WARRICK COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

COMMISSIONERS MEETING ROOM

107 W. Locust Street

Boonville, Indiana

March 24, 2004

4:00 P. M.

The Warrick County Commissioners met for the purpose of Planning Commission business and other business that may come before the Board, with all members present. Also in attendance was County Administrator, Roger Emmons; County Auditor, Richard Kixmiller; Plan Commission Executive Director, Sherri Phillips; County Engineer, Steve Sherwood; County Sheriff, Marvin Heilman and County Attorney, Rick Martin.

Don Williams: If I could have your attention please, I would ask everybody to rise if you would please. We have had a pillar of the community that passed away over the weekend, Mr. Terry Freedman. Who of course, built Victoria, he also served on our Economic Development Council and in respect for what he has done for the County and in his passing I would ask that we observe a moment of silence.

President Don Williams called the meeting to order.

Auditor Richard Kixmiller recorded the minutes.

AREA PLAN COMMISSION:

REZONING PETITIONS:

PC-R-04-04 Petition of Lake Group, Inc. Stewart Phillips, President: To rezone 26.1687 acres located on the South side of Heim Road approximately 1800 feet West of the intersection formed by Heim Road and Tow Path Road, Ohio township from ‘A’ Agriculture and ‘F-P’ Flood Plain to ‘R-2' Multiple Family dwelling zoning district. Recommendation of approval by Plan Commission on February 11, 2004. Continued from March 3, 2004.

Sherri Phillips: PC-R-04-04 Petition of Lake Group, Inc. Stewart Phillips, President. To rezone 26.1687 acres located on the South side of Heim Road approximately 1800 feet West of the intersection formed by Heim Road and Tow Path Road in Ohio township from ‘A’ Agriculture and ‘F-P’ Flood Plain to ‘R-2' Multiple Family dwelling zoning district. It was a recommendation of approval by Plan Commission on February 11, 2004. This was continued from your March 3, 2004 meeting.

Don Williams: Any questions by the Board? Is there anybody here to remonstrate against this petitioning? What is the pleasure gentlemen?

MOTION: Phil Baxter made the motion to approve the petition for PC-R-04-04

SECOND: Carl Conner

VOTE: 3 Ayes 0 Nays

STREET CONSTRUCTION PLANS:

PP-04-02 - Mallard Lake Subdivision by Lake Group, Inc. Stewart Phillips, President: 26.1687 acres located on the south side of Heim Road approximately 1800 feet West of the intersection formed by Heim Road and Tow Path Road, Ohio Township. Continued from March 3, 2004.

Sherri Phillips: The next item is PP-04-02 - Mallard Lake Subdivision by Lake Group, Inc. Stewart Phillips, President. This is 26.1687 acres. It is the property you just passed the rezoning on and I believe that the drainage plans were just approved by you as the Drainage Board. The street plans are in order except for, Bobby there was a couple of conditions you wanted to place on them.

Bobby Howard: The item I had, I would like on the street plans that it be noted where the pipes change direction a junction box could be placed at those areas. That is really it if everything is in agreement we don’t really have any problems.

Don Williams: Is that alright with you Mr. Aigner?

Jerry Aigner: That would be fine, I’ll have the engineer draw that up to County specs and resubmit that.

Sherri Phillips: Is that an amendment to the Drainage plans also, or should it be?

Bobby Howard: If anything was outside the road right of way, possibly. I believe that most of those junction boxes were inside the road right of way.

Jerry Aigner: We have our utility easement outside of that, electric and gas but not the drainage because it has to stay close to the street.

Don Williams: Bobby do you have anything else? Any questions from the Commissioners? What is the desire of the Board?

MOTION: Phil Baxter made the motion to approve the street construction plans for Mallard Lake with the stipulation of junction boxes being put in the drainage plans.

SECOND: Carl Conner

VOTE: 3 Ayes 0 Nays

REQUEST FOR RELEASE OF SURETY:

C-03-023 - Milynco Properties, LLC - Commercial Driveway- 8844 Ruffian Lane, Newburgh. $1,810:

Sherri Phillips: The next item is request for release of surety a commercial driveway C-03-023 Milynco properties LLC, Jack Tubbs Commercial Driveway. It is at 8844 Ruffian Lane in Newburgh. We are holding $1810.00 and Bobby has signed off that it has been constructed according to the plans and ready for release of the surety.

Don Williams: Any questions from the Board? Do I have a motion?

MOTION: Carl Conner made the motion to grant the request for release of surety in the amount of $1,810.00, C-03-023.

SECOND: Phil Baxter

VOTE: 3 Ayes 0 Nays

Sherri Phillips: You have to come in and sign a claim form and we take you to get it.

REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT:

Sandals Subdivision Section A Phase I by Mike Chandler: Streets and Sidewalks. Has had two years. Requesting a one year extension with no reduction in the amount of $22,544.50.

Sherri Phillips: The next item is request for extension of irrevocable letter of credit. Sandals Subdivision Section A Phase I by Mike Chandler, this is for streets and sidewalks. Has had two years and is requesting a one year extension with no reduction in the amount of $22,544.50. This has also been approved by the engineers office.

Bobby Howard: Dollar amount sufficient.

Don Williams: Any questions from the Board? If not, I will entertain a motion.

MOTION: Carl Conner made the motion to grant the request for the extension of irrevocable letter of credit for Sandal Subdivision in the amount of $22,544.50.

SECOND: Phil Baxter

VOTE: 3 Ayes 0 Nays

Lakeridge Crossing Section H by Castle Glen Development, Ron McGillem, President: Streets and Sidewalks. Has had two years. Requesting a one year extension with no reduction in the amount of $18,303.34.

Sherri Phillips: The next subdivision is Lakeridge Crossing Section H by Castle Glen Development, Ron McGillem, President. This is for streets and sidewalks also. Has had two years and requesting a one year extension with no reduction in the amount of $18,303.34. This has been approved by the engineer.

Bobby Howard: That dollar amount for $18,303.34 is sufficient.

Don Williams: Any questions from the Board?

MOTION: Carl Conner made the motion to grant the request from Lakeridge Crossing Section H for a one year extension in the amount of $18,303.34.

SECOND: Phil Baxter

VOTE: 3 Ayes 0 Nays

Sherri Phillips: That is all I have, thank you.

TABLED ITEMS:

Peabody Coal - Proposed Contract and Leasehold Agreement - Nelson Brothers Building:

Roger Emmons: Charlie reviewed that and finds it in order. They amended Clause number 2 which allows us to use that location as an auxiliary, or a satellite highway department. Changes from the first one when we were just limited to use it for salt storage. Now we can use it for anything.

Don Williams; Any questions from the Board? What is your pleasure gentlemen? It has been reviewed.

MOTION: Phil Baxter made the motion to sign the contract and leasehold agreement with Peabody Coal Company for the property.

SECOND: Carl Conner

VOTE: 3 Ayes 0 Nays

David Wendholt/Mike Winge:

Don Williams: Go ahead and state your case one more time, if you would, name and residence for the record.

David Wendholt: I live at 6811 Old Stonehouse Drive, Newburgh, Indiana. I guess what I am asking you to do is to, I am asking for a variance or an exemption or amendment to the code of an outbuilding that I have on the access steps to the attic of the building.

Carl Conner: At the last meeting I had indicated or requested from our attorney legal opinion in regard to whether or not the County Commissioners have authority to grant a variance. Because I have a great interest in this, I feel that the regulation or application of this building code is unfair and inappropriate in your position. I understand you also came before us at that time with information that you said you received from the state relative to filling out an application for a variance. I think that you also indicated that there was a fee of approximate $250.00, is that correct?

David Wendholt: $287.00.

Carl Conner: Since that time I have had several discussions with our building inspector and he has raised a couple of questions that I would like to ask you. One of those questions was in regards to the contractor that you had hired. Was the contractor aware of the regulations at the time that he had installed the stairwell?

David Wendholt: He is from Evansville and at the time, I explained it to him that in order to keep the space in the attic it was more, I think he was more of the assumption that I was, it was a little shed, a little out building. I don’t think that he felt that would be a problem either.

Carl Conner: Because it is not attached to your home and you are only using it for storage.

David Wendholt: Exactly.

Carl Conner: Did he ever make a comment to the building inspector in your presence that basically he really didn’t care about the rules and regulations that were in force in Warrick county relative to building codes and he wasn’t about to use a building code book or manual?

David Wendholt: That is certainly not, in fact he had access to a manual and he did take issue. One thing that he took issue with was the house wrap on this building also because first of all it is two by six walls, drywall, I have tongue and groove, Styrofoam, plastic coated insulation on the outside walls and he said that the plastic mesh on the outside of that Styrofoam and on the inside of the Styrofoam is a vapor barrier and he questioned whether that was needed but not to the inspector in my presence but he gave me these numbers Code book page 204, Rogers 703, there are two paragraphs that say that if you use the Stryofoam, tongue and groove seal and he taped it by the way, I have a picture of it. You can see the building is completely wrapped in Styrofoam. Now after the Styrofoam was put up, I have other pictures that I am having developed, where he taped every seam. Now I had to buy $150.00 worth of house wrap and special tape for it too and the nails that hold it on. I have it on but he said it is actually a double barrier and he was concerned about possible having to many moisture barriers. But as far as the inspector, he did ask the inspector why a crawl hole would be okay, or a step ladder or a leaning ladder to access the attic, something similar to that. There was nothing like you described at all, not in my presence.

Carl Conner: I guess my question is, did the builder give you the information relative to the insulation or the wrap and give you the page number of the building code?

David Wendholt: Yes he did. I didn’t pursue it though, because I said, let’s just put the wrap on, I don’t want any trouble. It is wrapped up twice.

Carl Conner: I am just trying to determine whether or not he had a building code manual in his presence or owned?

David Wendholt: He has access to it in Evansville and he said he thought Evansville, it was the same, but the person who he asked

doesn’t apply to an outbuilding. That’s the conflict that I have also trying to get with, just to simply get my application filled out. Where it says here, I highlight this to show it to you last week where it says that I needed documentation showing that the local building inspector is aware of the nature of the variance and this is required by the requested variance involves the project which the specifications have been or must be filed for design release, which I am not looking for or it involves one or two family dwelling. I think you mentioned that last week, there was a

little bit of misunderstanding about the dwelling. I’m actually paying money for a exemption to a dwelling, the way I read it.

Carl Conner: That was my question of whether or not, when you had discussed it with the state in regards to the process you had to go through, that of filling out the application for a variance and the dollar amount. I am sorry that I got the dollar amount wrong that whether or not the state really understood that this was a building that was not attached to the home nor was it going to be used to live in but was just going to be a storage area. I understand we have a gentleman here from the state that could probably answer those questions.

David Wendholt: Just for my sake, as far as the record is concerned, what you just described to me was a confrontation type thing, or not a disregard for code, I also have a picture of this man, this contractor, he did things like fill the voids in the block with cement and I bought the nine inch anchor bolts. He said he goes through two blocks, you have to get the 19 inch ones. In other words, the thing that I had with this particular contractor, was a very enjoyable experience because he wanted to basically do things right. If he did anything, it was overkill on the construction of the building. Like I say, it has two by six walls and he talked about, well, if you are not going to have trusses in the attic and I wanted the attic open to be able to move around in, he said you need, with you ceiling joist, he said that extra two foot I spoke about last week, on the sides, he said with that, that two by four, that could actually go out over time, I would go with the two by six. Instead of scabbing on a jack stud for the floor joist upstairs, he said no, we will go all the way down to the floor. I go from the foundation right on up. His rafters are right on the studs, he is very particular. He is a very particular builder. I am very pleased with him, I would recommend him to anybody. He is reasonable and he follows the rules. The argument with, if there was an argument, the argument that I asked the inspector at that time to do, I said would this hole, if I took the stairway out and this hole is here, would this be alright? He said well, if you squared it up. I said okay, and crawl up there on a step ladder that would be okay? He said, yes that is okay. I said if I had a pull down ladder like I have in my garage, I have a picture of that also, I said would that be okay? Yes. And I said, can you see that this is safer than a crawl hole, can you see that this is safer than a pull down ladder, he said that is not the code. I said do you realize this is a ten foot wide building we are standing in, this floor is ten foot wide. He said, he took his tape and went the other way and he said it is fourteen foot, he said ten by twelve, and I have no argument with the inspector, if you understand what I am saying. The inspector is not in the picture except the second part of my request last week, the state, I missed out on one month and by the way this is the 24^th , I have missed out on another month. I can’t get on May’s agenda in Indianapolis now for a variance, because I have to have the information according to their form, I have to have first a code violation cited by the inspector, which I haven’t got. I visited down stairs, two weeks ago, I think I said at the last time I was here, and Peggy Smith, she told me she has told the inspector that he needs to get a hold of me. And he has told her, yes I know that. But I have never had a phone call from this man since I seen the block of wood laying there that said stairs is not to code call inspector. And when I did call him, by the way, he said well I haven’t got time today, it is my birthday and I have the date here, and he said I will be there first thing Monday. I was there first thing Monday. If the builder was agitated, he was more agitated at me because I am going home, he needed know if we had to stop the building or what was going on. But he came back Monday and the builder, has eight licenses and he doesn’t want to loose any of them, I am the contractor if you understand what I am saying. My name is on the permit, I was going to hire the job whether it was done by one person, or bricks by another person and so forth. It is a home deal I guess you call it. I have never in my imagination ever felt it would get this far. I don’t know if I would have attempted it. My health is not that good. But the main purpose is I would like to see Warrick County, someone mentioned last week, that they have, Vanderburgh County has made exemptions of like smaller buildings, that is what I am trying to do, I am trying to. It is going to cost me more money to go to Indianapolis than what I have invested in this stairway tore all the way completely out. It is going to be hundreds of dollars either way. I would estimate since it is dry walled and everything, which he said I could go ahead with, it is wired, everything is done basically on the inside, I would just like some relief on this without having to go to Indianapolis. If there is a fee to pay, if I can do it from, like the person from Indianapolis is here like they told me he is a lot, I don’t mind paying the fee, I just want to get on, this thing is occupying to much of my time. I have been working on this thing trying to get a contractor, first of all, since last fall. I am just now, I am still trying to find a brick layer to be honest with you. I have had one tell me he would be there and the building is a busy business right now and I am having a hard time getting all my ducks in a row on that. I would just like some relief on this thing. To see it for what it is, and, but I have no quarrel with the building inspector, I understand he has rules he has to go by and that is why I have to go to the state or I decided to come here before I went all the way to the State Capital. I really don’t feel like I should, personally, I don’t feel like I should have to go to the State Capital for my little outbuilding but if I have to do it I guess that is what I have to do. The alternatives, like I say a crawl hole, a fold down stairway, or a stepladder or a leaning ladder that is not attached, I can’t even secure it with a nail, but if there was an argument with the inspector at the time, it wasn’t an argument it was questions. I asked him all these various things, can you see that I can’t put a full size stairway that would be in a home in a ten foot building? Ten by fourteen building. He didn’t get rude with me and I don’t feel like I got rude with him. I just asked him, can you see? His answer was simply it is not code, his answer was nothing like I am going to make you tear it down, he just said you have to tear it down. He didn’t say I am going to make you tear it down. He was cordial as he could be but he stuck to his guns. As the code is the same that is in the house. In my own mind I reversed that, and what if I took my stairway out of my house and put a step ladder there and say there is the upstairs, there is your room. That would be ridiculous. The house and outbuilding rules just don’t seem to....

Carl Conner: I agree with you 100%. I am personally not a builder, personally not a developer but I think that a number of our codes are ridiculous. I go on record to say that. And I think that a lot of times create problems for people that really is totally inappropriate and unfair. That is why I had asked our attorney for legal input in regards to whether or not the County Commissioners had authority to grant you a variance. Because if we did have the authority to grant you a variance, I would support to grant you the variance based upon our attorneys input. He has indicated that the County Commissioners do not have the authority to grant any type of variance in regards to this issue or any other issues as long as it is dealing with a state building code.

David Wendholt: Can I ask you, is it possible for the County to adopt a building code for outbuildings?

Carl Conner: I would have to check with our attorney.

Rick Martin: I would have to look and see, I think we have an ordinance, and basically the ordinance adopts state statute. Generally as a rule of law you can’t be less restrictive than state statute, you can be more restrictive than state statute so I don’t think there is anything that we can do in this circumstances that would provide the relief requested by local ordinance because I think what he would be looking at would be the County passing something that would be less restrictive than state stature. Just by law, we can’t do that.

David Wendholt: Is it true then that there is no code on a building that is twelve by ten?

Roger Emmons: I believe that is the minimum square footage that is required right Mike?

Carl Conner: It is ten by twelve.

David Wendholt: The thing that crosses my mind would be if you could increase that size of it.

Rick Martin: The problem there is we are becoming, ten by twelve or 120 square feet is the state requirement. We could say, okay in Warrick County we are going to make that 100 square feet so you have to have a permit on something that is ten by ten that would be something that is more restrictive than state statute but we can’t go the other way and say something bigger than that would be okay because that is less restrictive than the state statute.

Roger Emmons: I think Vanderburgh County has done that but there is no question they have exposed themselves to more liability by doing that. The building codes are the minimum building codes to begin with. I think you have a case where your out building is beautiful and it is perhaps built greater than code in most respects except for your stairway. And given that the states codes are minimum codes, if you are even less than those by just a little bit, the concern is that, I have talked to Don about this, at some point in the future, somebody is going to, could possibly take over the house, and somebody could get injured because it is not to code.

Carl Conner: I think my opinion is probably nil to zero but here again, you know my feeling. I think that this building code is ridiculous. We are only talking about inches here. Primarily there is only going to be two individuals that is going to be using that facility, you and your wife, you are going to use it for storage and believe me if our attorney would have come back and told us we had the authority to grant you a variance, I would sit here in a minute and make the motion to grant you the variance. Because I think that you are being held to something that is totally unfair and totally unrealistic.

David Wendholt: Can I ask then, though the answer is obvious, can I ask the Commissioners to get me the two pieces of information that I need? I need that information.

Carl Conner: That we can do and the building inspector is sitting right back there.

Don Williams: If you would like, if there are other options, to your stairs we would be glad to have, Mr. Winge would also have, what is your last name? Steve Shoultz, he is the head inspector for the State of Indiana and he can probably give you any light that you would want on that also. If there are other options, and if either of you gentlemen would like to address that, please come forward and do so. I know that he wants relief I know that Carl has stated three times that he is opposed to the ordinance so let’s get on with this and find out what you need to get you help.

Carl Conner: I would like for Mr. Shoultz to come forward, I would like to ask him a couple of questions.

Don Williams: We will ask Mr. Shoultz to come up but one thing, Mr. Wendholt is here if he wants to send that variance request, I would like for you to sign it for him saying you know he is going to do it, that is all you need from Mr. Winge before you leave, then we don’t have to worry about getting together.

David Wendholt: And the code number.

Don Williams: And Mr. Shoultz, if you do have a minute we do appreciate you driving all the way down from Indianapolis to be here to answer any questions we might have. Do you have your pictures with you so Mr. Shoultz can look at what we are talking about? It is a head clearance issue I think as far as the code goes.

Discussion among several while viewing.

Steve Shoultz: Thank you Mr. President for allowing me to be here. This is very important, I really believe in being available to local communities, I think it is important. I am the State Building Commissioner and regulation of one or two family dwellings are strictly with the local government. I have no authority on regulation of one and two family dwellings at all. None. The Commission of Fire Prevention and Building Safety Commission promulgates these rules and they use a national model code which I have participated in for many years, helping develop the national code. That is where these numbers come from through national process. We amend then at the state level and we ask for citizen participation to develop the amendments to the national model codes. I would invite you to participate if you would like to in the future.

Carl Conner: I would be more than happy to give you my input, in fact I am going to give you my input right now.

Don Williams: I think he has already had that.

Steve Shoultz As we do develop this, we ask people to participate, we have building officials, builders, fire people, and roof people and what ever engineers architects and they sit down and look at the model codes and they suggest the changes, we don’t do that. I would suggest you might want to do that. I am serious. That is what goes to the Commission and the Commission is appointed by the Governor, there are 19 people, they decide what they probigate. A couple of things I would like to respond to. The permitting is not regulated by the state. We have nothing to do with permitting. You can permit anything you want, you mentioned the 120 square feet, you can make it zero. You don’t even have to issue permits for this building. It is up to you. Not up to the State. We have nothing to do with permitting. Nothing.

Carl Conner: I don’t think that the question was from the permitting standpoint but, I think the question was from whether or not we could give him a variance relative to the building code itself and our attorney says that we do not have the authority to do that. One of my questions for you is, does the state understand what this gentlemans’ situation is, that it is not a residence, but it is an outbuilding and if that is the case, then my next question is, is the stairwell regulation that is being enforced on this individual, is it identical to what is being enforced if it was his residence?

Steve Shoultz: Yes. It is enforced at the choice of the Commission. Again the Commission can decide not to regulate these things. It is strictly up to them.

Carl Conner: Right the 19 member?

Steve Shoultz: They could decide not to do that and if you wish to lobby them to remove that from the jurisdiction of the state, that is certainly possible. They are citizens like you people, not state people. I have a vote in odd numbered years on ties. I don’t vote normally. But it is made up of people in the industry and they do listen to people like you. They really do. The variance process is very awkward and I am really sympathetic with it, it is a pain, I sympathize with him, if I was in his spot, I would be screaming also. Go to Indianapolis, pay this money, but that is the process. It is in state statute. Then you can talk to your legislature about it and you can fix that. All these things are fixable they just take a little work. We have nothing in it, staff, legislature make it, Commission or legislative body they make these rules and they are all subject to discourse and change. And I am very sympathetic. If I were him, I would be yelling, too. That stairway, this is an outbuilding, and it is a small building, it could be used for occupancy, it is all finished, brick and everything. Somebody could live there, but the stair is very awkward, but given the circumstances, I wouldn’t vote against the variance. If I were ever asked to vote, I would say okay. But the variance process is in state statute and we can’t escape it. Now one good thing, you could pass an ordinance to allow local variances. You have to do an ordinance, what that gives you, is allow the variance to come before the Commission to approve it but they don’t have to go through the variance process he has in his hand. All you do is mail it to the state and maybe they want to talk to somebody but staff can do that. And say here he is, ratify it, it is a ratification process. Because you guys have said okay, the state looks at it and says yes I think they did right. Boom, he doesn’t pay any fees, nothing, so there is a benefit for you to approve an ordinance to allow you to grant variances subject to the approval of the Commission. You escape all that red tape and the money.

Carl Conner: I am glad to know that because we have these type of situations from time to time and to put this gentleman through the cost that is involved in this.

Steve Shoultz: I agree for something that looks so minor.

Don Williams: Especially out buildings.

Steve Shoultz: If that was a house, that might be a problem. Because the stairs geometry isn’t right but you look at the building, it can’t be used for much. Maybe they have a daughter that wants to live there while going to college or something, they know the hazards. The Commission if they grant this, and they see this situation more frequent than you think, and what they do is put a sign up low head clearance. I see that a lot. You can do that. The other alternative is we are kind of playing games and I’ve suggested this to people in the past, the code does not require a stairway. It doesn’t say it, it is crazy. But you can remove that stairway and still be legal. Say how do I get up there, you use a step ladder, you do this or that while all that poses risk to the owner. Because the owner now opens himself to liability. But if he were to remove that Mike would walk in and say it is gone, he meets the code and what he does when the door is shut that is his business too. But if you have a visitor and he does let him sleep up there, it is finished, it is insulated, it could be used, he is on his own. If they hurt themselves getting up the ladder he will be sued, that’s the difficulty of that, that is code, the code is quirky, but the code will allow that.

Carl Conner: Like I said I am not a builder, but I looked at those pictures of that stairwell, and then looking at his option of taking it out and putting a spiral stairway straight up, or putting a pull down, which I have in my garage. a pull down or just having a hole that he can stick a ladder up. I have to agreed with you the stairwell is much safer than all those other options and that is what I am saying, to me it is just ridiculous. I will go a step further, I am sorry to say, but the building code in this situation is asinine and I think that probably what we need to do as a Board of Commissioners tonight and I think this brings up a real issue that we need to follow up on ASAP, we need to instruct our attorney to draft an ordinance for the purposes of giving us the ability to waive these type of issues. I am talking about stairwell in out buildings, in addition to that, my question I guess is, how many counties to date have such an ordinance in place?

Steve Shoultz: No one that I know.

Carl Conner: No one but it is an option for us. Secondly, is what are the percentages of just having, as you said ratification of our variance at the state level instead of always getting the variances back with a no instead of a yes?

Steve Shoultz: I have dealt with the Commission, I have been with the state 28 years and a few weeks. The Commissions all make up of Commissions have been pretty fair. And if it is stupid and you guys say this is my grandson’s building and let’s all get together and this thing smells as I vote, they are going to see it and they are going to say no. They are reasonable people just like you. They are you, they really are. But if this thing makes sense, and you make your case on this variance, like you are today, the things you are saying makes sense to you sitting there as a Commissioner they will say yes, because their mentality will be, you have a whole County Commissioner here, the whole Board and you think it is okay. You are here, you know the guy, you know the building, you have probably seen the building, you drive past it on the way to work. Who are they then to say we are smarter than you, and that kind of thinking does prevail.

Don Williams: Is there any kind of a sample ordinance for that?

Steve Shoultz: No, but what I give you a site here where it says this. It is IC 22-13-2-7 b. Commission shall review variances granted by political subdivisions of the fire safety laws and building laws adopted in it’s ordinance. The variance is not effective until it is approved by the Commission. That does not throw you into the variance mess that he is in.

Don Williams: I have a question. I would feel fairly comfortable with doing it like on Mr. Wendholt’s situation. If we grant a variance, which we are talking about something that is in opposition to state code, then the liability issue would be significant then. So I think you would use some discretion when you do that. Perhaps a hold harmless agreement?

Rick Martin: When I was the attorney for Area Plan we would grant variances to various thing that would generally require the person as a condition of having a variance granted, to enter into a hold harmless agreement with the County if there was any injury or liability that they would hold the County harmless.

Steve Shoultz: Government employees, I think, as appointed people, they would be shielded.

Rick Martin: Individually of course.

Steve Shoultz: Where you get in trouble is where you make reckless decisions as I go back to your nephew, when everybody says he is a good ole’ Joe let him have this. That is reckless and could be considered negligence and you are on the hook. That kind of thinking you are on the hook. But if you base your decision on sound information and evidence, and the Commission is bound by basically, is it adverse? People come in and say we will do these separate things, like some buildings they want to remove the fire protection on an auditorium and we will increase the sprinkler density, and put more water in there. The Commission say, that looks equivalent to us. We think you are doing the same thing only doing it a different way. We think that is not adverse and your alternative is okay. But lacking an alternative they still have to have proof that it is not adverse. The Commissions charged to make that decision, as you will be. Just think this is not adverse to life safety.

Don Williams: I personally think that we do develop ordinance that would strictly be for out buildings. I don’t know that I would feel comfortable doing that on a residential.

Steve Shoultz: That ordinance would have to be approved by the Commission like any other ordinance you do and ..

Don Williams: By your Commission?

Steve Shoultz: Yes. By the Fire Prevention and Safety Commission before it is effective.

Don Williams: So we would develop the ordinance, then we would send it to you and you would present it to the Commission and they can either approve or disapprove our ordinance.

Steve Shoultz: I don’t know why they would disapprove it. I would not personally be involved but I would hand it off to people who do it, they are on my staff. And I would advocate for this and support it to the Commission.

Carl Conner: I have one other question. I understand and this is grapevine because I have not spoken with anyone in Vanderburgh County, but I understand that on the ten foot by twelve foot out buildings, they basically are not enforcing the State regulations. Do you know whether or not that is a fact?

Steve Shoultz: No, I don’t know that as a fact.

Carl Conner: I guess my question would have been then if you would have said yes, then how can they operate outside of the building code and we as an adjacent County can not operate outside the code.

Steve Shoultz: I guess you could, too. But it wouldn’t be legal. If anything happens they suffer the consequences. They don’t work for me I can’t make them do anything.

Carl Conner: But you are not aware of that happening in Vanderburgh County?

Steve Shoultz: I know Mike has told me that. But I don’t know other than what Mike has said.

Carl Conner: How long have they been doing that, do you have any idea?

Steve Shoultz: They could make an ordinance to be different than the code. They could come to the Commission and what you said earlier, they can not be more restrictive than the state law either. They can’t be less restrictive, they can’t be more restrictive. It has to be identical. It says it can’t be in conflict with the rules of the Commission once the Commission approves it. So they can say yes you can be more restrictive, there is only four times that people have come before the Commission to do that and zero times have they said yes. So Evansville could come to the Commission and say we want to move this to 200 for us and the Commission could say yes, and they approve an ordinance that way, that could happen. That has not happened.

Mike Winge: Steve are they working on 200..?

Steve Shoultz: On the state lever they are talking about changing it to 200.

Carl Conner: Here again, that is another issue that I have and I won’t go into that but I just think, I believe we 10X12 foot, 120 I just think that what we have done is, we have put an obstacle in front of the small business man in this area that is in that business and we are just making their lives more difficult and more difficult for them to make a decent living. I personally would like to see us increase that size from 120 feet 10X12 or whatever. It was Roger Layman that you had spoken with in regard to ?

Mike Winge: Vanderburgh County.

Carl Conner: Right.

Steve Shoultz: The co-committee is going to propose to the Commission to go to 200 feet. I wasn’t there and I don’t know why they decided that, but I think they are hearing some of our stories. I don’t think you are off base in what you are saying. I agree.

Don Williams: When do you think that will be considered?

Steve Shoultz: It takes a year to get a rule change. So they are working on it now, they will probably take it to the Commission in three months. Say a year and a half. Things move slow at the state level. You might want to try that as a County Commissioner and suggest sending an ordinance to the Commission and do it now. All they can do is say no. Just because they haven’t done it, doesn’t mean they won’t. This has the earmark of all kinds of good reasoning. The stuff we have seen before wasn’t good reasoning.

Carl Conner: In addition to that, what you are saying is, we can save the resident these fees that normally they have to pay them.

Steve Shoultz: These buildings are not complex buildings. You can pick them up with a hoist or something and put them on a truck and drop them.

Mike Winge: Let me add one thing to what Steve is saying, Vanderburgh County has gone to 200,. I have seen some of those same places put buildings out now that are 24 feet long. If you move to 200, they are going to go to 250 or, it just seem like they always go to where they are going. The issue is not the amount of square footage. I have to look at what the code book says and I have to follow that because if I allow this gentleman to put a staircase in, and that guy doing that work tells another builder, then I have an issue in another place with another builder, I am in a bad spot. Then you are not being consistent.

Don Williams: I can even see an variance ordinance something as out buildings, if we are not careful you open up Pandora’s box. People ignore the codes, we can get a variance from the Commissioners so.

Steve Shoultz: It would still have to be approved by the Commission. That certainly gives you some safety net for your decision in a sense, if it comes back from the Commission, you go to the constituent and say Indianapolis.

Carl Conner: We don’t have to rubber stamp every request. We need to take it on its own merit, each individual request.

Mike Winge: Originally the building was designed for a lawn mower, gas can and a few things like that, riding mower in or whatever. Now they are getting bigger. Once you get to a point then you get a one car garage or something and that is the issue. It just seems like it always goes to the extreme. And if you start deviating from what the rules are then I am going to have to explain when someone calls you, and I would rather be explaining what is actually code, than trying to make a just call. If you are not consistent, something will come back to you.

Steve Shoultz: Part of the dangers of going to large is that people end up living in them, they don’t have service panel, they don’t have outlets. They run extension cords everywhere , they don’t have the right plumbing. Literally it does happen. And if you get them to big, you are going to find people living in them.

Don Williams: Mr. Shoultz, I don’t want to peeve anyone off but we do have an agenda we need to continue on with. I would like to express my appreciation for you coming down from the state to do this. And with Mr. Wendholt if you want to go on with your variance request, Mr. Winge is here, you might go ahead and sign that today.

Rick Martin: I would like to ask him one quick question because I heard this 120 square feet is the, you mentioned something about permits being controlled by us and not by the state. I guess is 120 square feet where the building codes kick in and apply to buildings only over 120 square feet?

Steve Shoultz: No they apply for less than 120 square feet but the code requirements are minimal, it is only a foundation.

Rick Martin: So 120 square feet is where the code requirements are more strict?

Steve Shoultz: Yes, they lessen as they go below it.

Rick Martin: I wanted to clarify something because I was under the impression that maybe our permit requirements were at 120 square feet which I think maybe they are. That is basically to mirror the code requirements.

Steve Shoultz: There is nothing magic, if you guys want to say we are not going to give any permits for out buildings that is certainly your business.

Rick Martin: I guess my question would be if we were to increase the permits to 200 square feet, somebody may have something over 120 square feet that doesn’t get them out of meeting the requirements?

Steve Shoultz: It is just a matter of permits or inspections.

Mike Winge: What that does is people half way done with a building or whatever by law they are supposed to stop.

Rick Martin: Basically doing that, you are in a situation where they are not applying for permits so you don’t know what is going on unless you see it. But they are still subject to the building code.

Steve Shoultz: I think what you have to decide is at what point do we want to start looking at buildings. What point do you think we are going to expose our citizens and ourselves to hazards or liability? That is your judgement. As some point you say we don’t care about any of them or we are going to permit all of them or somewhere in between. I would like to say a few words before I get out of here. I really appreciate being able to be here because this is the way it is supposed to work. We are over sight, we have state duties, you guys are where the real hard work is and we should be able to communicate like this. It is only a few hours down here. It is not a big deal. So I wish more communities would do this, I really do. I do meet with County Commissioners quite often on developing ordinances. I am available. I really appreciate the support you give Mike. Mike calls all the time with questions, is this right, da da da da. I know he tells me all the time about the Commissioners, what you are doing, how you are helping him. That is the way it is supposed to work. This is fast becoming a model for small counties. We just don’t see this kind of participation in a lot of counties. I think it is wonderful. The fact that I am here that you have asked me to be here, it shows where you are. It is wonderful.

Carl Conner: I would like to thank you for coming down because you have given us a lot of good information and I think especially giving us some options and directions in regards to how we can prevent this type of situation in the future by having an ordinance in place. I really appreciate that and I think that the citizens of Warrick County would appreciate that also.

Steve Shoultz: I really believe in code, I really believe in minimum standards but I also believe we don’t have to cause blood and tears. I would do whatever I can and this is part of it, to help that process become easier and simpler. Why should this be painful and hard, I strive to make it less painful and less hard.

Carl Conner: Could you send us a schedule of when you committee meets? I would like to at least attend one of those committee meetings to see how they function.

Steve Shoultz: That would be nice. We have them at the Indiana Builder Association building. They have space there. I’ll get it to Mike. Also you guys can call me direct. They allow me to answer my own phone really. They trust me to do that.

Carl Conner: Do you know your own number?

Steve Shoultz: Yes I do, 317-232-1400. It pages me when I get a, I have voice mail and if I got one right now it would page me. You don’t have to have me here you can call.

Roger Emmons: One question, should the Commissioners choose to have an amending ordinance to our building code ordinance that would add a variance process, once it gets to your level, what is the turn around?

Steve Shoultz: The Commission meets once a month. Usually the first Tuesday unless there is a holiday on Monday.

Don Williams: Thirty or sixty days we should hear something back.

Steve Shoultz: We would let you know right away. If we got it tomorrow, it would be on the agenda for the sixth of April. And you would get a letter out probably Friday. Our turn around is fairly quick.

Roger Emmons: The reason I asked, Mr. Wendholt might want to wait.

Carl Conner: If he could afford to wait, from a time stand point.

Steve Shoultz: As long as he is appealing it so to speak it is not really a formal, as long as he is in the process of trying to rectify the order, really he can’t be touched in a sense.

Rick Martin: If I understand what Roger was stating, if we can get this ordinance past and approved and to you all, to approve then we might be able to, I guess the concern I would have on that, when would you need it in order to address it at your April 6^th?

Steve Shoultz: We could get it the day before.

Rick Martin: Our next meeting is when?

Don Williams: The second Thursday.

Rick Martin: Unless we have a special meeting this board would have to pass an ordinance at a public meeting. It would have to be signed. Our next meeting is not until April 14^th.

Carl Conner: This is what we could do if I could make a suggestion. We could get it to you by the May meeting and until such time what is the big rush in forcing Mr. Wendholt to do anything at all? What is thirty days. So my suggestion is you don’t do anything until we get the ordinance drafted and we get the ordinance up there by May. Just follow up with us.

Steve Shoultz: On the first Wednesday because of election day.

Roger Emmons: That would save him the trip and the money.

Carl Conner: Just don’t do anything else.

Don Williams: So if that is agreeable with you Mr. Wendholt, just to wait saving your $287.00 you might at the Monday before the 14^th , the 12^th of April you might call Roger to see if that ordinance has been taken care of and put in force. By the end of May we should be able to get it in place I would think.

Rick Martin: I think we should, getting it on our agenda on that April 14^th meeting.

Don Williams: The 21^st would be the next meeting, if we get the ordinance in effect on the 14^th then the 21^st you could be on the agenda and come before us.

David Wendholt: If I could say something, I am totally in favor of zoning and zoning ordinances. Where I live we have a neighborhood organization. I would suggest, when you make an ordinance change, it is right here on this exemption from Board of Zoning Appeals, it says proposed structure can not be used for a residence. I can’t use this for a residence, if I wanted to.

Don Williams: And that goes with the property.

David Wendholt: This piece of paper here, the way I understood it, cost me $225.00, is this is a binding document. It has to do with the building permit. The biggest problem has always been the way this thing looks. Everybody thinks a house when they see it. I have no objections, in fact I had no choice, I can’t have my daughter or in-laws or anybody living here, I wouldn’t want them there anyway.

Carl Conner: I think that is a good suggestion and I would recommend to our attorney that he puts that in the ordinance.

Rick Martin: Generally that is the purpose, that is done every time you grant a variance. That is generally the language that you will put in the variance. You will do it on a case by case basis. But in a situation like this, that would be a condition of granting the variance that there would be no one living in there. You can put any kind of conditions, any kind of reasonable conditions on a variance that you want. That is a common one. Like I said the hold harmless agreement, that is a common condition to a variance.

Steve Shoultz: You need to convey that to the Commission when you send the variance up to them for their ratification. Basically send an attachment of why you granted the variance. The reason that you use that, this is okay because they need to know your rational. Like I say, if it makes sense and the fact that you say we have part of this variance that no one can live there, I think you would win right there. I really do.

Don Williams: Gentlemen, I need to cut this off, I have an agenda. Thank you.

Carl Conner: Mr. President, would it be appropriate at this time to entertain a motion relative to directing our attorney to begin the drafting of an ordinance as we had discussed for purposes to sending that up to the Building Commission for their approval or denial or do you want to take it up at a later point in time?

Don Williams: I think we can go ahead and do that as long as we are talking about accessory buildings.

Carl Conner: We are basically talking out buildings.

Don Williams: I think we can do that by consensus I don’t even think we need a motion.

Rick Martin: You will ultimately need a motion to pass the ordinance after it is drafted.

Carl Conner; Thanks.

Don Williams: Next item. Debbie come on up you have been waiting so patiently.

ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION:

Debbie Bennett-Stonehaven Area Sewer:

Debbie Bennett: First of all I have some samples of interlocal agreements I want to give to Mr. Martin.

Rick Martin: Thank you.

Debbie Bennett: I think I am coming back to continue the discussion we were having about Stonehaven and I guess it is on the Environmental contract. I didn’t know if you were going to get into any of the rates.

Don Williams: We haven’t gotten the rates back yet have we?

Roger Emmons: You just got it in your mailbox today.

Don Williams: We haven’t had a chance to look at them.

Debbie Bennett: It is not for me to discuss with you anyway but are you going to have Umbaugh come down or?

Roger Emmons: The Commissioners haven’t replied on that yet. I think one thing you left us with last time was that we have a proposed contract from Environmental Services between the County and your company and then you also have mentioned that one thing the Commissioners need to do is to select a professional engineering company. I think perhaps Charlie Martin has reviewed this contract, I don’t know if Rick has seen it or not.

Rick Martin: I have discussed it with him, he has reviewed it and indicated at least from a legal standpoint the agreement is in order.

Roger Emmons: It is for $1500 and you might, in a nutshell, tell us what the environmental...

Debbie Bennett: The one portion of the grant, the readiness for the grant, you have to have environmental clearance from the eight state agencies that the project is going to be cleared for construction and that has to be done before the grant application goes in. This process for me probably I won’t even start it until you do have an engineering firm selected because I am going to have to get where the lines are going to lay from them in order to send it in to the state to show them that they are going in the right of ways. I can’t just say this is where it is going to be. So as far as being paid that is probably, you are looking at a year out before all that work is completed. The environmental work is completed. I will have to work with the engineering firm you select to do it.

Roger Emmons: Prior to them naming a person or firm to pursue the grant they need to get the professional engineering firm selected.

Debbie Bennett: Yes. I think we touched on that last week we didn’t really get to it. An engineering firm is going to have to help you complete part of your readiness issues before the grant application goes in. You have a preliminary study, but when you get into going into a funding agency such as state revolving loan fund or doing a general obligation bond or whatever, you are going to have to have a firm on board to be able to go with you to those agencies and also with you to argue negotiation of your agreed order that you are supposed to receive from IDEM. They are also going to have to help me work on the environmental part. I have to take their preliminary plans where the lines are going to lay and send in on environmental. They are pretty much key on everything that you are going to have to do to be ready and they are also going to have to tell you if you are going to have to obtain any easements or any land issues. We talked about that last week under site control. If you don’t know where the lines are going to go, you don’t know any of those issues. In order to get your application ready, so that will be really a key factor and next for you to look at is getting an engineering firm.

Rick Martin: Debbie if I could make a statement or a potential suggestion on that, and I can’t recall whether or not, I know when Boonville came before us with the T.I.F. issue, that is something we are working with Boonville on, our T.I.F. District which is West of Boonville, but one of the proposals that they had come to us with, included Stonehaven in the T.I.F. District and I believe I would have to go back and check the records and check the documents on it but I believe their engineer was Midwestern Engineers may have as part of that project already done some work on estimating costs and location of sewer lines out to Stonehaven. I don’t know, I know they did for the project West of Boonville and I think it was the intention to work with them on that. It may save some time and save some money if they have already done the engineering on sewers to Stonehaven to talk with them and talk to the city about that.

Don Williams: So what we need to do, we need to go ahead .

Rick Martin: Action we need to take today and I guess I defer to Debbie, are you looking for us to obtain an engineer today?

Debbie Bennett: No, it is just something that you need in order to continue the process and keep it going at this point is the next thing you need to be doing is to think about getting an engineering firm on board. However the process the County wants to take.

Rick Martin: I don’t think we need to do that today but according to Debbie that is the next step we need to take.

Debbie Bennett: It is an integral part to keep this moving because that agreed order is on its way.

Rick Martin: I would recommend that we look and see from the materials we had on the T.I.F. district if they have already done it. Like I said that may be a time savings, and cost savings. If they have already done a lot of the engineering work on that. So I think the next thing we would need to do, not necessarily today, but prior to the next meeting, would be to get an engineer on board.

Debbie Bennett: You can do that through request for qualifications if you want to do it and review them, I would be happy to help you do that or however, you select your engineering firm. Or if you just want to select. You have to remember the payment to the engineering firm that will be another issue, how are you going to pay for them. Because I am certain they will charge you to do some kind of work, so that is something you need to be thinking about too, in your selection, can’t enter a contract without knowing how you are going to pay for it.

Don Williams :  I would entertain a motion to direct Roger to do the RFQ’s for an engineering firm for the Stonehaven Project.

MOTION: Carl Conner made the motion to direct Roger to do the RFQ’s for an engineering firm for the Stonehaven Project.

SECOND: Phil Baxter

VOTE: 3 Ayes 0 Nays

Don Williams: Can we do anything else for you and your company?

Debbie Bennett: If you want to go ahead, it is up to you if you want to enter into a contract to start the environmental. I am not going to be able to start until you get the engineering firm on board. It is up to you whatever you want to do.

Carl Conner: We do know that we are going to hire her to do it, we know what it is going to cost us, I would suggest that we just go ahead and approve, do we have a contract and has the contract been reviewed?

Yes it has.

MOTION: Carl Conner made the motion that we go ahead and sign the contract and get Debbie in place here in regards to doing the environmental impact study.

SECOND: Phil Baxter

VOTE: 3 Ayes 0 Nays

Debbie Bennett: If you would let me know when Umbaugh is coming because I have questions from that report too that I would like to ask them. If you have any questions after you see it, you can give me a call and I will give you my thoughts. Thank you.

Don Williams: Sorry to keep you waiting.

Debbie Bennett: I wanted to tell you, Sarah Long is here with me today, if you had any questions for her she has just been trying to keep it moving and follow along.

Don Williams; We need a lot of help with Stonehaven.

Debbie Bennett: We appreciate her being here today.

Don Williams: Thanks for coming.

Resolution Requesting Deferral of the Effective Date of Ozone Non-attainment Designation:

Roger Emmons: We received a fax from the Boonville Mayor Pam Hendrickson, it basically says please consider passing of this resolution. It benefits the County as far as the Non-attainment designation for the EPA Air Quality and the Resolution asks that the US EPA defer be effective date of Non-attainment designation so that sufficient time is provided to allow a demonstration of the Nitrous Oxide Emissions Reductions required will be effective and a non-attainment designation for Warrick County will be unnecessary. If you do this you are asking to defer that effective date until September 30, 2005.

Carl Conner: My question is, Rick is this something that we should have some kind of legal review on in regards to signing this?

Roger Emmons; We did copy Charlie on the 18^th , that was last Thursday.

Rick Martin: It may be, if you want to table, Roger do you see any harm in tabling this until the next meeting and let me take a look at it.

Don Williams: If it is time sensitive I would like to act on it.

Rick Martin: That is what my question would be, if it is not time sensitive.

Roger Emmons: It says it should be acted upon and presented to US EPA regent five before the April 15 deadline.

Don Williams: I think we need to act on it.

Rick Martin: April 14^th is our next meeting. Backing up against the deadline.

Don Williams: Basically we are just asking them to delay their...

Rick Martin: If you have a copy of the resolution I could look at it pretty quickly. I don’t see it being a issue that will require a lot of study.

Roger Emmons: The impetus came from Donna Bergman who is the director of the Evansville EPA. So the EPA itself is suggesting and recommending this.

Don Williams: I know that Alcoa is still putting its scrubbers on and they are real close all this year. I think it was only once or twice they ...standard. Part of the problem with Warrick County is you get pollution from both Counties from the West coming this direction, I think that may be a little part of it. But unfortunately they make the measurement here. Let Rick take a moment to look at that. It is a pretty slim document. While he is looking at that, let’s take the next item.

Approval of 2004 Election Polling Sites:

Roger Emmons: The 2004 Election Poll Sites. I have a listing of all those here. It is the same as last time, and there is forty some odd of them. Susie our Administrative Assistant has contacted all of the representatives of these locations and they have approved them for use as a polling place. We just need a motion approving these places.

Don Williams: I would entertain a motion to approve the polling sites for 2004 election for the Primary and the General.

MOTION: Phil Baxter made the motion to approve the polling sites for 2004 election for the Primary and the General election.

SECOND: Carl Conner

VOTE: 3 Ayes 0 Nays

Boonville Library Board - Appointment:

Don Williams: I would like to take that Roger if I may. I request that we appoint Shelly Kay Kleiman from Elberfeld, Indiana. She is from the Northern part of the County to fill the vacant spot by Chris Hilbert who is going to be going to Seamore. She had a job change that she wasn’t aware of when we appointed her.

MOTION: Don Williams made the motion to appoint Shelly Kleiman to that position.

SECOND: Carl Conner

VOTE: 3 Ayes 0 Nays

Treasurer - Proposed Merchant Processing with Approval Payment Solutions, Inc.:

Charles R. Christmas: Warrick County Treasurer. I gave Roger a copy of a contract to bring before the Board with Approval Payment Solutions, Inc. This local firm, right over here on the South of the square. They handle credit cards either on line or in person. The County presently has a telephone system that people can call in and pay their taxes by credit card. The company is located in California. The only communication we can have with them anymore, in the last year and a half, this was done before I came in office. The only communication we have with them is by e-mail and they send us a daily report stating who has paid their taxes and what the parcel numbers were and how much they paid by credit card. We in turn take that and post it after it has been deposited in the bank. We always make sure we have the money before we post it. They are deposited within 48 hours even from the California branch. There are no fees to the County for the present service. I would prefer, we can not with this system we had actually take this credit card in our office. The only card we can take in our office is Discovery. It is handled by a separate organization. I would like to see us, because there are many people that want to pay their taxes by credit card, some of them get a discount, because they pay them by credit card, some of them can’t afford to pay it all at one time but they can defer it for thirty days and they can make their tax payments. So I would like to see us have the capabilities to allow the tax payers pay the tax by credit card and would personally prefer a local firm. Instead of going to California and trying to deal with somebody clear across the nation from us. It is easier to go across the street and talk to the man individually. They are not a small outfit, they do business throughout the Country. The fee that they propose is a flat 3.5% of the tax bill. It is not chargeable to Warrick County. We still pay no fee. It is a service fee that the taxpayer themselves pay, they are already doing it if they use a credit card. In reality it is cheaper than the present rate they have because they have a fee that they are charging out in California and at one point it went about as high as seven percent that they were charging these people to pay their taxes. You would be amazed at how many people pay their taxes that way. I was looking last night, getting ready to transfer the funds tomorrow, around $300,000 in what we call our phone account, that has been phoned in by the credit card in just the last couple of months. So it is big business but I would like to see us take care of it here. Do it local, than have us go outside.

Don Williams; Any questions to our Treasurer from the Board?

Carl Conner: Charlie, I read through that contract. Just have a couple of questions.

Charles Christmas: I’ll try to answer but if I can’t I have a gentleman right here that can.

Carl Conner: Okay. You can probably answer them. The first question, it said something in there about the processing of three million dollars in the contract so I assume then what we are talking about is all credit card transactions by telephone transaction, and also, were you not looking at having taxes paid through the internet?

Charlie Christmas: That is what this is, pay through the internet.

Carl Conner: Okay, but that three million is for all of the. I was going three million by the internet that would be difficult for me to accept.

Roger Emmons: That is under the business profile and assumption section of the application.

Carl Conner: Then what I read in there also, there is basically a no cost to us for the processing of the payments or anything. The only thing that we are looking at possibly is if we attempt to terminate, because I didn’t see in the contract any out clause for three years, is that correct?

Unknown Speaker: There is typically a cancellation fee within three years. That may be waived for you.

Carl Conner: The fee stated in there is $250.00.

Unknown Speaker: That is correct.

Carl Conner: That is all the questions I have.

Charles Christmas: I would say this, I tell all our vendors, things of this nature, we will not pay fees. If that is in the contract I would say to have it taken out of there.

Carl Conner: Unless I misunderstood, Charlie, that is why I am bringing the question out.

Charles Christmas: I glanced at it, one of those things, Rick would probably look for things like that, that I may not notice. I will say this to Allen, there will be no fees to the County whatsoever because the bank does 45 million dollars with us down here basically on a constant basis and we pay no fee.

Carl Conner: It says in there $250.00 termination fee if, and then there was one other fee in there, since you brought that up, that I would assume is going to be waived, and it basically was speaking of if there is a back log, and there is not a timely cut off, then we would be charged for charge backs. That may be something that you want to look at.

Charles Christmas: He may have not been aware of that that day we were discussing this.

Don Williams: So you want us to wait and look at this next meeting?

Charles Christmas: I want you to be aware of it and bring it to you. If you have any questions we can answer them.

Carl Conner: As far as I am concerned, this is really the way to go.

Rick Martin: Carl if I could state something here too. Probably two concerns I have from a legal standpoint. The first concern would be and it didn’t occur to me until now. I wasn’t aware we had an agreement with another company. Is there going to be termination fee or any repercussions from terminating the one in California.

Charles Christmas: I have no idea. I have never talked to these people.

Rick Martin: We have a contract with them of some sort?

Charles Christmas: If there is I have never seen it. This was in effect long before I ever came in.

Don Williams: Send them an e-mail and tell them you can’t find your copy of the contract, please send me a copy.

Charles Christmas: Like I said, this was done before I took office and no body ever calls. Will be kind of hard to collect any money, people have to call it in and we are the ones to tell them who to call.

Several speaking.

Roger Emmons: You say the fees are three per cent you are adding up these .97, .98.

Mark Heiple: I am with Approval Payment Solutions based here in Boonville. Those would not apply, just a flat three and a half per cent. So we would need to change the contract accordingly.

Charles Christmas: It does not have to be approved tonight gentlemen by no stretch of the imagination. This is the first contact. We are not going to be paying taxes before May 10^th anyway.

Don Williams: Find out if you can what we have on the other contract. I think going local is the way to go but if that is a $500.00 fee or a $5000.00 fee we need to know about it.

Rick Martin: I assume Don you don’t want to hear the rest of my legal concerns this evening .

Don Williams: Go ahead and spit them out.

Rick Martin: The contract as I understand it here shows some miscellaneous provisions and I think I would probably object and request that these be re-written before entering into the contract here. We talk about a local company but the contract provides that the agreement is subject to interpretation under Texas law, with exclusive venue in Houston courts and to be resolved by finding arbitration in Houston, Texas at the request of either parties. So I think we need to get that changed to local. I guess beyond the others, that is really the only major concern I have from a legal standpoint. As far as that, I think that should be done locally rather than in Texas.

Don Williams: I agree.

Charles Christmas: After all those years you understand Texas law don’t you?

Rick Martin: Yes I am licensed to practice in Texas so you do have County attorney that is licensed to practice down there, if you guys want to keep it down there.

Don Williams: I may have to use my gavel the first time since Jack Pike left if you don’t sit down Charlie.

Laughter.

Thanks Charlie.

Don Williams: Item F, let’s get on with that.

Lynch Road Phase III - Purchase Agreement with Derrington, et al, for Wetland Mitigation:

Roger Emmons: This has to do with the Wetland Mitigation. The purchase agreement with Don Derrington and a couple of other owners. I talked to Charlie about this and he said he had reviewed it and it looks just fine as far as the purchase agreement. It is Donald R. Derrington, Kenneth A. Elliott and Carolyn S. Elliott, the three owners. It is $35,000.

Don Williams: This is for the wetland mitigation for Lynch Road ?

Roger Emmons: Yes.

Don Williams: Any questions gentlemen?

Phil Baxter: If we don’t do it, it stops the process.

MOTION: Phil Baxter made the motion to approve the purchase agreement with Derrington and Associates for the wetland mitigation.

SECOND: Don Williams

VOTE: 2 Ayes 1 Nay (Carl Conner)

Don Williams: Motion carries two to one.

Rick Martin: Can I jump back to the Resolution. I have reviewed the Resolution. Roger if you can look at it, it says be it resolved, the last paragraph, that we are requesting an extension to December 30, 2005, I think that should be 2004. As I read the thing we are requesting a five month extension to September 30, 2004. But down at the bottom we are saying 2005. Is that right?

Don Williams: I like the 2005.

Rick Martin: I guess we can request 2005. And if they want to give us to 2005 that would be even better. I am looking at the final Whereas Clause, it say Whereas, Warrick County needs five months from April 15 2004 to September 30, 2004 to demonstrate attainment, but at the bottom we are asking September 2005. I assume it is only our intention to ask for the five month extension to 2004. Other than that, from a legal standpoint I think the Resolution is appropriate and would recommend that I think from a legal standpoint a benefit for the County to pass the resolution.

Roger Emmons: Yes that is correct. I guess that is a typo.

Don Williams: It should be 2004. With that change September 2004. What is your pleasure gentlemen?

WARRICK COUNTY RESOLUTION 2004-03

WHEREAS, Warrick County, Indiana recognizes U.S. EPA must adhere to the Clean Air Act to designate areas meeting the criteria of nonattainment as nonattainment; and

WHEREAS, Warrick County understands U.S. EPA is bound by the consent decree to finalize nonattainment designations by April 15, 2004; and

WHEREAS, Warrick County contains three ozone monitors; two monitors demonstrate attainment with the 8-Hour design value of .085 ppm, with the 8-Hour standard being set at .084 ppm; and

WHEREAS, U.S. EPA proposes to designate Vanderburgh County and Warrick County as in nonattainment of the 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS, without regard to the wishes of the State of Indiana, the counties of Vanderburgh and Warrick County, or the City of Evansville, and irregardless of data, the research or demonstrations of attainment by U.S. EPA approved ozone monitors; and

WHEREAS, a nonattainment designation will hinder economic development without requiring any actions to improve air quality until at least 2007; and

WHEREAS, on December 16, 2003, U.S. EPA issued its Deferral of Effective Date of Nonattainment Designations for 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Early Action Compact Areas; and

WHEREAS, the Early Action compact Areas are areas which have signed an Early Action Compact to take measures to reduce ground-level earlier than would be required by the Clean Air Act. In exchange for early reductions measures, U.S. EPA proposes deferring the effective date of the 8-Hour ozone nonattainment designation for these areas until September 30, 2004, and

WHEREAS, Warrick County meets the spirit of the requirements of the Early Action Compacts, as described below:

1. Research indicated ozone levels in Southwest Indiana driven by the levels of Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) within our airshed. (See letter from Mayor Weinzapfel to U.S. EPA Region 5 dated February 12, 2004).

2. Warrick County, per U.S. EPA’s 1999 National Emission Inventory, contributes 23.3% of the NOx emissions and only 14.7% of the VOC emissions within our 2003 Metropolitan Statistical Area (“MSA”).

3. Warrick, Posey and Gibson Counties (within the 2003 MSA) contain major Nox sources, subject to the NOx SIP call.

4. As a result of the NOx SIP call, U.S.EPA predicts a sixty percent to eighty percent (60% -80/5) decrease in NOx emissions.

5. The major sources of NOx within the 2003 MSA have elected to install pollution control equipment to lower NOx emissions, rather than purchasing NOx emission credits. Therefore, this MSA should realize significant Nox reductions and consequently, significant improvement of ozone levels.

6. By U.S. EPA’s own modeling and predictions, the NOx emission reductions required by the NOx XIP call will allow Southwestern Indiana to attain the 8-Hour Oxone NAAQS.

7. The effective date of the nonattainment designation must be April 15, 2004 or earlier.

8. The Nox reduction equipment must be operational by May 31, 2004; and

WHEREAS, Warrick County needs five months: from April 15, 2004 to September 30, 2004, to allow Warrick County to demonstrate attainment of the 8-Hour ozone standard, and thereby render a nonattainment designation moot;

THEREFORE, the Commissioners of Warrick County, Indiana believe that it is in the best interest of the residents of Warrick County, Indiana, that the U.S. EPA defer the effective date of “Nonattainment Designation” so that sufficient time is provided to allow a demonstration of the NOx SIP call will be effective and a nonattainment designation for Warrick will be unnecessary;

BE IT RESOLVED, THAT THE Commissioners of Warrick County, Indiana hereby request that the U.S EPA defer the effective date of “Nonattainment Designation” for Warrick County until September 30, 2004.

MOTION: Carl Conner made the motion to support the recommendation of the Resolution that was submitted to us by the City of Boonville relative to the Ozone in asking for the extension.

SECOND: Phil Baxter

VOTE: 3 Ayes 0 Nays.

AUDITOR:

Claims:

Don Williams: Have you gentlemen had the chance to look at the claims? We have total claims in the amount of $993,314.87. Do you have any questions. I would entertain a motion.

MOTION: Phil Baxter made the motion to pay the claims in the amount of $993,314.87.

SECOND: Carl Conner

VOTE: 3 Ayes 0 Nays

COUNTY ATTORNEY:

Don Williams: County Attorney, do you have anything else?

Rick Martin: No I don’t.

ADMINISTRATOR:

Don Williams: County Administrator, do you have anything else?

Roger Emmons: Yes. Pat Brooks brought me today the FEMA Community Emergency Response Team Subgrant, to the amount of $3,152.92. She asked that the Commissioners approve that by motion and sign the grant to get those funds.

Don Williams: I would like to commend Mrs. Brooks for the amount of grant money she has gotten in the few months she has been in that office. It has been exceptional.

Roger Emmons: She has done great.

MOTION: Don Williams made the motion to sign that grant for $3,152.92 for FEMA.

SECOND: Phil Baxter

VOTE: 3 Ayes 0 Nays

Roger Emmons: Town of Tennyson sent us a letter asking for their spring clean up day to drop off a couple of 40 cubic yard containers at the Tennyson American Legion. They are having that April 24^th from 8 AM until Noon. I believe in conversation with Alan Ahrens, that he will only have one of those available. They have asked for two but they will obviously settle for one. They do have an account at the Blackfoot Landfill and they take the trash there, then they will direct bill the Town of Tennyson but otherwise, they will be happy to pay the dumping fee where ever we take it.

Don Williams: I would recommend to the Board that we approve the one and if two becomes available the second one also. It looks like we only have one. But if it should become available I think it would be good to offer it to them.

MOTION: Phil Baxter made the motion to approve the one and if two becomes available the second one also for the April 24^th Tennyson Spring Clean Up Day.

SECOND: Carl Conner

VOTE: 3 Ayes 0 Nays

Roger Emmons: The third item has to do with the, I have drafted a letter that you have a copy of to St. Mary’s Warrick Hospital to Mark Dooley the Administrator, to withhold $38,871.14 for the month of February.

MOTION: Carl Conner made the motion to approve the payment of $38,871.14 to Warrick Hospital for purposes of making up an deficit in the month of February and that $38,871.14 be withheld from collected revenues with the net being reimbursed to the County.

SECOND: Phil Baxter

VOTE: 3 Ayes 0 Nays

Roger Emmons: The HIPAA Business Associate Agreement with MedBen. I copies Rick on that and Dave Waltz our insurance broker from MedBen says that needs to be done so we can get it to MedBen before April 14^th. It is at no cost, it is an addendum to the current MedBen Benefit Management Agreement and I see it, it looks like MedBen is agreeing to comply with all HIPAA regulations. I would ask that Rick comment on that.

Rick Martin: Basically I have reviewed the addendum and that is clearly the purpose and intent of the addendum is just to come into compliance with the HIPAA requirements and in my review of it, I believe that it does so and that approval of the Business Associates Agreement is appropriate.

Don Williams: Any discussion?

MOTION: Phil Baxter made the motion to approve the amendment and sign the agreement.

SECOND: Carl Conner

VOTE: 3 Ayes 0 Nays

Roger Emmons: I had copied Rick on a letter from Barnes and Thornburgh, Richard Hall about the engagement letter for the two T.I.F. Districts. I don’t know if you want to cover that today or not.

Rick Martin: I think Roger, in my understanding and I will have to get with Barnes and Thornburgh but on the T.I.F. issues, the legal entity that has the authority to issue bonds and to take action on that is the Redevelopment Commission so that contract will need to be entered into by the Redevelopment Commission. I will get with Barnes and Thornburgh and have them redraft that agreement to be an agreement between Barnes and Thornburgh and the Redevelopment Commission.

Carl Conner: As a follow up to that Rick, I think basically what we are addressing here is the issue that came up last week in regards to bond counsel is that correct?

Rick Martin: That is correct, Carl.

Carl Conner: And I agree with you 100% that probably from a legal perspective the County Commissioners can not sign that contract, however, I would like to see this Board of Commissioners pass a motion with a recommendation to the Redevelopment and EDAC. I think that based upon being at that meeting last week I think that there are some obstacles being put before us and we need to let them know specifically that the County Commissioners are on record in regards to recommending that you as our attorney use Barnes and Thornburgh.

Rick Martin: I think that would be appropriate, Carl.

MOTION: Carl Conner made the motion to recommend to the Redevelopment and Economic Development Advisory Board that they employ Barnes and Thornburgh as bond counsel in regard to both T.I.F. Districts.

Don Williams: I do believe the Redevelopment Commission is the only one that has the authority to do that. Do I have a second?

SECOND: Don Williams

VOTE: 2 Ayes 1 Nay (Phil Baxter)

Carl Conner: And I would recommend that you put that in writing and send it to the Economic Development Director for distribution to each one of those members.

Roger Emmons: One quick item, when we took the bids on the roll off truck for the Landfill, the Commissioners agreed to a lease purchase agreement. The first payment is due at closing, however, the truck will not be delivered until July 1^st. Two options we have, with Old National Bank, we can go ahead and do the lease purchase and capture the interest rate that they have quoted which is a little over three percent. And the other possibility is we can wait but the interest rate may go up. If we close the lease now, we will have to put the money in an escrow account and that will cost $250.00. If we decide to wait until July 1^st or even late June that is where we are taking the chance on not getting the same interest rate we have now. So I didn’t know what you wanted to do.

Don Williams: What is that interest rate now?

Roger Emmons: A little over three percent.

Don Williams: Three quarters?

Roger Emmons: Two something, I think. It is very low.

Carl Conner: What are we borrowing a hundred thousand?

Roger Emmons: Hundred and two thousand. We initially gave them a figure of $115,000 just to get an idea and that was around $21,000. So it will be less now. So I didn’t know if you wanted to go ahead and proceed with it or just wait until we get closer to actually getting the truck.

Phil Baxter: What if the interest rate gets ...?

Don Williams: I don’t see it going up and after the prime rate, they were looking at it last time.

Carl Conner: I guess my question is we pay the $250.00 plus the interest, right?

Roger Emmons: He didn’t mention that but I would assume that would be correct.

Carl Conner: So it is just not the $250.00 we have to take into consideration.

Roger Emmons: He said he really didn’t know, he has told clients one thing that the interest rates were going to go up for a long time and they haven’t, they may go up tomorrow, you never know. But we do have a low rate right now. I wanted to let the Commissioners know, I would like to get their advise as to how you want to proceed with that.

Carl Conner: If we lock into it now, we are going to pay the $250.00 plus the interest up to July?

Roger Emmons: Yes.

Carl Conner: What is the date we are locking in? Is it in March?

Roger Emmons: It is the last day of this month.

MOTION: Carl Conner made the motion to go ahead and lock in the present rate and pay the penalty of $250.00 and have the money put in escrow.

SECOND: Phil Baxter

VOTE: 3 Ayes 0 Nays

Thank you.

SIGN IN SHEET:

Don Williams: There is nothing on the sign in sheet.

COMMISSIONERS ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION:

Don Williams: Commissioner Baxter do you have any thing to present .

Commissioner Baxter: No.

Don Williams: Mr. Conner do you have anything to present?

Commissioner Conner: No sir, I don’t have anything.

Commissioner Williams: The only thing I have is the Library appointment and it has been done. So I would entertain a motion to adjourn.

MOTION: Carl Conner made the motion to adjourn.

SECOND: Phil Baxter

VOTE: 3 Ayes 0 Nays

WARRICK COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

______________________________________

DON WILLIAMS, PRESIDENT

ATTEST:

______________________________________

________________________________________________ CARL CONNER

RICHARD KIXMILLER, AUDITOR

WARRICK COUNTY, IN ______________________________________

PHIL BAXTER