing customer- VRUC. It lets DCRSD get capacity from Greendale for free and possibly tack on a surcharge to the new development customers to help pay for county uses beyond this area or help Aurora so the county can pass through them, or fix High Ridge Estates, or buy capacity at St. Leon for the county’s TIF.

Goals of the DCRSD are 1. to maintain health and safety of residents, 2. to serve economic development areas, and 3 to serve residential growth – in that order. Yet we see the biggest hassle being over eastern residential growth and Greendale serving it.

DCRSD had no problem with allowing LMH to serve Maxwell’s proposed subdivision on Sneakville Road. What is the difference between that and Greendale serving the subdivisions they had planned to serve?

Hankins noted they were getting variances with IDEM to allow more inflow to Aurora even though Aurora is in violation with IDEM. He asked: What’s the difference if HighRidge Estates overflows there or in Aurora? Could the difference be that AURORA PAYS PENALTIES when this occurs?

Why is the little town of Guilford a big issue? Is it because of what’s above Guilford?
Similarly, why are we concerned with New Alsace at this point?

It seems that economics is the driver and no one is paying attention to how the county can biologically and scientifically devise a plan that will take us into the future- responsibly.

DCRSD states in their letter to Council that:”Since its establishment, the board of DCRSD has spent its initial period getting its arms around the sewer issue in Dearborn County.” We need to be sure those arms don’t strangle our neighbors in the cities and towns.

Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawrenceburg Township

20 June 2006 Dearborn County Commissioners Meeting Notes

20 June 2006 Dearborn County Commissioners Meeting Notes

Present: Hughes, Chairman, Fox, and Benning
Also present: Pickens, Auditor, Messmore, Administrator, and Ewbank, Attorney

A uniformed county police officer was present.
Register Publications also covered the meeting.
The meeting room was full- approximately 60 people present.

[NOTE: Both candidates for D-3 County Commissioner were present, cordial, and seated next to each other: Ralph Thompson-Republican and the new candidate put up by the Democrat Caucus last week – Frank Linkmeyer.]

1. Chris McHenry for Dearborn County Historical Society – requested consideration for $10,ooo in the 2007 budget, as usual.

2. County Farm- Mike Heffelmire- was told to get a survey to mark off the shooting range for the Boy Scouts on the farm so as to keep other park uses away from that area. Lease was OK’d for Scouts and 4H with that provision. Heffelmire also told commissioners that the Boy Scouts had a $10,000 grant from the Dearborn Foundation. They used all but $157 and RETURNED THAT TO THE FOUNDATION. Stated this to show this was the only time the foundation had money back and attested to their honesty.
Later at 7PM Steve Doll- Forester- opened 3 bids for county timber on 278 trees (93 of them white ash as they are trying to harvest ahead of the white ash bore.) Ray Benham was $21,000, E&H Logging for $24,000, and John Cooley (couldn’t hear and spelling?) $18,500. Tabled for 1 month to look over, as the income seemed low to the commissioners.

3. SEIMAC (Media Arts Council with Leroy McCluskey and Dave Abner)- requested $7500 in startup money and equipment money to be funneled through HHH (Historic Hoosier Hills) as their status as a non-profit apparently works better that way. Lengthy presentation on audio and visual options they will try to put out for county residents to use. OK’s to go to Council for 2007 budget consideration or one time grant.
[NOTE: This may be hard for Council to justify, as we are short on funds for basics like roads and sewers, etc.]

4. Weights and Measures- Jeff Smith- gave annual report and 2007 budget. Requesting a truck AGAIN. His own has 230,000 miles on it. Mentioned he may be able to go full time. Questions on who insures him and his truck. Seems that the county currently treats him as an outside contractor.

5. Transportation and Engineering- Todd Listerman-
Freightliner approved for 2 chassis for $113,252
Kaffenberger only bidder- approved for dump beds, spreader boxes, and plows for $60,370 for two.

6. PUBLIC HEARING FOR SUN VALLEY ACRES ZONE CHANGE opened at 7:15 PM

Mark McCormack- Planning Director- gave the overview of the county Plan Commission meeting and the 4 motions that failed. He also explained the options open to the commissioners to approve, deny, or let sit for 90 days at which point it would be effectively denied if they didn’t act. The decision was certified on May 31, 2006- so the 90 days starts from that point in time.
He noted there was no concept development plan submitted with the final presentation in May and that Kent stated he would make it moderate density at about 1.07 lots per acre average. [NOTE: This is actually on the borderline of being high density at less than an acre per lot]
The plan went from 265 to 180 units. They want to cluster.
The commissioners have to consider the worst-case scenario of highest density if they rezone without a concept development plan.
Sewers will be provided by a partnership of DCRSD, SDRSD, and Lawrenceburg. A R turn lane is recommended.
The 5 criteria for a zone change were posted at the end of the PowerPoint.

Residents speaking in opposition: (At this meeting there were none speaking publicly to support the proposal except for Tom Kent, the developer)

Dennis Sparks- Concerned with education at South Dearborn and especially the potential doubling of enrollment at Manchester Elementary. The 500 petitioners represent practically everyone on 48 up to Negangard’s Corner. Read the Comp Plan and doesn’t think that they fit with #2. These are not MODERATE density- many homes are on large acres- like 8 acres. Section 520 of the code states you have to view this as worst-case scenario – condos even. You should not do this without a VISUAL plan- this will affect our property values. Sent an email to the 3 commissioners and apologized for his tone- but THIS IS MY HOME! The infrastructure is not there YET.

Irwin Diehl- reminded them that there is not a formal commitment from Kent on the actual density. By removing the detailed site map in May- Kent removed the commitment. We will have a serene rural residential area succumbing to high density. He is using the highest end of moderate density across the board. Kent is the front person for the PERFECT PLAN– and if this goes through and they want to make more profit- they will take it over from him.
People’s single biggest investment is their home. They borrow against it to finance college and other things for their family. There is a real and a subjective value to this “nest egg” that we call home. When you choose rural living that is the quality of life you desire.
Sheriff Lusby campaigned saying that increased density leads to increased crime and increased traffic and accidents.
When you put rats in a cage and it becomes crowded they either become depressed and withdrawn or get aggressive. There are 22 adjoiners who oppose this and 4-5 who want it. There are 387 acres opposed and 174 acres who want it.
Please consider and apply the criteria in the zoning code and comp plan to deny this. We are generally not anti development- we support reasonable- low-density plans that would not burden the community.

Johnny Schott- Has loved DC for 50 years and moved home and two businesses here. I set out to buy an EXISTING home so as not to contribute to urbanization here. People do NOT come here for density- they have that in Ohio. Money is not the only value we have- peace, quiet, and tranquility are also valued. Dearborn County desperately needs to correct the oversight and create levels of residential zoning. Deny this until we get that commitment or those levels in place.

Eric Watkins- moved here a year ago- to be a long term resident. Treat this as worst-case scenario. His relocation company even noted that they couldn’t approve his home unless it was among similar homes because of the value issues. This does not meet the burden of proof needed for the zone change.

Brian Groh – Noted again the large number of residents opposed. (the room was full)Citizens took time to come and have their voices heard and to obtain 500 petitions. They are angry because this is grossly out of character. There are issues with SR48 and US 50 traffic that are not resolved yet. Many people do not agree that you should be able to do anything you want with your property. Try to find a reasonable solution for both sides. MANY PEOPLE FEEL THAT THE MAJORITY OF YOU ARE SO PRO-DEVELOPMENT THAT YOU WILL ALLOW THIS ANYWAY. In their eyes the only way to fix this is to vote you out. Those of us here hope you can fix this and we can say you did it right.

Chet Wolgamot – gave a clear depiction using the county plat map books of the 6 square miles surrounding the development. He showed no ¼ or ½ acre lots. He showed a small amount of 1-3 acre lots. He showed how some small lots were combined to one owner to make a large lot site. Using county records at the assessor’s office he showed that virtually all the 6 square miles is greater than 3-acre home sites.
“We are all agonizingly familiar with section 540 of the code.” He went on to address each criterion for a zone change in that section.
This is the worst cost to benefit rate of any land use.
The stark contrast between rural and suburban uses cannot be overstated.
How can you transition to 99% low density?
There is nothing fair is deciding to put an urban subdivision here.
The county has a SURPLUS of homes in the 150-200K range as referenced in the comp plan.
There is NO community need- this price range is pursued by developers because it is of max. profit to them- not to the community.
There are as of yesterday- 170 residential properties on the market in the county. Of these 39 are in L-bg, 60 in South Dearborn, and 70 in Sunman Dearborn.
The Plan Commission member in May said this was out of character with the current conditions. Judicial review would show that this is in violation of this regulation- we believe.
The most desirable use would be with the existing community. To conserve property values you cannot go with the worst-case scenario- even PC agreed.
How can trading on existing owners’ rights be responsible growth?
This should not be based on the developer’s profitability. Be responsible- the 500 supporters are real people.
Kent has minimal risk- tell him no- he will come back again with a better plan- both beneficial and compatible with the community. We do not want the land to lay fallow- but to be beneficial- 50-80 homes would be our plan.

Jerry Watts – What is the growth potential for this? We lost the 2nd largest employer- Seagrams…

TOM KENT- responded to issues. This will be moderate density, SD schools wants students- per Tom Book. I didn’t show property lines because it is not required.
Kent put up tax maps showing tax lots. He said the comp plan promotes safe and affordable housing. He wants 3 products in this development in ranges from $150 -$230K.
Development should occur where infrastructure is- and this is 2400 ft from a sewer. [NOTE: That sewer line is not big enough to serve this- they will have to lay another one and go much further back into Lawrenceburg to the larger main.]
We are on 2 state highways.
Wish we had a land use map telling us where to develop. There was some consensus at fall master plan land use workshop that this are should be R. I live out here not every house here is a $400,000 house.
500 petitioners vs. 48,000 county residents as represented by the comp plan.

FOX asked Kent to go on the record:
No condos?- Kent agreed – none.
1-3 acres?- Kent said yes- but he will cluster.
Buffers?- Kent plans on it.
Lowest price home?- Kent- $150,000.

Chet Wolgamot: rebutted as he said he was accused of lying. Kent can exaggerate as in saying he has 48,000 people and somehow none of them are here. Kent feels the plan will pass on merit alone. He’s using the Herman Goering approach- if you lie long enough people will believe.
Is a buffer one tree or 20 ft?
When PC requested moderate diversity- he did not meet the bare minimum. He plays you people and this gets old.
Wolgamot was stopped at this point to address the board.
He went on: We have to defend ourselves. He put up the density slide again- this is the key to the whole thing.

Chris Mueller- reminded the board that the price of the home is not always the issue. The same as the size is not. Small homes can have good quality- but most people have a picture of a $150,000 home in mind. Also asked if the price included the lot. This was not answered.

At 8:50 PM the Public comment was closed, though Benning had tried to close it earlier.

There was a legal opinion from McGill on 36-7-4-6.15 that questioned the ability of the COMMISSIONERS to obtain written commitments for a zone change.

Benning was in a hurry to make a motion for a favorable approval and READ but did NOT state how the 5 criteria were met for a zone change.
THERE WAS NO 2nd to that motion.
Motion failed.
There was no other motion- Fox nodded no when asked if he had another one.

[NOTE: Tonight I was reminded of a discussion I had with Rick Fox just hours before he was elected two years ago. He talked about his philosophy of development. Tonight it seemed that he was staying true to his previously stated, personally held, ideals.]

If there is no further action by the end of 90 days from May 31st this zone change will be denied.

[NOTE: After the meeting I questioned Ewbank, the attorney, as to what a failed motion meant. He said it is still alive for 90 days from May 31st. They could act on it, though he didn’t think they would. I asked if they would announce it- he said he’d hoped they would and that it had to be part of the official agenda to be considered. Official agendas are often not available till the day of or day before the meeting though.]


Claims and minutes were approved.

Messmore:
Contract as before with DCEDI for professional services for economic development was signed.
There was no report from Lobbyist John Frick & Associates.
Sonya Henry was appointed to SIEOC board to fill a vacancy.

Benning brought up the groundbreaking ceremony at the library expansion on Tues at 4PM per Sally Stenger. Wondered what they would do with their parking lot now. (County leases this to handle overflow parking) Ewbank thought lease might be a 30 day termination type though he hasn’t seen one yet. Messmore to investigate.
[NOTE: County will be in trouble without that lot- there are times when there is no parking available on Mary or High Street even now. County courthouse may need to build a parking area or utilize the I&M lot.

Ewbank noted in addition to survey work on county farm they are locating the pauper graves and marking the area. He also noted same suits as last meeting still in process.

Meeting adjourned around 9:30 PM

Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawrenceburg Township

DEARBORN COUNTY REGIONAL SEWER DISTRICT, JUNE 15, 2006

DEARBORN COUNTY REGIONAL SEWER DISTRICT, JUNE 15, 2006
BY: KATHY SCOTT

MEMBERS PRESENT:
PAT HOLLAND, DAVE ENZWEILLER, MIKE HANKINS, JOHN MAXWELL (LATE), BARRY PRUSS, RODNEY DENNERLINE, BRET FEHRMAN (ABSENT)
ALSO PRESENT: L.EHNER ATTY, DOUG BAER, TOM QUINN

MINUTES APPROVED FOR MAY 4TH AND MAY 18TH

TREASURER’S REPORT APPROVED, (COULD NOT HEAR MOST OF IT).


CHUCK ANDRES:
ADDRESSED THE BOARD WITH INFORMATION CONCERNING JOINING A PILOT PROGRAM WITH THE STATE, TO EVALUATE PRIVATE SEPTIC SYSTEMS AND ANY OTHER TYPE OF
SYSTEM, NOT ON A, MAJOR SEWER SYSTEM. HE BROUGHT UP THE PROBLEMS WITH ALLEN COUNTY AND FORT WAYNE. ALL DUE TO
THE LEGISLATIVE ACT OF 2004.

ANDRES STATED THE GUIDELINES BEING SET UP BY INDIANA BOARD OF HEALTH AND IDEM. DEARBORN COUNTY WOULD USE THE ALLEN COUNTY GUIDELINES, PAYING ATTENTION TO 9 SPECIFIC ITEMS. (I THINK THESE CAN BE FOUND ON IDEM’S WEB SITE).

ANDRES ASKING IF THE BOARD WOULD WANT TO BE A PILOT SEWER
DISTRICT. THERE APPARENTLY IS A FEE TO THE BOARD OR COUNTY.
ALSO THERE WOULD BE A FEE TO THE INDIVIDUAL HAVING THEIR SYSTEM INSPECTED.

LOOKING TO UNINCORPORATED AREAS ONLY.

QUESTION: HOW DO YOU GET PERMISSION TO GO ONTO SOMEONE ELSE’S PROPERTY, TO INSPECT THEIR WASTE SYSTEM? COULD NOT
ANSWER THIS.

STATE DEPT. OF HEALTH TO HAVE GUIDELINES WORKED OUT IN 2 – 3
MONTHS.

_____________________

PETER ELLIS: UPDATE ON CHATEAU POMIJE

DOUG BAER WANTED TO KNOW IF THE WINERY WOULD HAVE A SYSTEM ON SITE VS A FORCE MAIN.

ELLIS: “ST. LEON NOT ON BOARD YET. ST. LEON WANTS TO WORK OUT AN AGREEMENT”.

DOUG BAER, WANTS POMIJE TO SET ASIDE MONEY IN ESCROW

ELLIS: “LOOKING FOR POSSIBLE BOND MONIES, RESUBMITTING PLANS FOR ONSITE SYSTEM”.

BAER: “END OF MONTH IS RUN OUT TIME FOR WINERY. ESCROW ACCOUNT MAY DO IT”

ELLIS, WILL WORK WITH BAER

ESCROW ACCOUNT WITH AGREEMENT (MONIES FOR WASTE SYSTEM ONLY) WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE UNTIL FURTHER DECISION ON “IN LINE SEWER OR ON SITE SYSTEM”.


TUCKER: SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT, NORTH DEARBORN RD.

ST. LEON, WILLING TO SERVICE PROJECT.

SEWER LINE ON N. DEARBORN AND SHULLER

DOUG FARROW SAID, READY, WILLING AND ABLE TO TRANSPORT SEWAGE.

TUCKER WILL DO WHATEVER ST. LEON SAYS.

BOARD MEMBER, “WHY BRING THIS UP HERE” .NOT ANSWERED.

QUESTION ABOUT NEED FOR A NEW LINE. TUCKER WOULD BE SURPRISED IF A NEW LINE WOULD BE REQUIRED.

MAXWELL: A POSSIBLE UPGRADE OF EXISTING LINE

(A LOT OF TALKING GOING ON, NOT ABLE TO HERE)

BOARD: PASSED WITH A VOTE, BOARD TO SEND CORRESPONDENCE TO ST. LEON, THAT TUCKER WAS APPROVED.

(WHAT HAS THIS GOT TO DO WITH THIS BOARD?)


BETH O’LEARY: SEWER EXTENSION, SERENITY RIDGE

SUMMARIZED: O’LEARY TO FIND OUT HOW MANY VACANT LOT OWNERS WOULD WANT TO HOOK ONTO SEWER SYSTEM. DCRSD /ENGINEER TO DRAW UP NUMBERS FOR COST. OTHER OWNERS MAY BE COMPELLED TO HOOK ON, (THIS WAS SOMEONE’S QUESTION).
HANKINS: “ NO PRACTICE OF THIS BOARD TO FORCE HOOKUPS”

ANOTHER BOARD MEMBER ( I DO NOT REMEMBER WHO ) STATED:
“IN THE MINUTES – POLICY – EVERYONE TO HOOK ON”


MARK MCCORMICK, PLANNING OFFICE.

WOULD LIKE TO PARTNER WITH DCRSD (PER MEMORANDUM SENT TO DCRSD BOARD) TO CLARIFY CAPACITY ISSUES OF SEWER SYSTEMS. THE LETTERS REQUIRED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF SEWER COMPANIES ARE VERY VAGUE. THERE IS A LOT OF FOLLOWUP NEEDED WITH PRIMARY PLATT ISSUES WHEN IT COMES TO APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL. THIS IS NEEDED BECAUSE OF THE LG. NUMBER OF PLATT ISSUES IN THE FALL.

BOARD WILL REVIEW MEMORANDUM.


CONSTRUCTION BID MEETING AND OUTCOME – TOM QUINN

STEWART RD. AND COLE LE.,

IN AGREEMENT; 1.HOMEOWNER, WOULD HAVE ELECTRICIAN TO RUN ELECTRIC TO 30AMP BREAKER ON OUTSIDE OF HOUSE. 2. 80 PVC PIPE ACCEPTED 3. TRENCHING TOOL ACCEPTED, 6 INCH WIDE TRENCH

SINCE SOME OF THE SPEC’S CHANGED, LEHNER STATED “ JOB WOULD HAVE TO BE REBID “. BOARD AGREED TO PUT OUT FOR REBID, WOULD ALSO NEED TO ADVERTISE IT AGAIN.

QUESTION RAISED, WOULD, HOME OWNER HAVE OPTION TO MAINTAIN OR WOULD SEWER CO. MAINTAIN?

ALL EASEMENTS ATTAINED, NO ROAD CUTS NEEDED

(DO ANY OF THE BOARD MEMBERS OWN PROPERTY ON COLE LE.?)


AURORA AGREEMENT – BRETT FEHRMAN (ABSENT)

BOARD DISCUSSION:

LEHNER STATED SHE MET WITH RICHARD BUTLER, AND BUTLER VOLUNTEERED INFORMATION, RICHARD SUBMITTED PAPERS TO LEHNER.
(WHAT PAPERS? ARE THERE 13 PAGES?)
DENNERLEIN TO LEHNER, “WHO’S PAYING FOR THIS?”

DENNERLEIN, UNHAPPY WITH HVL, DOES NOT WANT HVL TO BUILD SEWER PLANT.

DENNERLEIN ASKED LEHNER IF SHE WAS REPRESENTING ANYONE IN HVL, IF SHE HAS A CONFLICT OF INTEREST.

LEHNER STATED “I DON’T REPRESENT ANYONE IN HVL”.

LEHNER OFFERED HER FEE AS $150.00 PER HOUR.

THEN MUCH DISCUSSION ON AGREEMENT, (VRUC, AURORA, GREENDALE)

LEHNER, STATED SHE MET WITH, PARVIN PRICE ABOUT VALLEY RURAL
POSITION. (13 PAGES AGAIN) AND HE WOULD NOT GIVE AN OPINION.
MULTIPLE FAULTS WITH 13 PAGES.

(IS THE 13 PAGES THE GREENDALE AGREEMENT?)


ALL OF THE LATER DISCUSSION CONCERNED THE GREENDALE AGREEMENT.

SO THE BOARD SET ASIDE THEIR NEXT MEETING FOR THE DISCUSSION ONLY OF THE GREENDALE AGREEMENT.

THERE IS A LOT AFFECTING THIS AGREEMENT:

TERRITORIES, IDEM TERRITORIES
POSSIBILITY OF LAW SUITS
WAIVER OF RIGHT TO REMONSTRATION (REGARDING ANNEXATION)
COMPETING RIGHTS
GREENDALE ADDING CAPACITY
TAP IN FEES, SURCHARGES
COST OF SERVICE STUDIES
WHO PAYS? “ SEWER CUSTOMERS, CO. TAXPAYERS, DEARBORN CO.”
OWNERSHIP OF LINES, LEASE BACK OF LINES
WHO BILLS CUSTOMERS
WHO WILL EXTEND LINES IF NEEDED AND BEAR COST
TRANSPORT OF SEWAGE

THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT MEETING SINCE IT INVOLVES A LARGE SECTION OF THE COUNTY AND POSSIBLE FUTURE WITH THE BORDERING INCORPORATED AREAS AND NON INCORPORATED AREAS
WITH THEIR OWN SEWER COMPANIES.

NEXT MEETING IN 2 WEEKS, (I BELIEVE THE BOARD MEANT AT THEIR, REGULAR SCHEDULED MEETING, JULY 6TH AT 7PM)



COUNTY COUNCIL MEETING: MIKE HANKINS

WORKING ON PRESENTATION TO COUNTY COUNCIL FOR REQUEST OF 4.2 MILLION DOLLAR, APPROPRIATION

COUNTY COUNCIL MEETS JUNE 21ST AT 5PM, ADMINISTRATION BLDG.



NEW BUSINESS: *VOTED YES TO PAY CLAIMS

*DOUG BAER, REQUESTING EQUIPMENT TO CREATE A
SECURE ENVIRONMENT FOR HIS DEPARTMENT. WILL
BRING COST TO NEXT MEETING


OTHER DISCUSSION:

LEHNER ASKED, WHAT HER PRIORITIES ARE NOW. MANY PHONE CALLS, PEOPLE STOPPING IN WITH QUESTIONS, TUCKER, EWBANKS, WOLPERT, RICHARD BUTLER ETC..

BOARD DISCUSSION:

BOARD CANNOT AFFORD THIS, BOARD DOES NOT HAVE PRIORITIES SET UP.

DECISION: PEOPLE NEED TO BRING TO BOARD FIRST THEN THEY (BOARD) WILL BRING IN LEHNER.


VERA BENNING OFFERED TO BE SECRETARY PER DENNERLINE, NO MOVEMENT ON THIS.
(V.BENNING, WAS PRESENT TAKING NOTES)

A BOARD MEMBER ASKED LEHNER, WHY SHE CONTACTED PARVIN PRICE- VRUC’S ATTORNEY.

LEHNER: I THOUGHT IT WOULD BRING, VRUC TO THE NEGOTIATING TABLE.

LEHNER ASKED WHAT VRUC ‘S POSITION WAS ON GREENDALE AGREEMENT

LEHNER STATED SHE SENT CONTRACT OF GREENDALE AGREEMENT TO PARVIN PRICE.

(OBVIOUS THAT BOARD MEMBER (DENNERLINE) NOT HAPPY.)

DENNERLINE, “VRUC MAY SUE, IF DCRSD ENTERS INTO AGREEMENT WITH GREENDALE.

LEHNER, SAID, “TO KNOW VRUC’S POSITION WILL FORCE GREENDALE’S HAND.”

(MORE CONVERSATION, COULD NOT HEAR)

LEHNER WILL WORK ON GREENDALE ISSUE

ADJORNED 9:40 PM

KATHY SCOTT
LOGAN TOWNSHIP

ATTORNEYS TAKE ISSUE WITH BZA PROCEDURES ON TWO ITEMS

13 June 2006 Dearborn County BZA Meeting Notes

ATTORNEYS TAKE ISSUE WITH BZA PROCEDURES ON TWO ITEMS

Present: Jim Deaton, Chairman, Mike Hall, and Jane Ohlmansiek
Also Present: Mark McCormack, Planning Director, and Arnie McGill, Att’y
Absent: Jake Hoog and Pat Baker

In approving the minutes from the March and May meetings the attorneys for the cell tower asked to have them further revised and possibly reopen the case. The attorney for the opponents (Lehner) objected, complaining that this was not on the agenda [NOTE: Not being on the agenda doesn’t seem to be an issue with Lehner at other times with other boards] and the appeal period had passed. [NOTE:There seemed to be some issue with filing appeals when minutes were unavailable.] Following arguments on both sides the board, with the BZA attorney’s advice, approved the minutes and informed the cell tower attorney and clients that they could appeal the decision or reapply.

New Business:

1. The dimensional variance for 150 ft of road frontage for owner Anthony Hon on 20 acres of Ag land in Kelso Township on Werner Lane off Bittner Road was approved. Neighbors were generally OK with the idea as long as the easement did not take any of their land. The approval hinged on providing a 50 ft easement all the way back and a maintenance agreement being drawn up for Werner Lane with all the users of the lane.
Ohlmansiek motioned, Hall 2nd. Passed.

2. Tom Blondell of Woods Lamping and Lehner withdrew the application for Tim Kramer and owners for a conditional use of a private recreational facility for Jacobs Conservation Group, LLC on Jacobs Road in Kelso Township.
Deaton noted they couldn’t consider the application if a violation existed and Mark Mitter, Becky Mitter, Jackie Kraus, Chris McCann, and myself all gave testimony that the group is in violation and has been for a number of months.
Blondell objected to the public being able to give information to the BZA without notice. Deaton explained that the BZA routinely receives complaints like that and they then investigate. No decision is rendered without notice to the property owners. The rest of this discussion was actually covered under Administrative at the end of the meeting:
Jacobs Conservation application noted they have 10 members- but the pictures from the site show at least 20 ATVs at times. Large parties, 4 campers, bonfires close to a neighboring home, noise, dust, late night ATV activities, trespass and property damage, and generally an inability to peacefully co-exist with the adjoining neighbors seem to be the issues.
Blondell at one point got up and turned off the Planning Dept. computer screen. (Mitter had returned to the slide that focused on the definition of recreational use in answer to Blondell’s question regarding that definition.) The Planning Director had to turn it back on and informed him that it belonged to the county. There appeared to be an interchange going on between them as the meeting proceeded.
Blondell tried to make a case for pre-existing grandfathered use and Kramer stated there were only two large parties- graduation and Memorial Day. This was refuted as pictures of the 20 ATVs were circulated to news people several weeks prior to grad and Memorial Day times.
Blondell questioned the road quality opinions. Mitter reminded the board that he was a county councilman, who reviews road budgets and plans, served on the comp plan, and also was chairman of the Plan Commission. He said he was qualified to address road matters in the county.
Blondell and Kramer noted they have 60 petitions supporting their activities. Mitter countered with the statement that having 60 petitions is like getting a DUI and having your buddies stand before the judge saying you’re a good guy. It’s not relevant.
The board asked McCormack to investigate further- as they are already about 2 months into enforcement proceedings.
Mitter wanted action to be taken more quickly. It was noted that to cure the violation is simple- nothing needs to be unbuilt – they just have to stop the activity.
McCormack and the enforcement officer will proceed with enforcement, per the BZA’s request.

3. Archie Crouch of The Survey Co- representing The Dearborn Realty Company (The Country Club) received approval for a conditional use for 6 duplexes (cabins for weekly rental to members and their families) on 114 acres of Ag land in Lawrenceburg Township. The adjoining property owners were OK with this as long as it is for weekly rentals and no expansions unless they come back to the BZA. Hall motioned and Ohlmansiek 2nd. Approved.

ADMINISTRATIVE:
The Jacobs Conservation, LLC enforcement issues - See notes above under #2.

The new county enforcement officer is also a planner- she starts Monday. Mark McCormack gave her high marks for organization and experience as well. Her name is Catherine Rademacher.

McCormack also updated the board on the US 50 studies and preliminary work on the 2007 budget.

Meeting adjourned at 10 PM.

[NOTE: BZA meetings are usually a matter of thoughtfully hearing opposing viewpoints and sifting through citizen’s issues to fairly resolve conflicting land use problems. At tonight’s meeting it was more like a three ring circus at times. Three lawyers were present (in addition to the BZA attorney.) Watching them spar with each other and the board and argue points in a manner more appropriate for a courtroom, reminded me that negotiating and working things out with neighbors is better handled by the “civilians” on the board. Well- placed questions and truthful answers usually point to an equitable solution for the parties involved. At one point I found myself wishing the board could swear people (and their lawyers) in before hearing them.
I had to smile as I listened to a certain lawyer argue for public notice, as this same lawyer has clearly circumvented that process on numerous occasions.
It is apparent that as the county grows and more people LIVE here, we will have to curb rude behavior more often. It is also apparent that certain uses are by their nature a nuisance. Going to someone else’s back yard to recreate with ATVs does not make it less of a problem- it only transfers it from your neighborhood to someone else’s. We need to be more conscious of - and courteous to - our neighbors.]


Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawrenceburg Township

A Real Plan for Better Service that Saves Money

South Dearborn Community School Corporation has an opportunity to overcome transportation challenges and improve student services with the new bus contracts. But that can only happen if the administration and the board are willing to try new things.

Whether the school owns the buses or contractors own the buses, someone in this community will be dishing out a lot of dough just to pay for those buses. Contractor’s, as well as the corporation, will also need to have spare buses on hand and people to maintain those buses.

Forty six buses at a cost of 75 grand a piece works out to 3.45 million dollars. The federal government allows buses to be depreciated over a period of five or nine years. Buses over nine years old really should not be transporting our children. A straight average gives you an annual cost of 690 thousand dollars a year for five years or 383.34 thousand dollars a year for nine years.

The current bus contract pays drivers 53 dollars per day. This works out to a total of 362.5 thousand per year. This figure does not include the payroll taxes contractors must pay. Payroll taxes include social security, unemployment, and worker’s compensation.

With costs this high, why would we put each of these buses on the road for little more than three hours per day?

South Dearborn has a number of problems that are directly linked to shortfalls in transportation.

First, kindergarten children only have transportation one way. This hurts attendance and keeps some of the children who need kindergarten the most out of the classroom.

Second, the school day for seventh through twelfth grade students is too short. This has led to the five period trimester block schedule, which has reduced the quality and quantity of instruction available to SD students in core subjects. Even when the class periods are longer, thirty six weeks of material simply cannot be covered in twenty four weeks. The school day has been shortened because three of the elementary schools are at least 10 miles from the main campus and our buses transport k-12.

Third, because k-12 are on the same bus, some parents are not comfortable allowing their children to ride the bus. This leads to more traffic problems.

Fourth, the distance of the main campus to the homes of many students creates a financial hardship for families who’s children participate in after school programs. This hardship sometimes prevents participation in these programs.

Fifth, with 70% of Dearborn County Residents working outside of the county, picking children up at 5:00 pm is impossible for any parent who gets off work at 4:30 or later and must travel US 50.

Sixth, beginning in January more than two thousand students will be beginning and ending the school day at the same time on the main campus. This will make a bad traffic situation worse.

Other school districts have over come these problems with a staggered school schedule and South Dearborn could do the same. Yes, the buses will have to travel more miles and will use more fuel, but in the long run the improved transportation service will save families time and money. It will also improve the outcomes for many children.

Twelve buses could transport all Junior High Students and High School Extracurricular Students in the morning to classes and practices beginning at 8:00 am. Buses arrive at 7:45 for breakfast.

Twenty-two buses transport the corporation’s elementary school students for classes beginning at 9:00 am. Buses arrive at 8:45 for breakfast.

Eight buses transport High School Students, primarily freshmen and sophomores, to school for classes that begin at 10:00 am. Buses arrive at 9:45 for breakfast.

At noon eight buses transport Kindergarten and preschool children home and eight buses transport Kindergarten and preschool children to school for afternoon classes.

At 3:10 eight buses transport Junior High students not participating in after school activities home.

At 4:10 twenty two buses transport elementary students home.

At 5:10 twelve buses transport High School and Junior High Students participating in after school programs home.

What are the advantages?

First, you only need 27 buses and five of those are spares. This saves 1.425 million dollars up front or 158 grand to 285 grand per year. You also save insurance premiums.

Second, you only need 22 drivers. Paying each of these drivers $11.00 per hour eight hours per day, you save $14,000 a year. This would almost pay for an instructional assistant. But you don’t need 22 drivers eight hours per day. You need eight drivers full time, four drivers 5 ½ hours, four drivers 4 hours and six drivers 3 hours. At $11.00 per hour the total wages would be $237,600. This saves over $124 thousand per year. This is nearly enough to pay three full time teachers.

Third, every child will have transportation to and from kindergarten.

Fourth, children seventh grade through twelfth grade can participate in extracurricular activities even if their parents work out of town or the family doesn’t have a car.

Fifth, a later start to the school day will improve attendance and achievement for Elementary and High School students.

Sixth, Junior and Senior High School students can again have a full year of instruction in core subjects.

Seventh, the hours home after school without adult supervision will be significantly reduced for most students.

Eighth, the traffic problems before and after school at the main campus will be greatly reduced.

Fuel will cost the corporation more with staggered schedules, but in the long run this change would save money for the community at large and improve outcomes for South Dearborn’s children.

Financial Snapshot Dearborn County Regional Sewer District

Financial Snapshot Dearborn County Regional Sewer District

DCRSD Budget Major Expenses from 2003 through April 2006

94,837.46 Lisa Lehner, (Wood, Lamping, and Lehner, Attorneys)
67,500.30 GRW Engineering Consultants
28,549.42 Woolpert Engineering Consultants
22,594.51 Quinn Engineering
6,532.00 Seitz Insurance-liability and bonding
5,500.00 St. Leon TIF Sewer Study
3,024.49 DuWel Office Furniture and supply
2,329.30 Mailing and postage
2,055.05 Wullenwebber transcription services
1,632.87 Mike Hankins, Chairman (includes mileage cost of $82.87)
900.00 Atlas Appraisal services
725.00 Hall rentals and refreshments
646.25 Rainbow Printing
493.60 Pat Holland, board member (includes mileage cost of $93.60)
400.00 Rodney Dennerline, board member
400.00 Barry Pruss, board member
400.00 Brett Fehrman, board member
400.00 Dave Enzweiler, board member
355.00 Indicom phones
340.00 Wendelman Sound System
224.23 Register Publications public notices
228.03 Walmart supplies
200.00 John Maxwell, new board member
160.00 Memberships and meeting fees
50.00 Greg Vollmer, former board member


INCOME since 2003:

125,000.00 Seed Money 5/1/03
357,000.00 County Council Interlocal agreement “loan”
100,000.00 Grant money 11/22/04 transferred $74,000 to interest bearing acc’t
200,000.00 Project Funds 1/24/06
883.44 Interest Income from savings

Balances in accounts: (some is already “spoken for”)

21,907.28 Savings acc’t
352,169.68 Seed money
177.87 Grant acc’t
167,499.16 Project Funds

Information taken from Excel speadshhets of accounts provided by Doug Baer for DCRSD

Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawrenceburg Township

6 June 2006 Dearborn County Commissioner Meeting Notes

6 June 2006 Dearborn County Commissioner Meeting Notes

Present: Hughes, President, and Fox
ABSENT: Benning
Also present: Pickens, Auditor, Ewbank, Attorney, and Messmore, Administrator.

There was no county police officer present at this meeting.
Register Publications also covered this meeting.

1. OKI- Mr. Policinski gave an overview of all OKI services provided to the county, primarily in hiring our original plan director, the Aurora-G-dale bike trail, basic transportation info, SR1 truck issues, Stateline traffic, Soil and Water District management of Tanners Creek, Traffic Studies and Transportation data, US 50 Gateway Study with ME to tie land uses to the corridor, and the new MPO- Metropolitan Planning Organization. Paperwork show that we have accumulated $790,000 in transportation funding that is now available to us through the MPO for certain types of projects. Bob Koehler will be our rep with OKI as he has been attending the MPO meetings in INDY for nearly a year now. OKI wants to help us with our growth. – NOT BE A BIG BROTHER.
Todd Listerman asked several pointed questions at this point regarding the “pots” of money and their potential types of uses. Rick Fox asked about a timeline on US 50 issues. OKI and Bill Miller replied that they could “dance around the issue” in public if they wanted. Implication is that no one knows when US 50 will be done.

2. Todd Listerman- Highway funds update.
Listerman received approval to request an exception to the Bells Branch project to just do the bridge and not the access points.
Contract for tracking software was signed by commissioners.
Request for Level 5 engineering to get additional geotech work for $2850 on the Slab Camp Creek realignment and bridge area of N. Dearborn Road was Ok’d as long as the funding is checked with Pickens records.
Listerman detailed the results of the May County Council meeting as to what was approved. For details see that previously on the blog in the May 2006 Council notes. Fox and Hughes questioned why Council didn’t approve all the roads to be paved and wanted to know if Listerman had explained the reasoning- to be sure they didn’t degrade without topcoats. Listerman explained Council’s position on this – only wanting roads 18 ft and wider to be done. The total paving cost dropped from $900,00 plus to $679,636. Some other money was spent doing side stripes on roads as well as centerlines.
Fox agreed that the point system evaluation of roads should be used and roads should not be done because somebody knows somebody. It should be based on need and not on commissioners picking them.
Fox also asked Listerman to check on 4 problems: Collier Ridge slip, Guilford Hill slip moving again, Guardrail between New Alsace and Dover on North Dearborn, and Schantz Road ditching.
Listerman talked about getting a crew together to just do ditching and widening.
Hughes asked about Wilson Creek. Turned out INDOT REMOVED IT FROM THE SYSTEM because no design had been done for years on it. Listerman write a letter to the INDOT Commissioner petitioning them to replace it on the list as it was in the top 5 on our Long Term repair list and we have our 20% match.
Hughes suggested that Listerman get hospital to help get that back on the list also as it is access for them.

3. Doug Baer- DCRSD- Cole Lane easement signed and Lisa Lehner will get it recorded. Ewbank said it was a standard temporary easement.

4. Claims and minutes signed.

An amendment was presented that Lisa Lehner sent over for the DCRSD (County-wide sewer approval desiring a change in the county’s minutes from the Nov 15, 2005 meeting.)

Pickens noted that this can be an amendment in the June 6 minutes and he’ll cross-reference it to the Nov 15th ones. As the books are continuous it is not proper to change them- only to amend.
The text of the document prepared by Lehner and signed by commissioners is below:
[NOTE: The text changes are noted in red print]

AMENDMENT TO MINUTES OF THE DEARBORN COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING DATED NOVEMEBER 15,2005
WHEREAS, the Board of Commissioners of Dearborn County held a meeting on November 15, 2005 at which meeting a quorum was present and at which meeting the Board agreed that the expansion of the Dearborn County Regional Sewer District was necessary for the public health, safety, convenience and welfare of the County and that it was feasible; and
WHEREAS, meeting minutes of such meeting were prepared and adopted by the Board of Commissioners of Dearborn County and the Board desires to describe this discussion in more detail.
NOW THEREFORE, the Board of Commissioners of Dearborn County approve and accept these amended meeting minutes such that the following language is deleted from the meeting minutes of November 15, 2005:

"REGIONAL SEWER DISTRICT Doug Baer and Mike Hankins addressed the Board to discuss the Regional Sewer District. Mr. Fox read the following: "There is a need for Dearborn County Regional Sewer District to provide county wide service in Dearborn County unincorporated areas currently unserved by municipal providers or by the current boundaries of the South Dearborn Regional Sewer District. The Board of Commissioners hereby authorizes the Dearborn County Regional Sewer District to expand the boundaries of the district to provide sewer service to Dearborn County's unincorporated areas currently unserved by a municipal provider or by the current boundaries of the South Dearborn Regional Sewer District."
Rick Fox motioned to authorize the Regional Sewer District as quoted in the previous statement. Jeff Hughes seconded. VOTE: ALL ayes, motion carried.
There was extensive discussion on the issue after the initial motion by Mr. Fox and before the second by Mr. Hughes."

And the Board of Commissioners of Dearborn County hereby approve and accept this Amendment such that the following language is added:

"REGIONAL SEWER DISTRICT Doug Baer and Brett Fehrman addressed the Board to discuss the Regional Sewer District. Mr. Fox read the following: "There is a need for Dearborn County Regional Sewer District to provide county wide service in Dearborn County unincorporated areas currently unserved by municipal providers or by the current boundaries of the South Dearborn Regional Sewer District. The Board of Commissioners hereby authorizes and requests that the Dearborn County Regional Sewer District expand the boundaries of the district to provide sewer service to Dearborn County's unincorporated areas currently unserved by a municipal provider or by the current boundaries of the South Dearborn Regional Sewer District.
The Board agreed and confirmed that the inclusion of this territory in the Regional Sewer District is necessary for the public health, safety, convenience and welfare of Dearborn County and that the inclusion of the territory will be practical and feasible
Rick Fox moved to request that the Dearborn County Regional Sewer District expand the boundaries of the district, for the reasons stated above, to provide sewer service to Dearborn County's unincorporated areas currently unserved by a municipal provider or by the current boundaries of the South Dearborn Regional Sewer District. Jeff Hughes seconded. VOTE: All ayes, motion carried."

The Board of Commissioners of Dearborn County confirm that all other statements in the meeting minutes dated November 15, 2005 shall remain unchanged.

[NOTE: Looking back on my notes from the blog on November 15, 2005 I stated that Lisa Lehner and Brett Fehrman presented the county wide sewer proposal. Nowhere in this amendment does it show Lehner’s role in the meeting, presentation, or approval of this COUNTYWIDE sewer district. They did correct the other presenter from Hankins to Fehrman. The commissioners did not say: “The Board agreed and confirmed that the inclusion of this territory in the Regional Sewer District is necessary for the public health, safety, convenience and welfare of Dearborn County and that the inclusion of the territory will be practical and feasible.”
Rick Fox’s motion was not stated as in the amendment. He stated that they approve it as worded in Lehner’s typed wording for them to use that night. It’s obvious that they need the commissioners to invoke the “health, safety, and welfare provisions. But when they didn’t say it – they can’t just make it up!
Why such a big deal for these changes? Why do the changes not reflect who really said what?
The original 15 Nov 2005 commissioners meeting did not even have this item on their agenda. It wasn’t advertised in the paper. In fact there was no notice of the county sewer board going to countywide at all. Perhaps in all the hurrying up preparations got sloppy.]

5. Messmore- County Adm- opened two sealed bids for Workers Comp. He will get back to the board with recommendations. Bids were from IPEP (IN Public Employees Plan) and Bliss McKnight.

6. Ewbank- Attorney- noted a suit filed on prisoner searches and civil rights violations and also a claim from the Juvenile center regarding Employment issues going to Judge Humphrey.

Meeting adjourned at 7:15 PM

Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawrenceburg Township

Give Me Liberty or... $55,000 an Acre!

Mr. Andres has written:

"When a Town submits a proposal for bonds it needs to show how those bonds will be repaid. This includes a cash flow chart that shows when and where will the money come from and when will it be paid off. Revenue sources need to be shown, and in the case of the sewer the only revenue sources are 'connection' and 'user' fees. If you show that there will be XXX number of customers that will be providing that revenue you then need to provide a contract to collect those fees."

And, indeed, so the town officials did.

They have accumulated a large debt for people in St. Leon and people within the jurisdiction of St. Leon but who do not having voting rights in St. Leon. Yes, we know that it is legal. These folks included property owners who did not need, did not want and for some could not afford the connection fee, the cost of the grinder pump, the excavating cost to lay a pipe from the owners house to the sewer line, the continuing sewer service fees and the probable increased water fees. People will be and are forced to service their grinder pump, regardless of the weather, regardless of their own health.

The questions still are why was this done, why was there an additional one Million dollar 2003 extension of the system in 2003 and why is there now a plan for a 4 to 5 Million dollar plan for the extension of the St. Leon sewer plant.

The sewer plant representative mentioned that at present there the sewage plan has an available facility for over 1000 new connections. That is a lot of connections and a lot of money for the sewer board account and for the operators of the sewage system. 1000 connections might indicate 1000 more houses build in our area. What else could it signify?

One can wonder if this sewer system was instituted for the enrichment of a few via the coerced connections of neighbors and citizens of this county where the median income is but 43,000 dollars a year. This is shameful.

The Dearborn County Development Economic Development website has a list of some properties for sale as industrial sites. There is a parcel of land along I-74 of a little over 20 acres advertised a having utilities and being sewer serviced. The land is offered at 55 thousand dollars an acre. If it is all sold the owner will harvest over 1 million dollars. The name of the owner is Andres. I have no idea whether it is our Mr. Andres, relatives of his or someone from an entirely different family. Perhaps it is one of those strange coincidences.

Now it is conceivable that the Town of St.Leon's officials find the costs referred to above as insignificant. They are business men, and entrepreneurs. However there are property owners affected by this sewage system who find it a heavy and needless burden. Again, it is shameful.

The actual mechanics or plan of the system is really not pertinent except for the fact that Mr. Andres mentions that there had been "some inconsistency in the original installation that was causing then system to operate inefficiently and would have caused serious problems down the road." Well, what's this all about? This reads a bit like a euphemism, a whitewash? Who was responsible for this "inconsistency," were they insured for their "inconsistency" or do the coerced citizens have to pay for the correction of this "inconsistency"?

Now Mr. Andres has mentioned that when bonds are issued in a town's name the integrity of the town is at stake. Well,unfortunately the integrity of the town of St. Leon is a laughing matter since a TV program aired and a newspaper described a chaotic St. Leon meeting during which a respected elected town official was quoted as saying to a police officer "throw him out before I knock him out."

What is more important, the town's former integrity if there was such a thing or the financial viability of our friends and neighbors?

A default on these bonds would bring in a fresh, disinterested receiver who'd put the proper perspective on this muddled situation.

An alternative would be for the state or federal government to buy back the bonds and put and end to this nonsense. The amount of money involved to the state or federal government would be insignificant. However the Honorable John Nugent and the Honorable Bob Bishoff show no interest in helping and neither does our esteemed United States Senator Dick Lugar.

It seems that all elected officials want this burden placed upon our citizens. It is so easy for politicians to put the responsibility for their actions upon the citizens.

I still wonder who urged the elected officials to take on this enormous debt and the impending debt which is causing so much angst and anxiety among our friends and neighbors. Was it at the urging of housing development companies, sewage operating companies, companies who sell products to sewage system operators? Who?


Alan Stanley Freemond, Sr.

Jackson Township

Sewer Comments From Former St. Leon Town Council member

I have no idea where Freemond gets his information but it is obviously from someone who does not know the facts and he selectively chooses to challenge those aspects of the Sewer operation that will continue to inflame some 130 people and not resolve the issue. His remarks are an insult to the some 900 intelligent people that made the correct decision some 10 years ago and connected to the sewer system as was required. I do not know if he is one of the 130 that made the wrong decision. He knows little or nothing about how the system operates and does not take the time to become informed. This system is a 'low pressure' system that operates differently then a 'gravity' system. The original collection lines that were installed were in reality two separate collection 'loops', one on the North side of I-74 and the other on the South side that were independent of each other.

He talks about the School Corporation paying for the upgrade of the recent line installed which is completely untrue. The School Corporation paid for only those portions of the Sewer connection that effected them just as any other developer is required to do in order to connect to the system. I am sure the minutes of the public School Board meeting at which I (Town Council member) discussed these issues with the Board are available and should reflect the Corporations responsibility for payments to the Sewer. Perhaps Freemond should contact them for those minutes. The size upgrade of the line and other mainline extensions was done at the expense of the Sewer. These upgrades were undertaken for four specific reasons;

1. The School Corporation indicated to us that they had another School building of equal or greater size that was on the drawing boards that would be constructed in a few years. We then on our own fiscal initiative and expense, decided to increase the line size which saved them the expense of doing it at a later date.

2. We connected the South side 'loop' to the North side 'loop' which accomplished several money saving issues one of which is that the flow from the South 'loop' can be reversed in the case of an emergency such as what happened when the County broke the line on Whites Hill Road this past year. This ability saved time money and aggravation for the Customers served on the South.

3. In order to make this work efficiently we completed the line in the Town and closed the 'loop' down Hwy. 46. Again this will save the customers money by doing this now rather then later.

4. During the Engineers study of this project, it was discovered some inconsistency in the original installation that was causing the system to operate inefficiently and would have caused serious problems down the road. By upgrading at this time it prevented some very costly repairs in future years.

You can see that every thing that was completed at this time was done on a fiscally responsible basis with the Customers well being in mind. These upgrades at this time allowed us to scale back the rate increase that was recently enacted.

Municipal Bonds are different from other bonds in that not only the integrity of the Town is at stake but also financial viability is on the line. When a Town submits a proposal for bonds it needs to show how those bonds will be repaid. This includes a cash flow chart that shows when and where will the money come from and when will it be paid off. Revenue sources need to be shown, and in the case of the sewer the only revenue sources are 'connection' and 'user' fees. If you show that there will be XXX number of customers that will be providing that revenue you then need to provide a contract to collect those fees. The only legal way this can be accomplished is through an Ordinance that in essence provides a contract with the customers. All of the Ordinances that were enacted were done so according to the State Statute in an open advertised public meeting. Few if any customers were at those meetings to learn about the fee structure and other provisions much less voice their opinion one way or the other. It is easy 'after' the fact to criticize when you have no input into the discussion and to distort the facts when you are not present when they are presented.

It would be in the best interest of every one to get the true facts before they continue to spread rumors that are untrue. Once you understand why certain actions were taken you will see that the best interests of customers and the Citizens well being were the driving force. Should Freemond want to get the TRUE FACTS I will be glad to inform him.

Chuck Andres

St. Leon

23 May 2006 County Council Meeting Notes

Dearborn County Council Plays the Money Game for 5 ¼ Hour Meeting

23 May 2006 County Council Meeting Notes

Present:
Charlie Fehrman, Chairman, Mark Mitter, Liz Morris, Dennis Kraus, and Bo Lansing.
Absent: Bill Ullrich and Tom Cheek
Also present: Cary Pickens, Auditor, and Bryan Messmore, Administrator

There were no uniformed officers present at this meeting.

Register Publications covered the meeting also.

1. Dearborn Highland Arts Council- Marilyn Bowers- Approved $1000 from Youth Services for Gateway to the Arts to subsidize classes for children and a parent.

2. Sunman Dearborn Summer Art- 2 week program- Ruth Ann Batta- Approved $1000 from Youth services.

3. Library Capital projects- Sally Stenger from L-bg and Mary Alice Horton from Aurora- received their annual approval on a 3-year plan.
Pat Ritzmann was also appointed for 4 years to the L-bg Library Board.

4. Prosecutor’s Office- Aaron Negangard- presented the Sheriff/Prosecutor’s Office booklet on Law and Order published recently in the local newspaper from discretionary funds.

Recovered $15,000 in seized assets from drug busts.
They need a fund to put money from the mayor’s for office supplies travel and conference expenses on the Special crimes Unit – Reimbursed to County General.
Requested $10,000 in investigational funds for a murder trial- Granted from riverboat fund.

5. Planning Dept- Mark McCormack- Requested $18,000 in litigation expenses- Tabled to allow to get this at later meeting.
$3958.60 approved out of contingency fund to cover current expenses for legals.

6. Margaret Minzer and Dennis Kraus, Jr. presentation on GIS status – see commissioner meeting notes in early May for details. Council advised Minzer to develop a wish list with subsets for budget hearings.
Kraus Jr. was approved to use $60,000 of his $80,000 corner perpetuation fund to use GPS to locate section corner markers.

7. Health Dept.- Doug Baer and Terry Miller- Public Health Coordinator- requested Identicard system credentialing equipment for $10,000. Tabled.

8. Charlie Fehrman announced that PSEG is appealing their taxes and if they win there will be a 10% reduction in the budget- across the board.

9. DCRSD- Sewer Board- Mike Hankins accompanied by John Maxwell and Brett Fehrman- asked for $4.4 million for SDRSD membership and expansion and $1.5 million for St. Leon expansion projects supposedly for TIF areas primarily.
Hankins comments:
In 2003 DCRSD got $125,000 from County and $100,000 from DC Foundation as seed money for 370 sewer hookups.
In 2005 DCRSD changed boundaries to take in the entire county not currently serviced.
This year with Woolpert study DCRSD discussed the ability to own part of a sewer treatment plant and want to join SDRSD. Initially SDRSD had some members who were skeptical about the county treating wastewater. Now the skepticism has waned.
The other site is in St. Leon where 2 TIFs need treatment. We need funding to treat sewage in the TIFs in the northern part of the county- to be shovel ready.
The first sewer construction is Stewart St and Cole Lane to be bid and finished this summer.
We can eventually get pipe, collect fees, and repay the county.
Lawrenceburg says if we put in $1mil they will loan $5 mil.
Mitter asked when revenue stream might start to come back to county. Hankins said there are 1250 customers we have to serve,
Mitter- 36 months or more?
No real answer.
Priority is West Aurora. VRUC is an issue. Pernod Ricard seat may be open- they do 1 mil gpd. County could own Pernod Ricard’s share and new company could pay county for the sewage treatment.
Pernod Ricard can assign capacity to purchaser or divide it equally among the shareholders of SDRSD or buy it or…
Two primary objectives: Gain treatment capacity and enter interlocal agreement to expand St. Leon plant.
SDRSD treats 10 mil gpd.
Buy in to St. Leon would not be equity so we do not inherit debts.
Mitter asked how $4.4 mil was determined at SDRSD – Answer was it was the same numbers that VRUC was given a couple years ago.
Woolpert Study data will have another report in July from all the entities showing assets and liabilities.
Question asked: Growth and Development Fund has slightly over $5mil. If we use 80% of that fund what about other county projects?
Charlie Fehrman sees it as a way to get MORE money to fund jail and gov’t building remodeling for office space.
Hankins sees a 10-15 year payback time. Pickens said TIFs can then bond out and pay bonds back on sewers.
Kraus- before we spend $4.4 mil we should have a full board here.
Ask Ewbank to draw up the interlocal agreement with DCRSD and the County and vote at later meeting. They need $1.5 mil for St. Leon too. Will set meeting in June for this (CURRENTLY THIS IS SET FOR JUNE 21st at 5:30 PM)

10. Lusby- Sheriff- needs $150,000 to cover inmates for the year. Currently owes Ripley County $50,000.
Council approved $90,000 to cover till August and tabled $60,000 all from Riverboat Revenue.
Lusby requested $50,000 for vehicle maintenance- Approved $25,000 and tabled $25,000
Lusby said commissary money under Indianan code can be used for a variety of expenses related to the jail- supplies, education cell phones, advertising, promoting sheriff’s offices, etc. They get about $3-5,000 a month. Pickens suggested they have Ewbank research and put it in resolution form for the next meeting. Approved Ewbank doing that.

11. Juvenile Dept.- Scott – Approved $6500 from riverboat revenue for DVR Recorder, travel, and residential supplies.
Overtime pay- will get ruling on how this works during sick or vacation weeks- Approved $3,000 tabled $3,000.
Part time youth attendant- Approved $10,000 and tabled $10,000.
All the above is out of county general.
Might look into commissary fund for some educational expenses here.
$5700 for computers from a grant will not be turned over to county general until they see if they get a grant to complete the project. This eliminates asking for it back.

12. Charlie Ashley- 911- approved $50,000 from relocation fund for 911 out of $300,000 in the 911 fund.

13. Todd Listerman – County Engineer and Transportation Director – discussed cross training both the bridge laborers and highway laborers to have CDL licenses to be truck ready for snow plowing etc. Advantage was in long snow periods with tired drivers- having more shifts. Also noted that all other counties do this with staff. “We’re the only ones around here without all CDL licensed staff!”
Mitter asked what happens if they can’t or won’t get CDL? Listerman said we’d have to evaluate the worker- we are eliminating the other position- so they have to have this training. They will be paid nearly $1,000 extra a year in salary- and the county is providing and paying for training.
Costs are covered with the elimination of 2 laborer positions that were not refilled.
Looking for summer intern for $8,000 and $11,000 for eng services contract.
Also wants $6,000 for charts software that tracks manpower, equipment, and material for future decisions. 15 counties use this and love it- locally Franklin, Ripley, and Decatur do. Annual fees after the first full year are $1500/year.
Safety training equipment - $19,500 requested.
Insurance agencies should reflect reduction in WC with this also.
HIGHWAY DEPT IS BEING REORGANIZED. There will no longer be D-1,2,3- but all Dearborn County. Listerman mentioned the elimination of the former highway director position (Mike Davis) and will get an ass’t to oversee just the highway crew at a reduced salary with a new job description. Salary similar to his surveyor/ass’t eng salary (Seiler). Bryan Messmore is working with him on this.
By August he hopes to have it all consolidated.
Council approved moving the above-mentioned funds to the appropriate accounts for Listerman’s work.
Salary ordinance was amended to include the additional CDL pay for the laborers. ($2862)
Bell’s Branch was funded $45,000 from Cum bridge for design of project. Cum bridge fund as $582,000 in it. Shared costs with Ohio County.

From the new MVH sub fund- formerly the 147 fund- now the 172 fund:
Total available is $1,767,847.98
Approved $15,000 to remove underground tank in D-2 garage for IDEM violation.
Approved $200,000 for Stateline and Stephens construction
Approved $160,000 for line striping- TWICE WHAT WAS ASKED- to add the white lines on the sides also- per Liz Morris and Mike Davis requests.
Approved $200,000 for 2 trucks
DID NOT APPROVE THE ENTIRE ROAD PAVING LIST:
Listerman tried to get the entire list approved per commissioner wishes and also stating that these roads had such thin bottom coats that they would not hold up. Numerous questions regarding the paving done on these in the first place- when and how approved. Listerman stated they were before his time- was going on what he could see in records and was told.
Council instead decided to approve topcoats for those road that were currently paved at 18 ft or greater width. That is # 2,6,7,11,13,14,15,16,17,18,19 on the paving list.
Those numbers correspond to these roads: Blue Creek, Huseman, Ireland, Probst (may include Water St to FD), Sawdon Ridge, Schwipps, Stewart, Voltz, wedge/levels Sawdon and Stewart, driveways on these roads, line striping for Huseman and Sawdon Ridge.
Roads eliminated from the list due to insufficient pavement width include: Ashe, Ester Ridge, Fox, Grimsley, Kuebel, McManaman, Pollard, Rice.

14. Bill Black- EMA- requested $5600 for siren maintenance and equipment repair. Approved from Riverboat.

15. Don Townsend -Building Dept.- gave a detailed accounting of services and fees and appealed for a full time inspector. Council approved $16,108 base salary plus the benefits for ’06 remainder. Salary for full year would be $27,615 plus benefits. Townsend intends to offer the job to the part timer.

Townsend’s comments included:
We have the only certified inspectors in the county. Do inspections for everyone – approximately 12,000 inspections a year with 4 full time and 1 part timer. Fees increased by $26,000 this year so far. Argosy’s expansion will probably add about $50,000 in fees.
There are 1485 proposed residences in approved subdivisions this year and 1406 proposed condo units. Fisher Homes has 36 condos signed for so far and 4 buildings. They build as they get sign ups.
In 2005 they took in $331,160 in fees and they project over $500,000 in 2006.
There are 900 units proposed by Fisher homes on the intersection of SR1, Ridge and
Oberting.
Hilsinger’s property above Steak and Shake is coming together as well.

15. Coroner’s request for vehicle maintenance. Approved $1500 to replace discretionary fund borrowed and deny $3500.

16. Solid Waste needed a resolution signed by council so they can do their own PERF now that County no longer does their payroll. Approved.

17. Cum Courthouse ($248,216) and Cum Cap ($505313) approved to spend the amount that was OK’d at budget – but not advertised.

18. Messmore asked for another $15,000 to finish up insurance assessment needs of the county. (Total so far is about $30,000) Thinks this is a good use of tax dollars, as it hasn’t been done before. The current company has service issues with getting the entire inventory done, it seems. As the insurance companies bid each year they will UPDATE THIS RECORD. By August budget they will have a price for insurance as it is bid in June. $15,000 approved.

Messmore is setting up financial consultant interviews to do strategy, capital management, and a fiscal model. Cheek and Ullrich will sit in on that process.
Messmore wants seed money to match for federal highway projects- so they can get better responses. Wants Council to consider this.

19. Council mentioned asking Ripley County to help with badges for Health dept request. Better than the whole $10,000 expense.

20. PTBOA Board appointments for tax assessment appeals were Ken Madden and Mark Neff. Approved.

21. Chamber of Commerce letter representing the Redevelopment Commission asked for TIF fees of $18,000 att’y fees, $5,000 CPA, $1,000 local att’y fees (Butler) for a total of $24,000. They are going to have someone come in just to manage the TIF districts to be sure they are figured out. (Original TIF wasn’t filed properly and so now dollars were recaptured yet.) This item will be advertised and they will come to ask for it in person in June.

22. New Horizons didn’t get their annual $10,000 form Council Benevolent Fund and so it was approved for $10,000 from discretionary fund.

23. Stephanie Disbro off for 6 weeks medical leave. Approved $1,000 for additional help during that time.

The next meeting is a special meeting to be advertised for June 21st at 5:30 PM

Meeting adjourned at 12:45 AM 24 May 2006 (YAWN)

Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawrenceburg Township

22 May 2006 Dearborn County Plan Commission Meeting Notes

22 May 2006 Dearborn County Plan Commission Meeting Notes

Present: Mark Mitter, Chairman, Patrick deMaynadier, Jane Ohlmansiek, Tarry Feiss, Nick Held, Mike Hall, Jeff Hughes, Robert Laws, and Dennis Kraus, Jr.
Also Present: Arnie McGill, Attorney, Mark McCormack, Enforcement Officer, and Todd Listerman, County Engineer and Transportation Director

Register Publications covered this meeting.

Administrative Items covered first due to two PC members stepping down for the main business of the meeting to follow:

1. OKI draft versions of strategic policies and plans were covered in a meeting with McCormack, Feiss, Bryan Messmore, and OKI Copies in PC member’s packets.
2. Working session 7 PM Wed May 31 to discuss parent tract that commissioners sent back for changes, Regional sewer district, and St. Leon requiring some help with planning.
3. US 50 existing conditions draft and Gateway study documenting every access point on US 50 in the county is on INDOT site and PC website.
4. Enforcement officer will be selected in the next few days- references are being checked.

PROPOSED SR 48 DEVELOPMENT DEMONSTRATES THAT MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL ZONING CLASSES MUST BE CREATED IN THE ORDINANCE JUST AS THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROPOSED

[NOTE: While the commissioners are pushing for changes in parent tract language in the zoning ordinance that would essentially allow for piecemeal development with potential drainage and infrastructure issues, the PC is being tied up discussing that instead of working on one of the main zoning ordinance changes proposed in the comprehensive plan. Perhaps multiple R zones need to be added to Wed May 31 agenda at the working session.]

OLD BUSINESS:
Zone change from Ag to R for single-family development on SR48 at 148 on 184.87b acres in Manchester Township. Applicant is Tom Kent- Owners have changed. They are now Boones, Craigs, Powells, and Busses. Rollins has dropped out.
FEISS AND HALL stepped down for this item due to possible conflicts of interest.

The room was full for this item- approximately 50-60 residents.

McCormack gave the overview of changes in the proposed development- the access is single now and will utilize a boulevard style entrance. The proposed 265 units have dropped to what the applicant states in less than 180 at 1.07 units per acre or .933 acres per unit. Street configuration internally is nearly the same. They reduced cul-de-sac to meet ordinance. Craig driveway can move at applicant expense or if not a variance for the entrance might be required. County engineer to give design possibilities to applicant for entrance. New adjoiners were notified due to redesign. Tech review was moved to May meeting, with historical b/u as the reason to allow.

Tom Kent presented two main ideas that MUST happen for his “moderate density” plan to work:
1. The boulevard style entrance has to be approved- with essentially two lanes in and two out.
2. Clustering for part of the development to allow for 3 different products leading to more buffer and more greenspace.

He provided an updated traffic study and also was clear that he wasn’t proposing 180 single acre lots- but a sum total of moderate density as the ENTIRE project is considered.

DeMaynadier asked for Kent’s definition of moderate density. Book says 1-3 acres. Kent said closer to the 1 acre.
DeMaynadier- said that was just on the other side of the line for high-density parameters. He also asked if the purchase of the land was contingent on the proposal being accepted. Kent affirmed that was the case. DeMaynadier noted that the purchase price COULD be changed to reflect whatever the potential for development allowed.

Kent said he planned a homeowners association to handle the ballfields, but there would be no pool in this design. Greenspace and buffers would be handled by covenants on larger exterior lots rather than by HOA. Busse and Kent will share fencing as per township rules. More buffering would be put in some areas with white pines – double rows.
Kent wants to offer a mix of affordable and higher priced homes. Affordable as defined in the comp plan.

Listerman noted that the boulevard was the minimum requirement for a single entrance on this plan. Right turn lanes will be determined at primary approval stage. He also discussed the site distance options with the Craig driveway.

At 8 PM Public input began.

Chet Wolgamot- first Kent said 260 weren’t feasible- now he’s saying 165. We won’t know what’s really feasible… Right now we’re skating on the edge of moderate density.
There needs to be a buffer between rural residential and this contrasting development. Why buffer so much against the farm fields? Do we worry more about field mice than about existing homes? (Mitter stopped him at this point to remind him not to make a joke of the board. Wolgamot apologized for the emotional response. Mitter explained that farm uses were often incompatible with residential- that’s why the farm buffer was important.)
Wolgamot acknowledged that we need R even if doesn’t pay for itself. He went on to say that quality of life in their area will be degraded by this density- “we are not Bright or HVL.” This development would be a toehold so that the next farm sells and so on and we become another Bright. Developers can maximize THEIR profit in this “affordable” price range. The PC has to allow for development that benefits the county. We showed at the last meeting 170 homes available in this price range here. There are 23 home on 5-20 acres around this The average lot size is well above 3 acres.
Current conditions and character- How can this be in character with existing homes?
Most desirable use for the land- This is a new toehold of a new era different from anything along SR48 corridor.
Conservation of property values throughout the jurisdiction- My value will go down because of this. We have 500 people (petition) who understand this concept of value- we hope you do too!
Responsible development- Why allow more and moor minimum value homes that are not needed- is that responsible. Think of how hard people worked going door to door to get 500 signatures- this should give you some idea of how we feel.
We feel better about these changes coming in. We didn’t come here to be patted on the back about our good presentation like last time- we want to be heard! “We need rich people too.”
"This board approved a zone change in Bright (Maxwell’s Hidden Acres on Sneakville) and I went to my first commissioner meeting." The Bright Fire Dept and EMS were turned down – because we have no money- they were given a letter of support to get the money elsewhere. AND IN THE NEXT BREATH they added 300 more homes! (by approving the zone change)
Mitter encouraged Chet Wolgamot to present the rest of his ideas, but Wolgamot thought they might be more emotion than fact. He senses an atmosphere of indifference in the politicians. He did add that we just had a primary election and changed commissioner candidates. He said that if 300 Bright people and 500 in this area don’t like an idea, then something is wrong!

Mitter noted it was frustrating on the PC side of the table too.

Patrick deMaynadier explained the judicial nature of the PC – where they consider facts and the POLITICAL nature of commissioners where the petitions have more effect. Commissioners can look at petitions as a reason to accept or deny. PC cannot.Mitter noted that PC goes to great lengths to listen.

Irwin Diehl- Said he wasn’t active politically for a long time but he is AWAKE now. He has the impression that the county commissioners are not as open as they could be- agendas are not done a week in advance and yet citizens have to sign up a week ahead if they wish to speak on and issue- a catch 22 situation.

Mitter commented that he was on the other side 10-11 years ago and was told by the PC to shut up and sit down. So he got involved, went to the extreme, and ran for office even- “What was I thinking?” (Laughter)

Diehl thanked Kent for the changes so far. He doesn’t like the density being in the front along his and Wolgamot’s and Horizon Way properties. He still thinks there is not adequate transition between these property uses.

Dennis Sparks- lives near the Y- has 3 kids- this would at least double the enrollment at Manchester elementary. Most people move out here to live in a rural environment. You can’t compare Bright to Manchester.
The sewer line has to go back to near Ludlow Hill Park and bring a new or larger one out.

Dorothy Watkins- Horizon Way – We live on 11 acres of AG zoned land. What buffer do we have? (She wasn’t notified due to assessor’s office address errors.) This cul-de-sac is right up against my Ag land. She also wanted shorter meetings. Mitter commented that they are trying to hear everyone- “this is an endurance test.” (Laughter)

Brian Groh- read a prepared statement including these comments: People had to take time from their family and jobs to be here. People are shocked by the disrespect to the community. There are many people who agree- thousands went to the polls to vote for Ralph Thompson. People are ANGRY- there seems to be no reasonable limits, they have to take time away from busy lives to take care of this, and they are connected as never before, by email and Internet now! Do you respect the citizens enough to listen to what we are saying?

Carrie Baylor – Horizon Way- These homes here are $300,000 and up. 14 homes adjacent to this are on 5-10 acres. How can this possibly meet criteria #4 for a zone change? (property values)
Tom Kent is asking you to approve a vision- not a plan. If you are judicial as Patrick said- how can you decide on a vision? My neighbors have horses. The sewer letter says they are SEEKING TO PROVIDE- it is NOT there yet! I liked 2 entrances- now we are back to one and no definition of it- a very rubbery understanding.
YOU CAN’T MEET YOUR OWN CRITERIA FOR A ZONE MAP CHANGE!

At 9 PM Public comment ended.

Kent spoke about leadership creating a comp plan and protecting the rural look. He said that means we will leave some untouched and take other land. 500 petitions are one thing. 48,000 people in this county have spoken through the comp plan.
He plans green space and apologized to some of the residents he hadn’t spoken to yet.
“If we have criteria that we have to MATCH the area beside us, then why have a comp plan?” He believes that moderate density is in the 3 subdivisions around this.
Mitter asked about buffering the Watkins property. Kent showed a ravine there and said no building would occur between about 200-300 ft of that property line.
A discussion occurred on tax parcels vs. lot divisions. Wolgamot finally explained how the small parcels on one owner’s land occurred due to section lines and taxing rules.

Mitter noted this has to be decided on the worst-case scenario- because there is no concept plan submitted.

Plan commission members discussed:

De Maynadier- With no concept plan-= we have to use worst-case scenario.
In reference to the tax lot thing- zone requirement doesn’t say current LOT size the code says “current buildings and structures.”- so tax lot sizes are not a deciding factor.
I’m not averse to R- but density IS an issue here.
Tom Kent is a good businessman- if we decide X lots, then he will only pay Y price for this land.
Cluster would work here- but it depends on how much is in the cluster.
Boulevard entrance is a good OPTION.
I see 60-90 units maybe here.
I don’t see this plan as being that different from the first one.
Hughes – With Ag vs. R- I think this should be R.
Law- I wish the lots were in the plan- with no plan- I have problems with that. Likes the boulevard solution for two entrances and thinks this should be R.
Ohlmansiek- In the master plan we showed this are as potentially for growth and R. I like clusters and greenspace. I wish we had lot sizes on this map! I don’t have an actual number in my mind- I’d like to see a picture of it.
Held- Would be appropriate for R here with clusters, greenspace and buffers. Density issue.
Kraus, Jr. – Comp plan says where infrastructure is in place. This is on a state road. Relatively close to Aurora and Law-bg. We’re not compromising the residential of the county- it’s not like it’s on West County Line.

DeMaynadier noted three options- Favorable- if we can add written commitments or qualifications, Unfavorable, or Unfav and send a signal to come back with a design.

Mitter- It doesn’t meet criteria #2 for current conditions and character and it doesn’t meet #4 for conservation of property values. This must be viewed by ordinance in the worst light (because of no concept plan submission)
If we do R they can have carte blanche to do anything that R allows in the ordinance – apt’s and condos even. The topography is not conducive to all of R. This is not responsible growth and development to do just R.

Following this there were 5 or more attempts to get unfavorable (4-3 vote- 3 nays to UNFAVORABLE were Laws, Hughes, Kraus, Jr.)
It takes 5 to have a majority of the board (total of 9 members)Favorable with 60 units max- failed also due to lack of 2nd.
Favorable with no restrictions failed
UNFAVORABLE and adding sewer line unavailability failed also.

Board was deadlocked and so the matter proceeds to the commissioners with NO RECOMMENDATION.

[NOTE: At no time in this did Kent ask to have this tabled so he could draw up a concept plan. This indicates that he is comfortable going to the commissioners with whatever recommendation he got- even none. There is only one reason that would be the case – if the Commissioners plan to pass it. Potentially, it would seem that there is ample evidence in the record of this meeting that if the commissioners do not specify I fairly low density in their approval, the residents would have cause to seek legal remedy.
It would also seem that if and when Kent returns for primary approval, he could demonstrate an understanding of the surrounding parcels by drawing a plan that truly enhances that community and doesn’t detract from it.]

Meeting adjourned 10:10 PM

Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawrenceburg Township

18 May 2006 Dearborn County Regional Sewer District Meeting Notes

18 May 2006 Dearborn County Regional Sewer District Meeting Notes

Present: Hankins, Chairman, Maxwell, Enzweiler, Holland, Pruss, and Fehrman.
Absent: Dennerline
Also present: Lehner, Attorney, Quinn, Engineer, Baer, Health Dept., Messmore, Cty Adm.
Audience included: Tom Kent, Vera Benning, Mr. Z (Starlight Reception Center), Bob Hrezo, Jim West, and Jerry Jacobsen.

Special Requests:

Board went over Peter Ellis, O’Brien Engineering update on Chateau Pomije- trying to extend their pump and haul permit until the sewer access can occur.

Bob Hrezo passed out his detailed portfolio of projects, experience, and credentials of the Hrezo Engineering staff. He asked to be considered for future engineering work and stated he “didn’t want to step on anyone’s toes”, but wanted the board to know that Hrezo Engineering was available to do work on their sewer projects.

Mr. Z- Starlight Reception center- presented his request that the board consider going to Dillsboro for sewer as they have current capacity to p/u about 100 people between him and their lines. He had met with Scott Fortner. Maxwell and Hankins both talked about their meeting with Fortner also and the I&I concerns if they went thru town. Going out west required 3-4 miles more of pipe. They also said Dillsboro had higher sewer bills. R. Z thought there would be decreases as more came on due to higher volume and economy of scale. They will have more info by next meeting.

Old Business:

SDRSD gave then a favorable recommendation and that letter is being presented to Council on Tues when they ask for money.

Stewart St and Cole Lane have 5 contractors bidding to be opened at June 6 meeting. Enzweiler stressed getting ins to cover after construction liabilities if flooding or back-ups occur. Baer to talk to agent at Seitz about this. Lehner said the county engineer said he wasn’t comfortable inspecting the project [NOTE: Wouldn’t this would be outside his job description and add duties to an already full plate?] She also asked Hrezo if Chad Kramer was on his staff and could he inspect? Hrezo said yes and that he could also do it. Hrezo to give them a price on about 2 hours a day.

Some easements needed on Cole Lane because ROW is not big enough. Maxwell informed them that Cty Eng. keeps current records on ROW widths. Unsure about WHO will obtain the easements from discussion.
[NOTE: This project is ready to start- and they don’t have this ready?]

Hankins- Letter to residents in draft form is in packet advising them of bid process and being unsure about fees.

Quinn passed out colored maps of the Aurora interceptor options. Wanted to open cut to save $$s. Creek crossing issues exist- open cuts saving $1.5 mil estimated. ( Environmental impacts?)
Quinn to redraw avoiding creek crossing. Maxwell stated (stressed) that he needs to meet with GRW- there ought to be a discussion with them first. Quinn noted GRW’s pump station had excluded everything we’d bring down US 50. [NOTE: Hence Maxwell stressing GRW involvement in this design and decision. It would be fruitless to work at cross-purposes.]

St. Leon Meeting- Hankins discussed Serenity Ridge crossing LMH territory- so DCRSD will bring feeder to St. Leon for 6-7 homes with no septic sites, that can’t be built yet.
[NOTE: This was a known problem when that sub’n was approved years ago. How did the lots get sold?]

Lisa Lehner to work with John Watson on an interlocal agreement for sewage transport. They need it for activity on SR52. Lehner said that Watson and she agreed to settle on territory to be covered. They will draw lines on maps to show current area and beyond that we will transport to St. Leon.
Hankins note St. Leon does NOT want DCRSD to have equity in the plant, but would allow us to participate in the board of directors. “They see us as a great big guy putting his arms around the little guy and squeezing…”
Enzweiler- we need to stay out of there and let them fund capacity- we pay tap ins and they make money off us. The agreement just has to make sure we have a guaranteed capacity.
Hankins- we don’t want to get in a bidding war with private entities over capacities.
Fehrman- thinks the cty needs some ownership interest in St. Leon – maybe even a plant across the street. Would we have a say in fees or capacity?
Enzweiler- What about DCRSD- we have a big chunk of money invested- we need to concentrate on the bulk coming to SDRSD.
Lehner- we have a lot of debt? Hankins thought $4-5 mil with St. Leon.
Baer asked if Rosewood property was in the county- Yes. They need to keep that in mind with negotiating territories. [NOTE: SD Schools paid approximated half a million for a larger line out that way. Reference school finance officer]

NEW BUSINESS:

Much discussion on setting tap fee- cty range is $360-$4,000. $500 talked about- no decision. Quinn noted MSD in Cincinnati- used $3,000 for NEW homes and less for existing houses. Figuring new homes bear the cost of line extensions and capacity increases required.

Staff will be taking over part of break room downstairs for about 18 months till office space is created.

Maxwell and Hankins - Need to look at Woolpert draft as homework to be sure lines are accurate etc. Maxwell questioned some of the lines. Stays as draft until review.

Fehrman said Aurora was looking to partner with DCRSD- they have no debt now- but are about to incur $3 mil in next few months. Lehner said law on regional sewer districts gives them a lot of flexibility.

Holland will rep the DCRSD at the Moores Hill meeting.

Still having problems with the Rural Development grant and GRW’s apparent lack of info on the filings. [NOTE: This grant may have more problems because of the larger area they took in originally. The income guidelines changed as developers jumped in faster and property got bought for Ameritech etc. An experienced grant writer may be able to quickly ascertain the viability of this grant now.]

Meeting adjourned 8:40 PM

After the meeting I requested a copy of the claims and budget information from the inception of the district to the present time from Doug Baer. When claims are paid at meetings it is often hard to hear and unclear as to what is being paid. Baer has it in Excel format and will email.

Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawrenceburg Township

Sun Valley Acres at SR48/SR148

Planning Commission Meeting
Dearborn County Courthouse Annex
Monday, May 22nd, 2006, 7:00pm


This Monday evening, Tom Kent will be re-presenting his modified development proposal for a high density subdivision in the SR48/SR148 junction area in an effort to obtain a favorable recommendation for a zoning change to the properties involved. Citizens interested in learning more about this development or who may wish to express their concerns should same should plan on attending.


Chet Wolgamot