October 27, 2015 at 5:30 PM Work Session Agenda - AMENDED · 10/27/2015 · 1 | Page October 27,...

1 | P a g e

October 27, 2015 at 5:30 PM Work Session Agenda - AMENDED

1. Call to Order _________________________________________________________________________________ 2. SOLID WASTE MANAGE DISTRICT, Tom McGlasson Pages 6-14 -State Required Landfill Post-Closure Financial Assurance _________________________________________________________________________________ 3. AUDITOR, Steve Saulter & TREASURER, Cathy Smith

Discussion regarding Hartman-Williams Report _________________________________________________________________________________ 4. COUNCIL, Michael Flory 5

Discussion regarding – “Policy for Starting Certain New Hires at Above the Presumptive Initial Salary”

_________________________________________________________________________________ 5. SHERIFF’S OFFICE, Brad Swain Pages 16-22 Discussion of Monroe County Police Retirement Plan _________________________________________________________________________________ 6. AUDITOR’S OFFICE, Steve Saulter Page 23 A. Request for Approval to Amend 2015 Salary Ordinance FUND 1121-002, General COIT FROM: 12.7801 Part-Time Hourly Range: $10.00 - $15.00

TO: 12.7801 Part-Time Hourly Range: $10.00 - $19.25 (Auditor requests that this be retro to April 1, 2015) <><><><><> B. Request to Approve Revised Job Description Pages 24-32 FUND 1121-002, General COIT 10.0004 Payroll Financial Representative

MONROE COUNTY COUNCIL Monroe County Courthouse

Room 306 100 W Kirkwood Avenue Bloomington, IN 47404

Phone: (812) 349-7312 Fax: (812) 349-2982

Cheryl Munson, President Shelli Yoder, Vice President

Ryan Cobine Rick Dietz

Marty Hawk Lee Jones

Geoff McKim R. Michael Flory, Council Attorney

Kim Shell, Council Assistant

Page 1 of 175

2 | P a g e

<><><><><> C. Request for Approval to Amend 2015 Salary Ordinance Pages 33-34 FUND 1121-002, General COIT FROM: 10.0004 Payroll Financial Rep 35 hrs COMOT V 1 Year $32,995.00

TO: 10.0004 Payroll Financial Rep 35 hrs PAT III 1 Year $36,232.00 (See attached Exhibit C – Page 88) _________________________________________________________________________________ 7. TREASURER’S OFFICE, Cathy Smith Pages 35-42 A. Request to Approve Revised Job Description FUND 1121-003, General COIT 10.0003 Financial Cash Manager <><><><><> B. Request for Approval to Amend 2015 Salary Ordinance FUND 1121-003, General COIT FROM: 10.0003 Financial /Cash Book 35 hrs PAT II MID $35,793.00

TO: 10.0003 Financial Cash Manager 35 hrs PAT IV MID $40,286.00 (See attached Exhibit D – Page 88) <><><><><> C. Request for Approval to Reinstate Position Pages 43-49 FUND 1121-003, General COIT 10.0004 Deputy Judgments 35 hrs COMOT III MID $29,575.00 (See attached Exhibit E – Page 89) <><><><><> D. Request for Approval to Amend 2015 Salary Ordinance FUND 1121-003, General COIT FROM: 10.0004 Deputy Judgments 35 hrs COMOT III MID $ -0-

TO: 10.0004 Deputy Judgments 35 hrs COMOT III MID $29,575.00 _________________________________________________________________________________

of 175

3 | P a g e

8. COURT SERVICES, Bret Raper Pages 50-52 Request for Approval for Additional Appropriations FUND 8122-022, IV-D Parenting Time PTOC Grant 11.8101 FICA $ 2,000.00 12.7801 Hourly $ 26,080.00 20.0001 Supplies $ 1,217.00 30.0001 Travel $ 4,413.00 30.0004 Contractual $ 44,090.00 30.0005 Other Contractual $ 22,200.00 TOTAL $100,000.00 _________________________________________________________________________________ 9. PLANNING DEPARTMENT, Larry Wilson Page 53 A. Request to Hire Senior Planner at the Midpoint FUND 1000-079, General 10.0008 Senior Planner 40 hrs PAT IV MID $46,041.00 <><><><><> B. Request for Approval to Amend 2015 Salary Ordinance Page 54 FUND 1000-079, General FROM: 10.0006 Planner 1 35 hrs PAT III 1 Year $36,232.00 10.0007 Planner/GIS Specialist 35 hrs PAT III 1 Year $36,232.00 10.0013 Planner/GIS Specialist 35 hrs PAT III 1 Year $36,232.00

TO: 10.0006 Planner 1 40 hrs PAT III 1 Year $41,408.00 10.0007 Planner/GIS Specialist 40 hrs PAT III 1 Year $41,408.00 10.0013 Planner/GIS Specialist 40 hrs PAT III 1 Year $41,408.00 (See attached Exhibit B – Page 87) <><><><><> C. Request for Approval to Transfer Funds Page 55 FUND 1000-079, General FROM: 12.7801 Hourly/Work Study $10,008.00

TO: 30.0007 Consultant Fees/Legal Expenses $10,008.00 <><><><><> Pages 56-75

of 175

4 | P a g e

D. Request for Creation of New Fund with Budget Lines and Simultaneous Additional Appropriations

FUND 9127-000, Limestone Heritage Project 30.0012 Website Design/Development $3,500.00 30.0013 Domain Name/Maintenance $ 50.00 30.0014 Annual Site Maintenance/Host $ 500.00 30.0015 Software Licensing $ 500.00 30.0016 Printing/Supplies/Miscellaneous $ 450.00 TOTAL $5,000.00 <><><><><> Pages 76-78

E. Request for Creation of New Fund with Budget Lines and Simultaneous Additional Appropriations

FUND 9128-000, Indiana Landmarks/Indiana Humanities Educational Outreach Program 30.0017 Project Consultant $ 700.00 30.0018 Travel/Per Diem $ 750.00 30.0019 Supplies/Equipment $ 300.00 30.0020 Printing/Postage $ 250.00 TOTAL $2,000.00 _________________________________________________________________________________ 10. PROSECUTOR’S OFFICE, Beth Hamlin Pages 79-80 A. Request for Approve to Create New Budget Line FUND 1000-009, General 10.0053 Case Management/Tech Specialist <><><><><> B. Request for Approval to Amend 2015 Salary Ordinance FUND 1000-009, General 10.0053 Case Management/Tech Specialist 35hrs PAT III Mid $25,354.00 _________________________________________________________________________________ 11. RECORDER’S OFFICE, Eric Schmitz Pages 81-82 Request for Approval for Additional Appropriations FUND 1217-000, County Elected Officials Training Fund 30.0001 Officials Training Seminars $10,000.00 _________________________________________________________________________________ 12. PROBATION OFFICE, Linda Brady Pages 83-84 A. Request for Approval of Creation of New Budget Lines FUND 1122-004, Community Corrections Grant 10.0022 CASP Case Manager/PO 10.0023 CASP Case Manager/PO <><><><>

of 175

5 | P a g e

B. Request for Approval to Amend 2015 Salary Ordinance FUND 1000-009, General 10.0022 CASP Case Manager/PO 35 hrs SO Per State $48,869.00 10.0023 CASP Case Manager/PO 35 hrs SO Per State $48,869.00 _________________________________________________________________________________ 13. COUNTY COUNCIL OFFICE, Michael Flory Page 85 Request for Approval for Additional Appropriations

FUND 1000-061, General 11.8201 PERF $12,200.00 12.7801 Part-Time Hourly $ 9,500.00 30.0003 Contractual Services $ 1,000.00 30.0012 Community Services $ 3,000.00 TOTAL $41,500.00 _________________________________________________________________________________ 14. VETERANS’ AFFAIRS OFFICE, Larry Catt Page 86 Request for Approval to Transfer Funds FUND 1000-012, General FROM: 10.0002 Secretary Part-Time (1) $1,000.00

TO: 30.0001 Training/Travel $1,000.00 _________________________________________________________________________________ 15. APPROVAL OF MINUTES -September 1, 2015 Budget Hearing Pages 90-139 -September 3, 2015 Budget Hearing Pages 140-175 _________________________________________________________________________________ 16. COUNCIL COMMENTS _________________________________________________________________________________ 17. ADJOURNMENT

of 175

of 175

MEMORANDUM DATE: September 9, 2015 TO: MCSWMD Board of Directors FROM: Tom McGlasson Jr. SUBJECT: Post-Closure Financial Assurance Options The following is a summary of the seven (7) options available under the law to demonstrate post-closure financial assurance (329 IAC 10-39-3):

1) Trust Fund option (329 IAC 10-39-3(a)(1)) a. This is more applicable to operating landfills with the idea that the trust fund would grow,

through annual installment payments, over the life of the landfill to an amount great enough to cover the cost of closure and post-closure at the time the landfill closes.

b. For us to use this option, already being in post-closure, we would need to establish the trust fund now in an amount greater than or equal to the calculated remaining post-closure cost estimate ($2,864,250.00). The previously established trust fund for landfill closure is still in place and is currently valued at $692,717.87.

2) Surety Bond option (329 IAC 10-39-3(a)(2)) a. Two options:

i. Financial Guarantee surety bond ii. Performance surety bond

b. Penal sum must be equal to the calculated post-closure cost estimate, which will be required to be updated annually.

c. May not be terminated without IDEM authorization. d. Standby trust fund must be established in accordance with requirements of 329 IAC 10-39-

3(a)(1). We have investigated this option with Nate Peterman of Hylant and he has advised that based on our current post-closure cost estimate ($2,864,250.00) we should expect to pay an annual premium between $57,000.00 and $71,000.00

3) Letter-Of-Credit option (329 IAC 10-39-3(a)(3))

a. Must be in amount equal to calculated post-closure cost estimate b. Must be irrevocable c. Minimum effective period of one (1) year with automatic extensions of at least one (1) year.

i. Must Issuing institution may cancel by providing written notice to both permittee and IDEM at least one hundred and twenty (120) days before effective date of cancellation.

d. Standby trust fund must be established in accordance with requirements of 329 IAC 10-39-3(a)(1).

4) Insurance option (329 IAC 10-39-3(a)(4))

a. Must be in amount equal to calculated post-closure cost estimate b. Policy must remain in full force and effect unless IDEM provide written consent to termination c. Policy must be transferrable to subsequent permittee/responsible party

Monroe County Solid

Waste Management

District

of 175

d. Insurer may not cancel, terminate or fail to renew for any reason other than non-payment of premium

i. No policy may be canceled, terminate or not renewed unless insurer provide written notice to permittee and IDEM at least one hundred and twenty (120) days in advance.

We have investigated this option with Nate Peterman of Hylant and he has advised that based on our current post-closure cost estimate ($2,864,250.00) we should expect to pay an annual premium between $57,000.00 and $71,000.00

5) Financial Test for Restricted Waste Sites option (329 IAC 10-39-3(a)(5))

a. Not applicable to our facility

6) Local Government Financial Test option (329 IAC 10-39-3(a)(6)) a. If outstanding, rated general bond obligations that are not secured by insurance, letter-of-credit,

or other collateral or guarantee, must have current rating of: i. Aaa, Aa, A, or Baa by Moody’s; or

ii. AAA, AA, A, or BBB by Standard and Poor’s b. Most recent audited financial statement must show:

i. Ratio of cash plus marketable securities to total expenditures less than or equal to five-hundredths (0.05)

ii. Ratio of annual debt service to total expenditures less than or equal to two-tenths (0.20) c. Financial statements prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles for

governments and be audited by an independent CPA or state board of accounts d. Not eligible of any of the following apply:

i. Currently in default on any outstanding general obligation bond ii. Has any general obligation bonds rated lower than Baa, as issued by Moody’s, or BBB,

as issued by Standard and Poor’s iii. Has operated at a deficit equal to five percent (5%) or more of the total annual revenue

each of the past two (2) fiscal years. iv. Received an adverse opinion, disclaimer of opinion, or other qualified opinion from a

CPA of the state board of accounts. IDEM may review these on a case by case basis and elect to still allow use of this financial test.

e. Must place reference to the assured post-closure costs in into the next comprehensive annual financial report.

f. Total costs to be assured may not exceed forty-three percent (43%) of total annual revenue i. If any other environmental obligation costs are assured through a local government

financial test, all obligations combined may not exceed forty-three percent (43%) of total annual revenue

The District does not meet requirement “f” above. Based on our current post-closure cost estimate of $2,864,250.00 we would need to show revenue greater than or equal to $6,661,047.00 to not exceed the 43% requirement. The government of Monroe County, Indiana would meet this requirement, and, based on my review of the financial data available to me, should be able to meet all other requirements.

7) Local Government Guarantee option (329 IAC 10-39-3(a)(7))

a. This works the same as #6 above, allowing local government to demonstrate financial assurance for a facility, regardless of ownership, if they so choose.

b. Termination and cancellation clauses exist similar to those for the surety bond, insurance and letter-of-credit options

of 175

Discussion regarding: “Policy for Starting Certain New Hires at Above the Presumptive Initial Salary” Policy Draft will be sent separately

of 175

From: Brad Swain Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2015 1:23 PM To: Cheryl Munson Gmail; Lee Jones; Michael Flory Cc: Stan Brown ([email protected]) Subject: FW: Review of Second Amendment to the Monroe County Police Retirement Plan (M199) Cheryl, Lee, Michael This is the proposed amendment to the retirement fund. Michael, I mentioned briefly that I planned to make changes to the pension. Our representative (Stan Brown) from McCready and Keene visited the Sheriff’s Office recently and explained to deputies and I, our present benefits and the changes I would like to see. I invited Cheryl and Lee. Cheryl was able to attend. In hindsight, I should have advised you as well‐ just dawned on me that you may have wanted to ask questions. I am sure Mr. Brown would be happy to communicate with you. Per statute, any changes to the pension benefits must have the consent of Sheriff, Merit Board, and Fiscal Body. I wish to present these changes at the most convenient time. I am sure Mr. Brown would be able to come to a Council work session to explain as well (Stan, Mr. Flory is Council attorney). The changes I am requesting are copied here from my email with Stan Brown

1. For new hires, makes Normal Retirement Age defined as Age 55 and 10 or more years of

service 2. For new hires, changes vesting to 100% vested after 10 years of service 3. Adds the unmarried death benefit for active participants (applies to current participants

and new hires) Regards, Brad From: Cheryl Statzer [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2015 12:54 PM To: Brad Swain <[email protected]> Cc: Stan Brown <[email protected]>; Lori Furgason <[email protected]> Subject: Review of Second Amendment to the Monroe County Police Retirement Plan (M199)

Dear Sheriff: As requested, attached for your review and that of your legal counsel is a Second Amendment to the Monroe County Police Retirement Plan. This Amendment adds a service requirement to normal retirement, increases the service requirement for vesting, and adds a death benefit for vested participants who are not married.

of 175

If the First Amendment is acceptable, please have it signed as soon as possible. You should retain a signed and dated copy of the Amendment in your files and return one copy to me either electronically or to the address below. If you would like, you may simply return the signature page of the document. A signed copy of the Amendment should be forwarded to your Committee and one to the County Council also. We have also updated the Summary of Plan Provisions (SPP). The SPP provides employees with a summary of the provisions of the Retirement Plan and the Benefit Plan. However, since the document makes reference to the changes contained in the Second Amendment and the date of these changes, we will finalize it once we know the effective date of the Amendment. We will then forward it to you for distribution to participants. If you have any questions regarding the Amendment, please don't hesitate to contact Stan Brown by calling (317) 285-6501 or by email at [email protected]. Sincerely, Cheryl Statzer Plan Writer Specialist office: (317) 285-6531

One American Square, P.O. Box 368 Indianapolis, IN 46206 www.oneamerica.com

of 175

SECOND AMENDMENT

TO

MONROE COUNTY POLICE RETIREMENT PLAN

WHEREAS, Monroe County Police Retirement Plan (hereinafter referred to as

"Plan") was established by Monroe County Sheriff’s Department, Bloomington, Indiana

(hereinafter referred to as "Employer"), effective as of January 1, 1973; as amended by a

complete restatement effective January 1, 2013, and as last amended by a First

Amendment effective as of the dates indicated therein; and

WHEREAS, by Section 11.01 of the Plan, the Employer reserved the right to

amend the Plan with the approval of the Merit Board and the county fiscal body; and

WHEREAS, the Employer desires to amend the Plan in certain respects

heretofore considered and discussed;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Plan shall be amended,

effective as of the first day of the month coincident or next following the execution of

this Second Amendment by the Sheriff's Department, Merit Board and County Council,

to read as follows:

1. Section 2.01 of the Plan is hereby amended by the insertion of new language

immediately before the reference to a definition of Normal Retirement Age in order to cross-

reference the provisions of the amendment to Normal Retirement; such new language to read

as follows:

"Normal Retirement

5.01"

2. Section 5.01 of the Plan is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows:

"Section 5.01. Normal Retirement. The Normal Retirement requirement for a

Participant originally hired prior to the effective date of this Second Amendment is

attainment of age fifty-five (55). If a Participant is hired on or after the effective date of this

Second Amendment, Normal Retirement requirements are at least ten (10) years of Credited

Service and attainment of age fifty-five (55). The Normal Retirement Date of a Participant

is (a) the date he satisfies the requirements for Normal Retirement if he satisfies the

requirements on the first day of a month or (b) the first day of the first month following his

satisfaction of Normal Retirement requirements if he satisfies the requirements on a day

other than the first day of the month. 'Normal Retirement Age' means, with respect to a

Participant, the Participant's age as of his Normal Retirement Date."


"Section 7.01. Severance Benefits.

"(a) Upon attainment of Normal Retirement Age, a Participant shall be one

hundred percent (100%) vested even if he has not severed employment. In the event of

of 175

severance of a Participant's employment with the Employer because of retirement, he shall be

one hundred percent (100%) vested in the benefit earned as of his date of severance. In the

event of severance of a Participant's employment for reasons of death or disability, any

benefit payable from this Plan shall be governed by Sections 7.02 and 8.02, respectively. In

the event of severance of a Participant's employment with the Employer for reasons other

than death, retirement or disability, and after completion of the minimum number of years of

Credited Service required for vesting, he shall be entitled to receive either (1) or (2) below, at

his option:

(1) A lump sum payment which shall consist of the Net Amount of

Contributions as of the date of severance plus the amount transferred by the

Participant (adjusted for interest at a rate that ensures the Plan remains

actuarially cost neutral) pursuant to Section 3.04 for the purchase of Credited

Service."

(2) A monthly benefit equal to the amount of benefit earned by the

Participant as of his date of severance multiplied by the percentage set forth in

the following table:

For Employees whose initial employment commencement date is prior to the

effective date of this First Amendment:

Credited Service Vested Percentage

At Severance Of Earned Benefit

Less than 8 0%

8 or more 100%

For Employees whose initial employment commencement date is on or after the

effective date of this First Amendment:

Credited Service Vested Percentage

At Severance Of Earned Benefit

Less than 10 0%

10 or more 100%

A former Participant who elects the benefit under subsection (a)(2) must notify

the Committee of his then current address when such individual attains his

commencement date so that benefit payments may commence thereafter. Failure

to so notify the Committee by the Participant's seventieth (70th) birthday shall

cause the benefit described herein to be forfeited.

"(b) A Participant whose employment with the Employer severs for reasons other

than death, retirement or disability and who, as of his date of severance, has not completed

the minimum number of years of Credited Service required for vesting, shall be entitled to

the payment as set forth in subsection (a)(1) above.

of 175

"(c) If a Participant elects payment of the Net Amount of Contributions, as

provided in subsection (a)(1), such payment shall be made as soon as practicable after the

Participant's severance from employment. If a Participant elects payment of the benefit

provided in subsection (a)(2), then benefits shall commence on the Participant's Normal

Retirement Date, unless the Participant elects otherwise pursuant to this subsection (c). A

Participant who elects a monthly benefit as provided in subsection (a)(2) and who is credited

with at least twenty (20) years of Credited Service may elect to receive a monthly benefit

commencing on the first day of any month commencing after he reaches Early Retirement

Age equal to the amount of benefit earned by him as of his date of severance from

employment reduced five-twelfths percent (5/12%) for each completed month by which the

commencement date of such benefit precedes what would have been his Normal Retirement

Date. Payments of such benefit shall continue thereafter until the first day of the month in

which such former Participant dies. In lieu of a life annuity, a former Participant may elect

to receive the Actuarial Equivalent of such benefit in accordance with any of the options

provided in Section 6.04 at any time after he is eligible to commence such benefit and before

such benefit actually commences.

"(d) In the event that the employment of a Participant, otherwise eligible for the

benefit described in subsection (a)(2) above, is severed due to said Participant's dishonesty or

misconduct which relates to his employment with the Employer, the Committee, at any time

prior to the applicability of Section 11.02, shall have the power to cause the Participant to

forfeit the benefit for which he would otherwise be eligible. The Committee shall apply this

power in a nondiscriminatory and uniform manner to all Participants in similar

circumstances."


"Section 8.02. Death Benefits Before Retirement. In the event a Participant

dies prior to the commencement of any benefit from this Plan, a death benefit shall be

payable in accordance with subsections (a), (b), (c), and (d) as follows:

"(a) If a Participant who does not have a vested interest in the Plan dies while

employed by the Employer or after severance from employment for any reason, but prior

to the commencement of any benefit from this Plan, his designated Beneficiary shall be

entitled to receive a death benefit which shall be a lump sum equal to his Net Amount of

Contributions at time of death plus the amount transferred by the Participant pursuant to

Section 3.04 for the purchase of Credited Service (adjusted for interest at a rate that

ensures the Plan remains actuarially cost neutral). If a married Participant dies who has a

vested interest in the Plan, his designated Beneficiary shall be entitled to a lump sum

equal to the greater of (i) his DROP Benefit Accumulation if he had entered the DROP,

or (ii) the Net Amount of Contributions at time of death. If an unmarried Participant dies

who has a vested interest in the Plan, his designated Beneficiary shall be entitled to a

lump sum equal to the greater of (i) his DROP Benefit Accumulation if he had entered

the DROP, or (ii) the Net Amount of Contributions at time of death plus the amount

transferred by the Participant pursuant to Section 3.04 for the purchase of Credited

of 175

Service (adjusted for interest at a rate that ensures the Plan remains actuarially cost

neutral).

"(b) In addition to the lump sum equal to the greater of (i) his DROP Benefit

Accumulation or (ii) the Net Amount of Contributions at time of death, if a married

Participant who has a vested benefit in the Plan dies while employed by the Employer or

after severance from employment, for any reason, but prior to the commencement of any

benefit from this Plan, his surviving spouse shall be entitled to a monthly survivor benefit

payable in accordance with this subsection (b) for the remaining lifetime of such

surviving spouse. If the Participant had satisfied the requirements for Early Retirement at

the date of his death, then such monthly survivor benefit shall commence as of the first

day of the month following his date of death unless the spouse elects a later

commencement date. Such later commencement date may not be later than the

Participant's Normal Retirement Date. However, if the Participant's death occurs after he

has reached Normal Retirement Age, the benefit shall commence the first day of the

month following his death. The amount of the death benefit shall be equal to the survivor

annuity that would have been payable if the Participant had severed employment and

immediately prior to his date of death had commenced receipt of his retirement benefits

in the form of an Actuarially Equivalent one hundred percent (100%) joint and survivor

annuity with adjusted level monthly payments to the Participant during his lifetime and

continued monthly payments in the same amount for the lifetime of his surviving spouse.

If the Participant had not satisfied the requirements for Early Retirement under the

Plan at the date of his death, the payment of benefits to the surviving spouse shall

commence on the date specified by the spouse, provided the date is not earlier than the

Participant's Early Retirement Date and is not later than the Participant's Normal

Retirement Date. The amount of benefit is calculated assuming the Participant had (i)

severed employment with the Employer on the earlier of the Participant's actual severance

from employment or the date of the Participant's death, (ii) survived to the date of

commencement of the death benefit elected by the surviving spouse, (iii) commenced

receipt of his deferred vested severance benefit as of his Early Retirement Age or his

Normal Retirement Age, depending on the commencement date elected by his surviving

spouse, in the form of an Actuarial Equivalent one hundred percent (100%) joint and

survivor annuity with adjusted level monthly payments to the Participant during his

lifetime and continued monthly payments in the same amount for the lifetime of his

surviving spouse, and (iv) died on the day after the commencement date elected by his

surviving spouse.

"(c) In addition to the lump sum equal to the greater of (i) his DROP Benefit

Accumulation, if any, or (ii) the Net Amount of Contributions at time of death, if an unmarried

Participant who has a vested benefit in the Plan dies on or after effective date of this First

Amendment and while employed by the Employer or after severance from employment for any

reason, but prior to the commencement of any benefit under this Plan, his Beneficiary shall be

entitled to a death benefit. The death benefit shall equal two hundred forty (240) monthly

payments that would have been payable to the Participant if he had severed employment on his

date of death and elected a life annuity with two hundred forty

of 175

(240) guaranteed payments as described in Section 6.04(a)(1) payable at his Normal

Retirement Date. The Beneficiary entitled to receive the value of such guaranteed payments

shall be determined in accordance with the definition of Beneficiary in Section 2.01(c)."

"(d) For a DROP Participant, the foregoing provisions of this Section shall

apply to any death benefit payable for the DROP Frozen Benefit. The DROP Benefit

Accumulation shall be paid to the Participant's surviving spouse in a lump sum. If there

is no surviving spouse, the DROP Benefit Accumulation shall be paid in a lump sum that

is divided equally among the Participant's surviving children. If there are no surviving

children, the DROP Benefit Accumulation shall be paid in a lump sum that is divided

equally between the Participant's parents. If there are no surviving parents, the DROP

Benefit Accumulation shall be paid in a lump sum to the Participant's estate."

In witness of its adoption of the foregoing amendment to the Plan, the Employer

has caused this amendment to be executed as of the ___ day of ,

______.

MONROE COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT

By

Sheriff of Monroe County

Approved and ratified at a meeting of the Monroe County Sheriff’s Merit Board on

the ____ day of , ____.

MONROE COUNTY SHERIFF’S MERIT BOARD

Approved and ratified at a meeting of the County Council of Monroe County on the

____ day of , ____.

COUNTY COUNCIL OF MONROE COUNTY

of 175

REQUEST FOR APPROVAL FROM MONROE COUNTY COUNCIL TO AMEND 2015 SALARY ORDINANCE (Rev. 05-04)

Department Head: Steve Saulter, Auditor

Date: 09/16/2015

Department: Auditor Date: 09/16/15

Fund Name: County General – Auditor 1121-002

Position Number and Name Present Salary Requested Salary

12.7801 Part-Time Hourly $10.00 - $15.00/hr. $10.00 – $19.25/hr.

If salary increase request where will the additional funds come from?

Sufficient amount is already appropriated in this Fund to cover for the remainder of the year.

Reason for Request

To make the hourly salary for part-time staff who is qualified and currently fulfilling the duties of a full-time position more in line with the proper pay for such duties. These duties were previously performed by a full-time employee and are COMOT IV level work. Further, we request that the Council make this Salary Ordinance amendment retroactive to date of hire of April 21, 2015.

Send completed form to the Council Attorney and County Council Administrative Assistant in the Council Office prior to the deadline (see appropriate resolution concerning the Council meeting schedule for deadline dates). Requests received after the deadline will placed on the following month’s agenda.

of 175

of 175

Auditor/PayrollAdmin

POSITION DESCRIPTION

COUNTY OF MONROE, INDIANA

POSITION: Payroll Administrator

DEPARTMENT: Auditor

WORK SCHEDULE: 8:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m., M-F

JOB CATEGORY: PAT (Professional, Administrative, Technological)

DATE WRITTEN: September 1991 STATUS: Full-time

DATE REVISED: July 2015 FLSA STATUS: Non-exempt

To perform this position successfully, an individual must be able to perform each essential duty satisfactorily. The requirements listed in this document are representative of the knowledge, skill, and/or ability required.

The County of Monroe provides reasonable accommodation to qualified employees and applicants with

known disabilities who require accommodation to complete the application process or perform essential

functions of the job, unless the accommodation would cause an undue hardship.

Incumbent serves as Payroll Administrator for the Monroe County Auditor's Office, responsible

for administering the County payroll, conducting internal audits, preparing specialized taxes, and

coordinating tax reporting.

DUTIES:

Oversees daily operations of all payroll activities, including preparing and distributing County

payroll checks for all County employees, and training and supervising payroll employees.

Serves as internal payroll auditor for the County, auditing payroll for all County departments and

employees. Plans, organizes, and conducts a variety of internal audits to evaluate payroll

functions. Reviews and assesses payroll activities to ensure compliance with established laws,

codes, regulations, policies and procedures. Ensures proper application of internal controls.

Identifies payroll discrepancies, documents audit findings, investigates issues, and works with

department heads and Auditor to correct and resolve issues. Conducts follow-up audits to ensure

issue is corrected.

Receives and responds to State Board of Accounts audit questions and concerns related to

payroll and benefits and makes adjustments/changes as needed.

Implements garnishments as directed by court orders or other governmental agencies, such as

student loans, child support, and judgments.

Configures and updates payroll ledger database, including posting bi-weekly payroll accounting

from various funds, and balancing and reconciling funds for all County departments accordingly.

of 175


Coordinates with County Treasurer for reconciliation of payroll accounts and electronic funds

transfers.

Receives payroll vouchers and timesheets from all departments, reviews all timesheets for

signature of elected official, department head or office managers. Balances all payroll per fund,

departments and updates ledger interface in payroll for all new funds, departments and

deductions. Verifies and reconciles assigned general ledger accounts. Adjusts payroll manually

for off cycle pay periods to fix discrepancies and payroll adjustments for employees as needed.

Creates direct deposit file and sends to Treasurer to submit to banks.

Processes longevity checks, plan commission, board members, uniform pay, transcript pay and

all other special pays when applicable.

Prepares claim docket bi-weekly including all payroll expenditures for County Board of

Commissioners.

Responds to employee inquiries regarding payroll, deductions, insurance expenses, taxes and

various other questions/concerns as appropriate. Assists in providing information and

explanation to employees for benefits, personnel policies and work rules. Assists in

communicating Human Resource policies and ensuring compliance with County personnel

policy. Provides training and instruction for county employees on payroll process and

procedures. Distributes necessary documentation for payroll to employees. Communicates with

Elected Officials, office managers, department heads and employees regarding inner office

transfers, termination paperwork and final pays.

Creates payroll vouchers for Auditors Office staff to process payroll. Maintains Auditor’s staff

employee service records tracking all sick, vacation and comp-time. Balances with timesheets for

accuracy.

Accumulates employee service records for all other county employees for State Board of

Accounts purposes.

Processes new hire paperwork in payroll ledger. Updates payroll ledger with when needed in

salaries, job description and appropriation lines. Maintains all paper files securely for direct

deposits and garnishment forms.

Prepares proper notification and advertisements to local newspapers as needed.

Creates paystubs via payroll module to upload into the employee portal. Serves as Administrator

for county employee portal for new users, passwords and resetting accounts and enrollment.

Creates, runs and distributes payroll reports to officials and departments as needed.

of 175


Verifies employment for all county employees and verifies wages in response to legal requests.

Assists and maintains creation of timesheets for all county employees. Helps departments, and

employees with errors in formulas and questions for accuracy in benefit time.

Sends letters to county employees concerning delinquent property taxes provided by County

Treasurer’s Office. Maintains the garnishments and ledger pertaining to the delinquent taxes and

adjusts payroll deductions accordingly.

Pays all unemployment benefit claims.

Maintains employee and employer paid benefits including all insurance. Resolves all

discrepancies with all carriers and employee deductions. Works closely with all insurance

carriers to reconcile all deduction issues and makes proper changes to correct invoices and

payroll deductions. Reconciles monthly billing from all providers, reviews for accuracy and pays

via checks/websites. Terms employees/life events for benefits in PERF and all current agencies

uploading files through proper validation and balancing. Adjusts pay and deductions for

employees with FMLA leave and workers comp. Creates report in excel to upload and pay

employees 957 plan and balances via website. Administers and maintains Sheriff retirement

funds, reporting, balancing fund and remitting payments. Setup, administers and pays the

Government Reassurance program for Affordable Care Act.

Balances payroll to fill out Federal 941 form for withholdings, prints report and completes the

State UC-1 form for reporting quarterly wages.

Processes election workers/poll workers pay as required, balances according to special federal

tax guidelines for poll workers.

Closes out payroll for current year to process W-2’s and reports to State and Federal Agencies,

entering employer paid portion of employee benefits to comply, and rolling over into new year,

sending files to be printed and uploaded to employee portal for electronic printing and viewing.

Processes year end procedures by balancing payroll, manually enters new enrollment deductions

for all benefits for all employees.

Processes necessary documentation and ensures compliance with applicable laws, standards and

government regulations.

Assists in auditing County pay claims, ensuring proper format, calculations, and compliance with

legal requirements. Discusses suitability of purchases with County Auditor as needed, and

communicates with County personnel regarding appropriate expenditures.

of 175


Monitors fund balances for individual departments and communicates with all departments

regarding their appropriations, budgets and fund status. Assists with the distribution of all fund

status reports and responds to individual inquiries concerning funds as appropriate.

Maintains current knowledge of auditing methods, practices, and related laws, codes, regulations,

policies and procedures.

Represents the Auditor and office in a customer service role by answering telephones/greeting

customers in a welcoming and friendly manner, taking messages, and directing callers/visitors to

appropriate individual or department.

Assists other department personnel with budgets, funds, postings and other duties as requested.

Performs related duties as assigned.

I. JOB REQUIREMENTS:

Associate Degree and/or equivalent combination of training and work experience required.

Baccalaureate Degree in accounting, finance, or related field preferred.

Thorough knowledge of accounting systems and requirements of Monroe County and all

regulating/auditing agencies, with ability to maintain complete and accurate accounting records

and compile timely and accurate payroll and other financial reports.

Thorough knowledge of customary and prescribed practices of salary administration in the public

sector, with basic knowledge and understanding of County budgets, tax distributions, and the

general ledger, and ability to apply such knowledge to a variety of interrelated processes, tasks,

and operations.

Thorough knowledge of auditing standards and procedures, laws, rules and regulations.

Working knowledge of standard office procedures and ability to apply such knowledge to a

variety of interrelated processes, tasks and operations.

Working knowledge of standard English grammar, spelling and punctuation, and ability to

prepare various legal documents and detailed written reports as required.

Ability to maintain knowledge of all computer software programs used by Auditor's Office,

proficiency in spreadsheet and database design, and ability to organize and interpret large

amounts of data.

Ability to perform the statutory duties as prescribed for the County Auditor’s Office as

authorized by the Auditor.

of 175


Ability to properly operate standard office equipment, including computer, typewriter, calculator,

telephone, copier, and fax machine.

Ability to effectively communicate orally and in writing with co-workers, other County

departments, County employees, State Auditor’s Office, Government entities, benefits providers,

all taxing units of Monroe County, and the public, including being sensitive to professional

ethics, gender, cultural diversities and disabilities.

Ability to provide public access to or maintain confidentiality of department information and

records according to state requirements.

Ability to comply with all employer and department policies and work rules, including, but not

limited to, attendance, safety, drug-free workplace, and personal conduct.

Ability to understand, memorize, retain and follow oral and written instructions.

Ability to compare or observe similarities and differences between data, people, or things.

Ability to compute/perform arithmetic operations, such as determining salary/wage increases and

benefits, calculating taxes, and processing allocations.

Ability to compile, analyze and evaluate data, make determinations, and present findings in oral

or written form.

Ability to work alone with minimum supervision and with others in a team environment, often

amidst frequent distractions and interruptions, and under pressure from formal schedules,

deadlines, and high volume operations.

Ability to apply knowledge of people and locations, plan/layout assigned work projects, and

read/interpret detailed prints, layouts, specifications and maps.

Ability to maintain current knowledge of applicable statutes and guidelines, adapt to changes in

procedures accordingly, and solve problems under unusual circumstances.

Ability to occasionally work extended, evening and/or weekend hours, and occasionally travel

out of town for training/conferences, but not overnight.

II. DIFFICULTY OF WORK

Incumbent performs duties within general guidelines where desired results are indicated.

Incumbent is responsible for addressing unusual problems and/or circumstances and may discuss

these with his/her supervisor. Incumbent’s decisions have a substantial impact on departmental

operations.

of 175


III. RESPONSIBILITY:

Incumbent’s work product is reviewed upon completion for attainment of desired results and

conformity with departmental standards and policies. Errors in accuracy of work or decisions

are not immediately detected by procedural safeguards or supervisory review of work and may

lead to substantial loss of time in the department and have a negative impact on other department

operations.

IV. PERSONAL WORK RELATIONSHIPS:

Incumbent maintains frequent contact with co-workers, other County departments, County

employees, State Auditor’s Office, Government entities, benefits providers, all taxing units of

Monroe County, and the public for purposes of explaining procedures and regulations, verifying

payroll information, and resolving problems.

Incumbent reports directly to the Chief Deputy Auditor.

V. PHYSICAL EFFORT AND WORK ENVIRONMENT:

Incumbent performs duties in a standard office environment, involving sitting for long periods,

keyboarding, lifting/carrying objects weighing 25 to 50 pounds, pushing/pulling objects,

bending, reaching, close vision, speaking clearly, hearing sounds/communication, and

handling/grasping and fingering objects. Incumbent occasionally works extended, evening

and/or weekend hours, and occasionally travels out of town for training/conferences, but not

overnight.

of 175


APPLICANT/EMPLOYEE ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The job description for the position of Payroll Administrator for the Monroe County Auditor's

Office describes the duties and responsibilities for employment in this position. I acknowledge

that I have received this job description, and understand that it is not a contract of employment. I

am responsible for reading this job description and complying with all job duties, requirements

and responsibilities contained herein, and any subsequent revisions.

Is there anything that would keep you from meeting the job duties and requirements as outlined?

Yes______ No______

_______________________________________________ __________________

Applicant/Employee signature Date

_______________________________________________

Print or Type Name

of 175

of 175

Waggoner ● Irwin ● Scheele & Associates INC

MEMO

TO: Monroe County Personnel Administration Committee

FROM: Kent Irwin/Addie Rooker

Waggoner, Irwin, Scheele & Associates, INC.

DATE: September 15, 2015

RE: Classification Reviews – Auditor’s Office

As requested, Waggoner, Irwin, Scheele, and Associates, reviewed the following positions for

the Auditor’s Office.

1. Claims Financial Representative (Auditor’s Office)

This is a classification review. This position was reviewed in April 2009; at that time it was

recommended that the position remain classified at COMOT IV. The job description has been

revised. The position is responsible for maintaining the County’s general ledger and financial

records, auditing claims, and processing accounts payable claims.

Added duties include: plans, organizes, and conducts a variety of internal audits to evaluate pay

claims; verifies audits completed by other County departments; reviews and assesses claims

activities to ensure compliance; identifies discrepancies in claims and documents audit findings;

investigates issues and works with department heads and Auditor to resolve discrepancies; and

conducts follow-up audits.

The position requires a high school diploma or GED and four years of previous fund accounting

bookkeeping experience with an Associate degree in Accounting preferred. Thorough

knowledge of auditing standards and procedures, laws, rules and regulations is also required.

We have assessed this position respective of other positions in both the COMOT and PAT job

categories and re-factored the position using the Factor Evaluation System (FES) job

classification point-factor guide charts for COMOT and PAT positions. Based on our

assessment, the position fits best classified in the PAT job category with other like classified

financial positions.

of 175

2

Recommendation:

We factored the Claims Financial Representative at 285 PAT factor points. Therefore, it is

recommended that the position be reclassified from COMOT IV to PAT II.

2. Payroll Administrator (Auditor’s Office)

This is a classification review. This position was classified at PAT III in 2006. In 2014, the

position was restructured and downgraded to COMOT V. The job description has been revised.

The position is responsible for administering County payroll, conducting internal audits,

preparing specialized taxes, and coordinating tax reporting.

Added duties include: serves as internal payroll auditor for the County; audits payroll for all

County departments and employees; plans, organizes, and conducts internal audits; reviews and

assesses payroll activities to ensure compliance; ensures proper application of internal controls;

identifies payroll discrepancies and documents audit findings; investigates issues and works with

department heads and Auditor to resolve issues; conducts follow-up audits; and maintains current

knowledge of auditing methods, practices, and related laws, regulations, and policies and

procedures.

The position requires an Associate Degree and/or equivalent combination of training and work

experience with a Baccalaureate Degree in Accounting, Finance, or related field preferred.

Thorough knowledge of auditing standards and procedures, laws, rules and regulations is also

required.

We have assessed this position respective of other positions in both the COMOT and PAT job

categories and re-factored the position using the Factor Evaluation System (FES) job

classification point-factor guide charts for COMOT and PAT positions. Based on our

assessment, the position fits best classified in the PAT job category with other like classified

financial positions.

Recommendation:

We factored the Payroll Administrator at 345 PAT factor points. Therefore, it is recommended

that the position be reclassified from COMOT V to PAT III.

Overall, it is recommended that the County tighten the controls over the education and

experience qualification requirements for such financial positions.

of 175

of 175

Treasurer - Deputy-Accounting, Pg. 1

POSITION DESCRIPTION COUNTY OF MONROE, INDIANA

POSITION: County Financial Cash Manager

Property Tax/Investment Bookkeeper (Cash Side) DEPARTMENT: Treasurer WORK SCHEDULE: As Assigned JOB CATEGORY: DATE WRITTEN: May 2007 (Deputy/Accounting) REVISED: July 2013 STATUS: Full-time REVISED July 2015 FLSA STATUS: Non-exempt To perform this position successfully, an individual must be able to perform each essential duty satisfactorily. The requirements listed in this document are representative of the knowledge, skill, and/or ability required. The County of Monroe provides reasonable accommodation to qualified employees and applicants with known disabilities who require accommodation to complete the application process or perform essential functions of the job, unless the accommodation would cause an undue hardship. Incumbent serves as an Accounting Deputy Financial Cash Manager for the Monroe County Treasurer’s Office responsible for the formulation, implementation and administration of the county’s general and subsidiary ledgers and is the keeper of the Official Monroe County Cashbook. This Accounting Deputy is responsible for maintaining accurate records of all County funds received and disbursed on a daily basis. DUTIES: Performs all cash management transactions for Monroe County public funds, including all appropriated and non-appropriated statutory funds, property taxes collected outside of statutory funds, as well as excise taxes and all other various types of taxes collected and distributed by the Monroe County Treasurer’s Office. Oversees daily operations of general ledger, both accounts payable and receivable, including, but not limited to, posting figures and updating computer records, balancing and reconciling accounts, opening and closing records, ensuring debt service payments/issuing checks, and preparing all required financial documents and reports to State Board of Accounts and other agencies as required. Prepares monthly financial statements accordingly. Manages all aspects of depository banking, cash and investment reconciliation and the management of Official Monroe County Cashbook. Receives and deposits all county accounts receivable payments including individual departments and communicates with all departments regarding deposits and cleared transactions, budgets and fund status. Prepares all investments of county funds and monthly reconciliations of all cash on hand and in various investment accounts across all funds and departments. Prepares all cash and investment financial statements, including Treasurer’s Monthly Report to Commissioners and all Indiana

Exhibit B

Formatted: Strikethrough

Formatted: Font color: Red

Formatted: Font color: Red

Commented [CS1]:

Commented [CS2R1]:

of 175


State Treasurer and State Board of Accounts required reporting statements in a timely and accurate manner. Prepares and processes all cash wires, ACH payments, and all electronic public funds credits and debits to and from the State Auditor’s Office and State Treasurer’s Office. Maintains daily cashbook by compiling and reconciling all transactions handled in the office on a daily basis. Receives and accounts for all quiet used (depository) cash, checks and credit cards and the corresponding quietus paperwork from the Auditor’s General Ledger/fund accounting software on a daily basis. Enters this work appropriately into the Treasurer’s Module of the county’s accounting software. Receives daily receipt and expenditure reports from the Auditor, including checks written and other sources of out going funds such as direct deposits. Balances these reports daily and enters this information appropriately into the Treasurer’s Module of the county’s accounting software. Using Treasurer’s internal Low Taxation Software reports and Harris Financial Software reports, compiles net totals of real estate and personal property taxes, fund totals, and total investments on a daily basis. Also, balances end of month cashbook totals with end of month fund totals balancing with provided by the Monroe County Auditor’s Office. In cooperation with the Chief Deputy Auditor, records and balances all discrepancies and adjustments daily for taxation, using and provides feedback to the Auditor’s Office for Correction of Errors (COEs), Auditor Adjustments Forms (AAs) and taxation overpayment information. Records all changes on the Cashbook and in Low and Harris Financials. In cooperation with Auditor’s Financial Director Balances all appropriated and non-appropriated fund discrepancies and adjustments daily and provides feedback to the Auditor’s Office for fund correction, quietus correction and for the correction of any and all payments, such as checks that were voided, rewritten, corrected, ACHs, etc. Prepares all daily bank deposits by balancing cash receipt draws for tax payments with taxation software reports and verifying totals with cashier responsible for each cash drawer. Counts down drawers with cashiers and sets up next day’s opening cash drawers with respect to office protocol. Filling out deposit slips and prepares bank deposit for transport. Verifies that totals on the all daily deposit slips exactly match each day’s report of collection produced by the county’s taxation software. Voids or misapplies payments as necessary with cashier responsible for error. Appropriately documents these transactions for State Board of Accounts audits. Balances credit card/lock box payments daily, including entering total amount received by taxing district in the cashbook in the proper category. Balances all credit card/bank posted property tax payments to the report of collections on a daily basis.

of 175


(Until the program completely goes away) Maintains daily inheritance records, balances inheritance tax fund totals, and prepares quarterly inheritance reports for state and local distribution. Prepares and processes all property tax advance draw amounts for requesting governmental entities. Verifies and gives totals to the Auditor for distribution. Maintains and updates the office website, including adding information such as tax rate, due dates, when the 5% and 10% late fees are added, personal property tax demand and judgment information and methods of calculating taxes. Removes and edits information as necessary. Acquires and charts on a weekly basis, the various interest rates available from the local lending institutions for potential investment purposes. Sets up all new investments in Harris Financials and on the Cashbook. Prepares the overall Report of Collections and files the report with the Auditor’s Office in a timely manner to begin taxation settlement. Balances semi-annual tax settlement with Auditor’s office prior to cash settlement with taxing units. Prepares required and statutory semi-annual settlement reports including balancing the property tax amounts posted in the taxation system software to the totals kept on the Official County Cashbook by taxing district and tax type. Balance Automotive/Vehicle, Airplane and Rental Car excise tax for settlement purposes. Assists in calculating, preparing, and sending billing statements to affected taxpayers for taxation and Stormwater Fees. Reports all treasurer’s account payable claims, ensuring proper format, calculations, and compliance with legal requirements. Discusses suitability of purchases with County Auditor as needed. Communicates with county personnel regarding appropriate expenditures, electronic funds transfers, accounts receivable monies and checks. Verifies cash totals with receipts issued, posts and totals daily computer cash book and financial records, prepares necessary forms for deposit of money, balances, reconciles, and settles all County accounts and financial statements. Assists Chief Deputy with supervision of office workload, including assuring proper maintenance of all records and files and making recommendations for the improvement of overall office operations. Produces taxation software daily reports and verifies each day’s tax reception totals and up-to-date totals to assure complete accuracy in the cashbook at any time. Affirms that taxation software totals in each taxing unit matches cashbook totals for same taxing units at all times. Works directly with financial institutions in correcting banking errors in posting, overpayment, electronic funds and credit card transactions. Initiates stop payments and authorizes the issuance of replacement checks. Wires and/or transfers money to pay bills and payroll.

of 175


Works in constant unison with Auditor’s First Financial Representative to reconcile balances of County’s monies and funds and prepare financial statements such as the annual report and Gateway submissions, as required. Initiates and manages the county’s settlement activity by reconciling, calculating, compiling, and completing the Treasurer’s Certificate of Collections and Certification process of for the June and December settlement collections and submits the Treasurer’s portion of all settlement forms to the Auditor and State Auditor as prescribed by the State Board of Accounts. Processes the for the Auditor’s office for disbursement of tax and excise monies to various county entities via ACH, EFT or by paper check. Assists and gives direction and guidance to other deputies and part-time positions in the absence of the Treasurer and Chief Deputy in the performance of their duties as needed. Coordinates and provides orientation for new subordinates in the department. Accompanies Treasurer to various meetings as required and presents information as requested by the Treasurer. Meets and conducts business with taxpayers, State Board of Accounts, public funds banking officials, officers, and cash management specialists. Attends and participates in County Council work sessions, commissioners and department head meetings as required. Coordinates with State Board of Accounts for audits of Monroe County cash, funds and taxation process and ensures Treasurer’s Office is in compliance with their regulations and requirements. Performs various clerical functions such as pulling/copying canceled checks as requested, operating check burster/signer, organizing and administering automatic debit of taxpayer’s bank accounts, working with mortgage companies and tax services for payments by tape, processing credit card payments, performing daily computer backups, and receiving monies and posting receipts from other County departments. Periodically places stop payment orders and/or copies checks as appropriate. Performs additional assigned and related duties in the absence of the Treasurer and Chief Deputy. Performs any other related duties as assigned. I. JOB REQUIREMENTS: Baccalaureate Degree in business, accounting, mathematics, or related field with two years accounting experience or equivalent combination of education, training, and experience Associate Degree in Accounting with four (4) years’ experience, at least two in governmental accounting, or ten (10) years of professional accounting experience or a Certified Public Accountant (CPA) certification. Ability to manage public funds up to $100,000,000 with no risk to the County.

of 175


Ability to apply technical working knowledge of all the principles and standards of public funds accounting and the ability to apply such knowledge on a daily basis. Ability to perform the statutory duties of the County Treasurer’s Office as authorized by the Treasurer and prescribed by the State Board of Accounts. Advanced knowledge and application of mathematics and algebra, as well as cash and accrual based government accounting. Working knowledge of Standard English grammar, spelling, and punctuation, and ability to write and edit financial and nonfinancial reports. Ability to supervise and direct the work of subordinate personnel to maintain efficient operations of the department in the absence of Treasurer or Chief Deputy. Advanced knowledge and application of computer operations, software, and electronic financial packages particularly those with token rings. Working knowledge of standard office policies and procedures and ability to apply such knowledge to a variety of interrelated processes, tasks and operations. Ability to apply knowledge of standard office procedures and the ability to use standard office equipment, including computer, typewriter, line printer, printer, validator, bill printer, scanner, fax machine, and calculator. Ability to provide public access to or maintain confidentiality of department information and records according to state requirements. Ability to comply with all employer and department policies and work rules, including, but not limited to, attendance, safety, drug-free workplace, and personal conduct. Ability to effectively communicate orally and in writing with departmental supervisor, co-workers, other County departments, banks, and the public, including being sensitive to professional ethics, gender, cultural diversities and disabilities. Ability to work alone with minimum supervision and with others in a team environment. Ability to work on several tasks at the same time and work rapidly for long periods, frequently occasionally under time pressure. Ability to understand, memorize, retain, and carry out written or oral instructions. Ability to maintain complete and accurate accounting records and compile accurate financial reports. Ability to copy data from one document to another. Ability to accurately complete duties amidst frequent distractions and interruption while under pressure from formal schedules and deadlines.

of 175


Ability to solve problems relating to new or unusual circumstances. Ability to occasionally work extended hours, evenings, and travel out of town, sometimes overnight. II. DIFFICULTY OF WORK: Incumbent’s duties are financially complex in nature involving many variables and considerations. Incumbent ensures full compliance with GASB (Governmental Accounting Standards) and Indiana State Board of Accounts (SBOA) regulations, and the applicable Indiana Code covering County Treasurer’s responsibilities and directives. III. RESPONSIBILITY: Incumbent serves as an assistant to the Treasurer and is responsible for the daily financial operations management of the Treasurer’s Office and serves as supervisor and delegate in the absence of the Treasurer and Chief Deputy. Incumbent performs standard, recurring duties according to department and legal guidelines, with priorities determined by their judgement of current work priorities and statutory deadlines. In concert with Treasurer and Chief Deputy, incumbent establishes office policies, procedures and practices that ensure the accurate and timely completion of tax collection duties. Incumbent performs varied duties requiring the application of sound judgment based upon experience, training and State Board of Accounts guidelines. Periodically, decisions are made in the absence of specific policies and/or guidance from supervisor. Work is reviewed primarily for soundness of judgment and compliance with legal requirements. IV. PERSONAL WORK RELATIONSHIPS: Incumbent maintains frequent contact with departmental supervisor, co-workers, other County Departments, banks, and the pubic primarily for requesting and providing financial accounting information. Incumbent maintains continual communication with other financial institution employees in the exchange of financial accounting information. Incumbent reports directly to County Treasurer. V. PHYSICAL EFFORT AND WORK ENVIRONMENT: Incumbent performs duties in a standard office environment, involving sitting and walking at will, keyboarding, close vision, speaking clearly, hearing sounds/communication, and handling/grasping objects. Incumbent is occasionally required to work extended hours, evenings, and travel out of town, sometimes overnight.

of 175


APPLICANT/EMPLOYEE ACKNOWLEDGMENT The job description for the position of County Cashbook Financial Manager for the Monroe County Treasurer’s Office describes the duties and responsibilities for employment in this position. I acknowledge that I have received this job description, and understand that it is not a contract of employment. I am responsible for reading this job description and complying with all job duties, requirements and responsibilities contained herein, and any subsequent revision. Is there anything that would keep you from meeting the job duties and requirements as outlined? Yes_____ No_____ _________________________________________ _______________________ Applicant/Employee Signature Date _________________________________________ Type or Print Name

of 175

Treasurer – Deputy-Judgments, Pg. 1

POSITION DESCRIPTION COUNTY OF MONROE, INDIANA

POSITION: Deputy/Judgments DEPARTMENT: Treasurer WORK SCHEDULE: As Assigned JOB CATEGORY: COMOT III (Computer, Office Machine Operation, Technician) DATE REVISED: January, 2007 STATUS: Full-time

FLSA STATUS: Non-exempt To perform this position successfully, an individual must be able to perform each essential duty satisfactorily. The requirements listed in this document are representative of the knowledge, skill, and/or ability required. The County of Monroe provides reasonable accommodation to qualified employees and applicants with known disabilities who require accommodation to complete the application process or perform essential functions of the job, unless the accommodation would cause an undue hardship. Incumbent serves as Deputy/Judgments for the Monroe County Treasurer's Office, responsible for collecting tax payments and processing property tax judgments and certified filings with County Clerk’s office. DUTIES: Balances all township, excess, demands, tax sale cost, and conservancy financial totals with Deputy/Accounting and assists with financial problem resolution, as necessary. Answers telephone and greets office visitors, answering questions regarding tax liabilities and departmental procedures, furnishing tax record information, and/or routing callers to appropriate person or department. Assists tax paying citizens, checking exceptions for questionable amounts, making duplicate copies of lost tax statements for personal requests, and accepting tax payments and providing receipts according to established procedures of Treasurer's Office. Assists customers with renewal of alcohol beverage permits and obtaining mobile home permits to move or acquire/transfer title. Processes Personal, Business, and Mobile Home Property Tax Judgments, determining delinquent tax accounts, calculating interest payments, mailing demand notices, and preparing accurate and complete listing of unpaid bills to be certified to Clerk. Processes delinquent tax sale list, determining delinquent tax accounts, calculating interest payment, mailing delinquent tax notices, and preparing accurate and complete listing of unpaid bills and parcels to be sold. Resolves excess tax payment problems, determining amount of payment, filling out surplus tax form, mailing claim forms, and working with the Auditor’s office with any problems. Maintains and balances record of all claims with Deputy Treasurer for Accounting.

Exhibit A

of 175


Assists with semi-annual tax settlement procedures, preparing, packing, and mailing tax bills, responding to problems and complaints from taxpayers, receiving and receipting tax payments, and balancing operations daily to assure complete accuracy in cash accounting. Maintains governmental employee list and sends notification to employees, notifies Auditor of State with names of delinquent employees, updating files as necessary. Assists other clerks and deputies in performances of their duties as needed. Performs related duties as assigned. I. JOB REQUIREMENTS AND DIFFICULTY OF WORK: High school diploma or GED. Working knowledge of Treasurer's Office and tax collection policies and procedures; ability to apply procedures to regular and routine duties. Ability to obtain knowledge of and operate all computer software programs used by Treasurer's Office. Ability to perform the statutory duties as prescribed for the County Treasurer’s Office as authorized by the Treasurer. Knowledge of standard office procedures and ability to operate modern office equipment, including computer, typewriter, fax machine, copier, telephone, printer, validator, line printer, bill printer, scanner and calculator. Knowledge of standard filing systems and ability to create and maintain accurate files and records. Knowledge of Standard English grammar, punctuation, and spelling; ability to perform accurate arithmetic calculations, including balancing financial totals and calculating interest payments. Ability to provide public access to or maintain confidentiality of department information and records according to state requirements. Ability to comply with all employer and department policies and work rules, including, but not limited to, attendance, safety, drug-free workplace, and personal conduct. Ability to effectively communicate orally and in writing with department superiors, co-workers, other County departments, personnel from other government agencies, and the public, including being sensitive to professional ethics, gender, cultural diversities and disabilities. Ability to work alone with minimum supervision and with others in a team environment. Ability to work on several tasks at the same time and work rapidly for long periods, occasionally under time pressure. Ability to understand, memorize, retain, and carry out written or oral instructions.

of 175


Ability to occasionally work extended hours, evenings. II. RESPONSIBILITY: Incumbent performs a variety of standard and recurring duties according to established practices and procedures of Treasurer's Office, assuring accurate and timely completion of tax collection procedures. Errors in accuracy of work are readily detected through standard bookkeeping checks and close supervisory review. Incumbent receives specific instructions and follows guidelines developed by Treasurer's Office, adjusting duties and work routines to accommodate deadlines and seasonal needs. Reports to work in a timely manner in order to open the office, have equipment operating, and have cash drawer ready. III. PERSONAL WORK RELATIONSHIPS: Incumbent maintains frequent contact with department superiors, co-workers, other County departments, personnel from other government agencies, and the public, primarily for requesting and providing tax-related information. Incumbent maintains continual communication with members of general public to request and provide tax-related information. Incumbent reports directly to the Chief Deputy. IV. PHYSICAL EFFORT AND WORK ENVIRONMENT: Incumbent performs duties in a standard office environment, sitting and walking at will, sitting for long periods, lifting/carrying objects weighing over 50 pounds, keyboarding, close/far vision, speaking clearly, hearing sounds/communication, and handling/grasping objects. Incumbent is occasionally required to work extended hours, evenings. APPLICANT/EMPLOYEE ACKNOWLEDGMENT The job description for the position of Deputy/Judgments for the Monroe County Treasurer’s Office describes the duties and responsibilities for employment in this position. I acknowledge that I have received this job description, and understand that it is not a contract of employment. I am responsible for reading this job description and complying with all job duties, requirements and responsibilities contained herein, and any subsequent revisions. Is there anything that would keep you from meeting the job duties and requirements as outlined? Yes_____ No_____ _________________________________________ __________________ Applicant/Employee signature Date _________________________________________ Type or Print Name

of 175

Waggoner ● Irwin ● Scheele & Associates INC

MEMO

TO: Monroe County Personnel Administration Committee

FROM: Kent Irwin/Addie Rooker

Waggoner, Irwin, Scheele & Associates, INC.

DATE: September 15, 2015

RE: Classification Review – Financial Cash Manager (Treasurer’s Office)

As requested, Waggoner, Irwin, Scheele, and Associates, reviewed the following position for the

Treasurer’s Office.

1. Deputy/Accounting (Treasurer’s Office)

This is a classification review. This position was reviewed in May 2007; at that time it was

recommended that the position be reclassified at PAT II. In May 2011, the position was revised

and remained classified at PAT II. The job description has been revised and the position is re-

titled Financial Cash Manager. The position is responsible for the formulation, implementation

and administration of the county’s general and subsidiary ledgers, keeping the Official Monroe

County Cashbook, and maintaining accurate records of all County funds received and disbursed

on a daily basis.

Added duties include: Oversees daily operations of general ledger, both accounts payable and

receivable; Receives and deposits all county accounts receivable payments; Prepares all

investments of county funds and monthly reconciliations of all cash on hand and in various

investment accounts; Sets up all new investments in Harris Financials and on Cashbook; Reports

all treasurer’s account payable claims, ensuring proper format, calculations, and compliance with

legal requirements; and Attends and participates in County Council work sessions, and

Commissioners and department head meetings as required.

Deleted job duties include: Performs various clerical functions such as pulling/copying cancelled

checks, operating check signer, organizing and administering automatic debit of taxpayer’s bank

accounts, working with mortgage companies and tax services for payments by tape, processing

credit card payments, performing daily computer backups, receiving monies and posting receipts

from other County departments, and periodically placing stop payment orders and/or copying

of 175

2

checks as required; and Maintains and updates office website, including adding information such

as tax rates, due dates, personal property tax demand and judgment information, and methods of

calculating taxes.

The job requirements for this position have been updated: Baccalaureate Degree in Business,

Accounting, Mathematics, or related field with two years’ accounting experience or Associate

Degree in Accounting with four years’ experience, with at least two in governmental accounting,

or ten years of professional accounting experience, or a Certified Public Accountant certification.

In our view, the job requirements listed on the job description for this position are too broad.

Overall, it is recommended that the County tighten the controls over the education and

experience qualification requirements for such financial positions.

We have assessed this position respective of other positions in the PAT job category and re-

factored the position using the Factor Evaluation System (FES) job classification point-factor

guide charts for PAT positions.

Recommendation:

Contingent upon the position requiring a Baccalaureate Degree with two years of accounting

experience or a Baccalaureate Degree with a Certified Public Accountant certification, we

recommend the position be reclassified to PAT IV. We factored the Financial Cash Manager at

405 factor points based upon the above contingent requirements. It is also recommended that the

position job title be changed from Deputy/Accounting to Financial Cash Manager.

of 175

TREASURER Cathy Smith ELECTED

Part time hourly Mortgage Deputy & Cashier

COMOT IV - 35

Chief Deputy Treasurer

Hans Huffman SO

Financial Manager Funds & Property Tax

Cashbook COMOT III - 35

Financial Manager Banking

Bookkeeper PAT II - 35

Deputy Treasurer & Cashier

COMOT III - 35

Current State

of 175

TREASURER Cathy Smith ELECTED

Part time hourly

Mortgage Deputy & Cashier

COMOT IV - 35

Chief Deputy Treasurer

Hans Huffman SO

REQUEST TO UPGRADE

Financial Manager Funds & Property Tax

Cashbook COMOT III - 35

Financial Manager Banking

Bookkeeper PAT II - 35

Deputy Treasurer & Cashier

COMOT III - 35

REQUEST TO FILL Judgement Deputy &

Cashier COMOT III - 35

FUTURE STATE

of 175

C:\Users\cokshell\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\YM32H7TG\County_Council_Agenda_Request 10-2015.doc

Department: Office of Court Services [Note: in 2013 this request will be heard on the second Tuesday of the month. The fourth Tuesday will be a Work Session, unless otherwise advertised.] Month you wish this Item to be considered: October Title of Item as it is to appear on Agenda: PTOC Grant What is the purpose of your request, chosen from the following categories? (1) Additional Appropriation; (2) Creation of New Fund; (3) Amend Salary Ordinance; (4) Creation of New Budget Line(s); (5) Appropriation of newly received funds (e.g., grant); (6)Transfer of Funds; (7) Other. Type the Relevant Category Below: 5 appropriation of newly received funds Contact Person for further Information (include phone number and email address): Bret Raper [email protected] 812 349 7213 Please give a thorough narrative explanation of your agenda request; what action are you asking the Council to take, and what is the purpose? This narrative should be restated (cut and paste) on any additional forms regarding this request. NOTE: Council has instructed Staff not to accept requests that lack sufficient narrative explanation. Grant monies have been received for the 2015/16 year. Requested by (electronic signature suffices) Date: 10/9/2015

MONROE COUNTY

Please use only this form to place an item on the County Council’s Agenda. If the matter is complex, you may wish to consult with a Councilor or the Council Office. Please fill this form out as a Word document (not in PDF format) and send it as an e-mail attachment. Iif you submit this as an e-mail attachment, there is no need to submit a paper form. Please e-mail to [email protected] and to [email protected]. Contact the Council Office at 349-7312 if you have any questions. Rev: 1-13

of 175

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION APPROVAL FROM MONROE COUNTY COUNCIL (Rev. 05-04)

Department Head: Bonnie Austin Date: 10/9/2015

Department: Court Services Date: 10/9/2015

From Fund Name/Number: 8122

Fund Name / Number: IV-D Parenting Time PTOC grant

Budget Line Number Budget Line Name Amount

8122 022 11 8101 FICA $2,000.00

8122 022 12 7801 Hourly $26,080.00

8122 022 20 0001 Supplies $1,217.00

8122 022 30 0001 Travel $4,413.00

8122 022 30 0004 Contractual $44,090.00

8122 022 30 0005 Other Contractual $22,200.00

Total: $100,000.00

Reason for request (include a complete description of why appropriation is needed and how the money will be used)

PTOC Grant monies to be appropriated

Email completed form to the County Council Administrative Assistant in the Auditor’s Office prior to the additional appropriation deadline (see appropriate resolution concerning the Council meeting schedule for deadline dates). Requests received after the deadline will placed on the following month’s agenda. of 175

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES ADMINISTRATION FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES

SAI NUMBER: PMS DOCUMENT NUMBER:

1. AWARDING OFFICE:

2. ASSISTANCE TYPE:

3. AWARD NO.:

4. AMEND. NO.

5. TYPE OF AWARD:

6. TYPE OF ACTION:

7. AWARD AUTHORITY:

8. BUDGET PERIOD: THRU

9. PROJECT PERIOD: THRU

10. CAT NO.:

11. RECIPIENT ORGANIZATION: 12. PROJECT / PROGRAM TITLE:

13. COUNTY:

14. CONGR. DIST:

15. PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR OR PROGRAM DIRECTOR:

17. AWARD COMPUTATION: A. NON-FEDERAL SHARE........... $

B. FEDERAL SHARE.................... $

18. FEDERAL SHARE COMPUTATION:

A. TOTAL FEDERAL SHARE......................................... $

B. UNOBLIGATED BALANCE FEDERAL SHARE......... $

C. FED. SHARE AWARDED THIS BUDGET PERIOD…$

19. AMOUNT AWARDED THIS ACTION: $

20. FEDERAL $ AWARDED THIS PROJECT PERIOD: $

21. AUTHORIZED TREATMENT OF PROGRAM INCOME:

16. APPROVED BUDGET:

Personnel............................ $

Fringe Benefits.................... $

Travel.................................. $

Equipment........................... $

Supplies.............................. $

Contractual.......................... $

Facilities/Construction......... $

Other................................... $

Direct Costs........................ $

Indirect Costs...................... At % of $

$

In Kind Contributions........... $

Total Approved Budget....... $

22. APPLICANT EIN:

23. PAYEE EIN:

24. OBJECT CLASS:

25. FINANCIAL INFORMATION: DUNS

ORGN DOCUMENT NO. APPROPRIATION CAN NO. NEW AMT. UNOBLIG. NONFED %

26. REMARKS: (Continued on separate sheets)

27. SIGNATURE - ACF GRANTS OFFICER DATE: 28. SIGNATURE(S) CERTIFYING FUND AVAILABILITY

29. SIGNATURE AND TITLE - PROGRAM OFFICIAL(S) DATE:

DGCM-3-785 (Rev. 86)

NOTICE OF AWARD

0.00

09/14/2015

0

09

09/29/2016

Monroe County, Indiana Government

$100,000.00

1351732462A1

09/30/2015

Andrea Saunders

Fringe benefits are not being supported by this grant.

Moved to "Other": $22,200 for evaluation.

Ms. Bridget Shea Westfall

100%

1,217.00

100 W Kirkwood AveBloomington, IN 47404-5143Grantee Authorizing Official: Patrick Stoffers , President, Monroe County Board ofCommissioners

100,000.00

IV-D Safe Parenting Program- a project that willincrease the number of Parenting Time Orders

Demonstration

44,090.00

4,413.00

Office Of Child Support Enforcement

0.00

5-G9915TA

22,200.00

Discretionary Grant

0.00

351732462

93.601

Monroe

42 USC SECTION 452 (j)

Ms. Michelle Jadczak - Senior Advisor for Research and Strategy

100,000.00

28,080.00

09/29/2016

151111726

Thornell Page

0.00

0.00

90FI0117-04-00

0.00

Additional Costs

0.00100,000.00

41.51

100,000.00

90FI011704 75-X-1553

09/15/2015

09/30/2012

0.00

Non-Competing Continuation

09/14/2015

0%

399,690.00

100,000.00

of 175

MONROE COUNTY COUNCIL

REQUESTED AGENDA INFORMATION FOR COUNCIL MEETINGS TITLE OF ITEM THAT APPEARS ON THE COUNCIL AGENDA:

Planning Department: Request to Fill Vacant Senior Planner Position (PAT IV) at midpoint salary. DATE ITEM WILL APPEAR ON THE COUNCIL AGENDA: October 13, 2015 CONTACT PERSON:

Larry J. Wilson, Director PHONE NUMBER: (812) 349-2561

Presenter at Council Meeting if other than Contact Person: OFFICE/DEPARTMENT:

HAS THE MONROE COUNTY LEGAL DEPARTMENT REVIEWED ITEM?

Yes

No

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: (Please write information for the Monroe County Council in ten sentences or less, relating how this agenda item will be used in the community.)

The Planning Department requests permission to fill the following position at the midpoint range:

101-079-10.0008 Senior Planner PAT IV – 40 Salary: $ 46,041.00 per year

Jackie Scanlan vacated this position on September 23, 2015. She was being paid at the midpoint: $46,041.00. We are requesting to hire Carly Petersen at the midpoint salary. This requires no change in either the 2015 or 2016 budget since the position was already funded at the midpoint.

Signed

Date October 5, 2015

Larry J. Wilson

of 175

REQUEST FOR APPROVAL FROM MONROE COUNTY COUNCIL TO AMEND 2015 SALARY ORDINANCE (Rev. 05-04)

Department Head: Larry J. Wilson

Date: 10/07/2015

Department: 079 Planning Department Date: 10-13-2015

Fund Name: 1000 County General


079-10.0006 Planner I 36,232.00 41,408.00

079-10.0007 Planner/GIS 36,232.00 41,408.00

079-10.0013 Planner/GIS 36,232.00 41,408.00


No additional appropriation will be needed.

079-10.0006 Planner I has sufficient funds since position was unfilled for 3 ½ months.

079-10.0007 Planner/GIS. To be funded by transfer within 100 Category.

079-10.0013 Planner/GIS. To be funded by transfer within 100 Category.

Reason for Request

These three positions are scheduled to move to 40 hours per week in the 2016 Salary Ordinance.

Due to the need to fill a vacant position, the Planning Department will likely be understaffed by one planner position until the end of the year. Moving these positions to 40 hours immediately will help provide staff coverage until the 4th planner position is filled.

No additional appropriation will be needed as adequate funds remain in the 100 Category. of the year

Send completed form to the Council Attorney and County Council Administrative Assistant in the Council Office prior to the deadline (see appropriate resolution concerning the Council meeting schedule for deadline dates). Requests received after the deadline will be placed on the following month’s agenda.

of 175

REQUEST FOR TRANSFER OF FUNDS APPROVAL FROM MONROE COUNTY COUNCIL (Rev. 05-04)

Department Head: Larry J. Wilson

Date: October 7, 2015

Department: 079 Plan Commission Date: October 13, 2015

Fund Name / Number: County General Fund 1000

Transferring From: Budget Line Number

Budget Line Name

Amount

079-12.7801 Hourly/Work Study 10,008.00

Total:

Transferring To: Budget Line Number

Budget Line Name

Amount

079-30.0007 Consultant Fees/Legal Expenses 10,008.00

Total:

Email completed form to the Council Attorney and County Council Administrative Assistant in the Council Office prior to the deadline (see appropriate resolution concerning the Council meeting schedule for deadline dates). Requests received after the deadline will placed on the following month’s agenda.

of 175

of 175

C:\Users\cokshell\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\YM32H7TG\Agenda Req CMTS.doc

Department: Prosecutor Month you wish this Item to be considered: October 27, 2015 Work Session Is there a reason that this item should be heard at the first or second council meeting of the month? (E.g., grant deadline; department head not available for one of the meetings, etc.)? Title of Item as it is to appear on Agenda: Request to create budget line in Prosecutor County General for Case Management/Tech Specialist and to amend the salary ordinance accordingly. Contact Person for further Information (include phone number and email address): Beth Hamlin (812)349-2064 [email protected] Please check applicable category: Creation of New Fund X Amend Salary Ordinance X Creation of New Budget Line(s) Additional Appropriation Transfer of Funds De-appropriation of Funds

Appropriation of newly received funds (e.g., grant) Other Please give a thorough narrative explanation of your agenda request; what action are you asking the Council to take, and what is the purpose? This narrative should be restated (cut and paste) on any additional forms regarding this request. Because there will be no set “Work Sessions” in 2011, it is important that you give a clear and thorough explanation of your request, as the council’s first hearing will be at the televised council session. This is a request to create a new budget line in Prosecutor County General (1000-009) for the Case Management/Tech Specialist (CM/TS) position and to amend the salary ordinance accordingly. 2/3rds of this position has historically been funded in the PDP fund. Given the low balance in the PDP fund, and in order to avoid a negative balance at year end in that fund, it is requested that the 2/3rds CM/TS position be reposted from the PDP fund to the Prosecutor County General fund for 2015. It is anticipated that no additional appropriation will be necessary and the salary and benefits for this position can be funded by transferring funds within the 10’s in the Prosecutor County General fund. Requested by Chris Gaal Date: October 8, 2015

MONROE COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA REQUEST

Please use this form to place an item on the County Council’s Agenda. If the matter is complex, you may wish to consult your council liaison or the Council Office. If possible, please fill this form out as a Word document (not in PDF format) and send it as an e-mail attachment; there is no need to submit a paper form if you submit this as an e-mail attachment. Please e-mail to [email protected] and to [email protected].

of 175

REQUEST FOR CREATION OF NEW BUDGET LINE APPROVAL FROM THE MONROE COUNTY COUNCIL (Rev. 05-04)

Department Head Chris Gaal Date: October 8, 2015

Department: Prosecutor Date: October 27, 2015

Fund Name / Number: Prosecutor County General/1000-009

New Budget Line Number New Budget Line Name

10.0053 Case Management/Tech Specialist

Reason for request (include a complete description of why a new budget line in this fund is needed and how the money in that line will be used)

This is a request to create a new budget line in Prosecutor County General (1000-009) for the Case Management/Tech Specialist (CM/TS) position and to amend the salary ordinance accordingly. 2/3rds of this position has historically been funded in the PDP fund. Given the low balance in the PDP fund, and in order to avoid a negative balance at year end in that fund, it is requested that the 2/3rds CM/TS position be reposted from the PDP fund to the Prosecutor County General fund for 2015. It is anticipated that no additional appropriation will be necessary and the salary and benefits for this position can be funded by transferring funds within the 10’s in the Prosecutor County General fund.

Email completed form to the Council Attorney and the County Council Administrative Assistant in the Auditor’s Office prior to the additional appropriation deadline (see appropriate resolution concerning the Council meeting schedule for deadline dates). Requests received after the deadline will placed on the following month’s agenda.

of 175

of 175

C:\Users\cokshell\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\YM32H7TG\Request for Salary Ordinance - CC advance of CC Grant expansion.docx

Department: Probation Month you wish this Item to be considered: October 2015 Title of Item as it is to appear on Agenda: Community Corrections Salary Ordinance What is the purpose of your request, chosen from the following categories? Creation of new personnel lines & Salary Ordinance Contact Person for further Information (include phone number and email address): Linda Brady; 812-349-2645; [email protected] Tom Rhodes; 812-349-2005; [email protected] Please give a thorough narrative explanation of your agenda request; what action are you asking the Council to take, and what is the purpose? This narrative should be restated (cut and paste) on any additional forms regarding this request. NOTE: Council has instructed Staff not to accept requests that lack sufficient narrative explanation. Monroe County Community Corrections has submitted a grant application to the Indiana Department of Correction to fund possible expansion of the Community Alternative Supervision Program (CASP). If any of the grant request is funded, DOC has informed there will be a short turn-around from the notice of award and actual funding. This salary ordinance request is to put in place the line numbers and ordinance in advance to enable the starting of the positions as soon as possible – if funded in whole or part. Community Corrections Grant 1122-004. NO COUNTY GENERAL MONIES ARE INVOLVED. Requested by Tom Rhodes Date: September 3, 2015

MONROE COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA REQUEST

Please use only this form to place an item on the County Council’s Agenda. If the matter is complex, you may wish to consult with a Councilor or the Council Office. Please fill this form out as a Word document (not in PDF format) and send it as an e-mail attachment. Iif you submit this as an e-mail attachment, there is no need to submit a paper form. Please e-mail to [email protected] and to [email protected]. Contact the Council Office at 349-7312 if you have any questions. Rev: 1-13

of 175

REQUEST FOR SALARY ORDINANCE APPROVAL FROM MONROE COUNTY COUNCIL (Rev. 05-04)

Department Head: Linda Brady

Date: September 3, 2015

Department: Probation / Community Corrections Date: October 2015

Fund Name: Community Corrections Grant 1122-004


10.0022 CASP Case Manager/PO $0 $48,869.00

10.0023 CASP Case Manager/PO $0 $48,869.00


100% GRANT FUNDED – PROJECT INCOME TO SUPPLEMENT

Reason for Request

Monroe County Community Corrections has submitted a grant application to the Indiana Department of Correction to fund possible expansion of the Community Alternative Supervision Program (CASP). If any of the grant request is funded, DOC has informed there will be a short turn-around from the notice of award and actual funding. This salary ordinance request is to put in place the line numbers and ordinance in advance to enable the starting of the positions as soon as possible – if funded in whole or part.

Send completed form to the Council Attorney and County Council Administrative Assistant in the Auditor’s Office prior to the additional appropriation deadline (see appropriate resolution concerning the Council meeting schedule for deadline dates). Requests received after the deadline will placed on the following month’s agenda.

of 175

of 175

2016 Base 2016 Min 2016 1yr 2016 3yr

Salary 21,024.50$ 38,195.00$ 40,123.00$ 42,049.00$

Fringe (21%) 8,020.95$ 8,425.83$ 8,830.29$

PERF (14.2%) 5,423.69$ 5,697.47$ 5,970.96$

FICA (7.65%) 1,608.37$ 2,921.92$ 3,069.41$ 3,216.75$

Total 22,632.87$ 54,561.56$ 57,315.71$ 60,067.00$

Fiscal Impact in 2016: 31,928.68$ 34,682.83$ 37,434.12$

2015 PAT III (350 hrs) PAT III (400 hrs)

Salary: $19.91/hr 6,968.50$ 7,964.00$

Fringe (18%) 1,254.33$ 1,433.52$

PERF (14.2%) 989.53$ 1,130.89$

FICA (7.65%) 533.09$ 609.25$

Total 9,745.45$ 11,137.65$

Fiscal Impact in 2015: 1,392.21$ x 3 positions = 4,176.63$

2016 PAT III (3yr) 35hrs PAT III (3yr) 40 hrs

Salary: $21.45/hr 39,030.00$ 44,606.00$

Fringe (21%) 8,196.30$ 9,367.26$

PERF (14.2%) 5,542.26$ 6,334.05$

FICA (7.65%) 2,985.80$ 3,412.36$

Total 55,754.36$ 63,719.67$

Fiscal Impact in 2016: 7,965.32$ x 2 positions = 15,930.64$

2016 PAT III (1yr) 35hrs PAT III (1yr) 40 hrs

Salary: $20.46/hr 37,232.00$ 42,551.00$

Fringe (21%) 7,818.72$ 8,935.71$

PERF (14.2%) 5,286.94$ 6,042.24$

FICA (7.65%) 2,848.25$ 3,255.15$

Total 53,185.91$ 60,784.10$

Fiscal Impact in 2016: 7,598.19$ x 1 position 7,598.19$

Total Fiscal Impact in 2016 for all three positions: 23,528.83$

Exhibit A: Fiscal Impact of moving VA Service Officer/Director to FT, PAT II

Exhibit B: Fiscal Impact of moving Planner 1 and Planner/GIS positions to 40 hrs

(Estimated Based on 10 weeks remaining in 2015 and FY 2016)

of 175

1 year Scale COMOT V (350 hrs) PAT III (350hrs)

2015 18.13/hr 19.91/hr

Salary 6,345.50$ 6,968.50$

Fringe (18%) 1,142.19$ 1,254.33$

PERF (14.2%) 901.06$ 989.53$

FICA (7.65%) 485.43$ 533.09$

Total 8,874.18$ 9,745.45$

Fiscal Impact in 2015: 871.27$

1 Year Scale COMOT V PAT III

2016 18.68/hr 20.46/hr

Salary 33,995.00$ 37,232.00$

Fringe (21%) 7,138.95$ 7,818.72$

PERF (14.2%) 4,827.29$ 5,286.94$

FICA (7.65%) 2,600.62$ 2,848.25$

Total 48,561.86$ 53,185.91$

Fiscal Impact in 2016: 4,624.05$

Midpoint PAT II (350 hrs) PAT IV (350hrs)

2015 19.67/hr 22.14/hr

Salary 6,884.50$ 7,749.00$

Fringe (18%) 1,239.21$ 1,394.82$

PERF (14.2%) 977.60$ 1,100.36$

FICA (7.65%) 526.66$ 592.80$

Total 9,627.97$ 10,836.98$


Midpoint PAT II PAT IV

2016 20.22/hr 22.68/hr

Salary 36,793.00$ 41,286.00$

Fringe (21%) 7,726.53$ 8,670.06$

PERF (14.2%) 5,224.61$ 5,862.61$

FICA (7.65%) 2,814.66$ 3,158.38$

Total 52,558.80$ 58,977.05$


from COMOT V to PAT III for the remaining 10 weeks in 2015 and FY 2016

Exhibit D: Fiscal Impact of moving Treasurer's Office Financial/Cashbook Position

from PAT II to PAT IV for the remaining 10 weeks in 2015 and FY 2016

Exhibit C: Fiscal Impact of moving Auditor's Office Payroll Admininstrator

of 175

Midpoint COMOT III (350 hrs)

2015 16.25/hr

Salary 5,687.50$

Fringe (18%) 1,023.75$

PERF (14.2%) 807.63$

FICA (7.65%) 435.09$

Total 7,953.97$


Midpoint COMOT III

2016 16.80/hr

Salary 30,575.00$

Fringe (21%) 6,420.75$

PERF (14.2%) 4,341.65$

FICA (7.65%) 2,338.99$

Total 43,676.39$


at a COMOT III ‐ MIDPOINT for the remaining 2015 and FY 2016

Exhibit E: Fiscal Impact of adding Treasurer's Office DEPUTY JUDGMENTS

of 175

MINUTES MONROE COUNTY COUNCIL

COURTHOUSE, NAT U. HILL MEETING ROOM SEPTEMBER 1, 2015

Pursuant to proper notice, a Budget Work Session of the Monroe County Council was called to order at 5:00 p.m. on September 1, 2015 at the Monroe County Courthouse, Nat U. Hill Meeting Room, Bloomington, Indiana 47404. The presiding officer was Cheryl Munson, President. A quorum was present, including:

Councilors Present: Cheryl Munson, President Shelli Yoder, Vice President Lee Jones Marty Hawk Ryan Cobine Rick Dietz Geoff McKim Also Present: Michael Flory, County Council Attorney Steve Saulter, Auditor Marilyn Stonecipher, Deputy Auditor Kim Shell, Council Assistant Lorie Robinson, Case Manager, Courts I. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by President Munson. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE President Munson led the Pledge of Allegiance. (Munson) Before we get to work tonight, I would like to tell you how we will conduct this meeting. I’m going to begin with an introductory statement and tell you about our general meeting practices; then I will give a short presentation on salary comparisons. Following this, Councilor McKim will present a budget analysis and then we will begin with our usual round of motions, discussions, amendments and voting. By way of introduction, I would like to tell the public in our audience and at home that we have traditionally not had public comment during budget hearings but instead have reserved public comment until the budget adoption date which is several meetings hence. This year it will be on October 13th. This is because our multiple budget hearings are simply part one of a two‐part budget process. Nothing is final after these budget hearings until the budget adoption. That means salary lines and all budget lines until October 13th can be amended. Because Council members have received considerable public comment on each, I would like to open our meeting tonight for public comment. Therefore, I ask Council for unanimous consent to open public comment on each considered budget following the motion’s second, Council comment and any amendments and to keep us close to schedule we will limit comment to three minutes.

of 175

September 1, 2015 Page 2

McKim made a unanimous consent motion to open public comment on each considered budget following the motion’s second, Council comment and any amendments. (Yoder) I want to make sure I understood. So we will hear…. (Munson) We will hear public comment in the usual meeting fashion. (Yoder) Okay. (Hawk) So we’ll have the presentation first by the department head? (Munson) Usual presentations. Motion passed with no objection. (Munson) Now I would like to tell you about our general procedures and have Lorie Robinson, who I wish to introduce…she’s our guru with the spreadsheets. Kim Shell, second guru, is sitting next to her. Lorie would your project a straightforward spreadsheet for us from our budget work? And you will be seeing a lot of these spreadsheets so I’m just going to highlight. On the spreadsheet we have several columns. Lorie if you would enlarge the columns please. And I’ll ask Eric to come up and try again with my computer – or Brady. Thank you. On the left column you will see the particular budget lines, these are numbered and described; and then in columns to the right we have historical information and the department’s proposed budget request. You can see that we have the 2016 base amount. This is the amount that is the same as the 2015 approved budget. Next to that there is a change from the prior year and the column titled Base with COLA that is base with cost ‐ of ‐ living adjustment. This is a hope for a raise in the initial categories of salaries; it doesn’t really apply to any other budget requests. Then finally you see the 2016 request, the different from the base, and the amount that will be the Council approval. The first portion of the budget that we consider is the 10s category. You can see everything starts with digit 1 and this is for salaries and benefits. Beneath that are the 20s categories, generally this is supplies. Beneath that are the 30s categories, the numbers starting with 3s, and these are services. Finally, in some budget we have capital outlays, these are the 40s, starting with 4. So this is what you will be looking at tonight. Next I would like to show you the salary comparison that was briefly on the screen before. [Some of these numbers] were put together by Waggoner Irwin & Scheele (“WIS”) because the Council wished to begin a salary review for the entire County. All our employees’ salaries are going to be considered and reviewed but the salary data that is easiest to put together and compare are those of Elected Officials because these are reported by Department of Local Government Finance and they are in various reports. The Farm Bureau puts out a report that includes salary data and other pertinent county facts. Just last night I got this huge book published by the Association for Indiana Counties that has all sorts of 2015 fun facts about county government and finances. So what you see before you are a list of counties down the side. I’ve listed a series of counties that WIS had thought were important for comparison; counties that were important because they are the generally the same size as Monroe County, shown in red; and finally those with an asterisk are counties that also have a large university. I compared the salaries for all the Elected Officials and you can see a blank column 2014 Actual Spending. I thought this was a more important set of information for comparison than budget amounts. I’ve got the 2015 budget amounts in there but budgets include much more money than is actually spent and spending is really what we need to be looking at. I’ve got the tax rate and I have the total assessed valuation along with population size based on 2011 survey and then the size of the county. The size of the county is pertinent actually because different size counties have different amounts of roadways and actually the number of miles of roadway would be another variable that would be good to add to this.

of 175


Next the colors, you see Monroe in blue but the dark yellow cells are the highest among all the counties. The light yellow are the lowest. Down at the bottom you can see an average salary and you can see averages that exclude the highs and the lows and that is a common practice. We could also calculate – and I think I will be doing this in the future – average for a population cohort of similar size, so the red counties could have an average. We also could have average for the counties that have large universities. These will help us under‐stand how well our salaries mesh with comparable counties in Indiana; and we can consider comparable in many different ways. But this is not good enough in some considerations. For Monroe County we’re going to be talking tonight first about the Commissioners’ budget. There you can see that the Commissioner’s salary in 2015 was $32,421. The average Commissioner’s salary of this group is $35,325 and the average excluding the highs and lows is $34,353. So think everybody can see that the Commissioner’s salary is truly a little bit below average. But we don’t want to get into considerations that they have in Lake Wobegone where nobody can be average. This is something I think we will pay attention to in the future when we are looking at salaries for all County employees. So that’s all I have for this and, as I said, it is a work in progress. There are gaps in the data, more to be filled in, and the salary comparisons are not going to be ready for this budget season. It will be available for next year though. So just remember the Disraeli quote, “There are lies, damn lies and statistics.” Those numbers can be adjusted and analyzed in different ways to come up with what people want to show you but we hope to present enough comparisons so that you will not believe Disraeli. So finally, before Councilor McKim presents our financial analysis I want to call your attention to the magnitude of the task ahead of the Council tonight and the next three hearings and that is scaling back budget requests to meet our projected revenue. Last year at this time at the opening of budget hearings we had a deficit of $280,000 in County General Fund and $70,000 in the COIT Fund and a total deficit of $350,000. We worked very hard to get the budget down to a financially‐responsible level. This year the deficit is 5.4 times larger than it was last year. We have a big job ahead to reduce budget requests and we ask for everybody’s cooperation in helping us get down to the financially‐responsible level. So now Councilor McKim will show you something about that level. (McKim) Thank you very much, President Munson. The first thing I’m going to do is talk a little bit tonight about the fringe rate, that is essentially a tax that we apply on salaries to be able to collect the money that is necessary for the County’s healthcare plan for employees. That is probably the most important global decision that we make that affects every single budget and it is certainly a major reason why we are beginning from so far behind right now. So I’m just going to talk a little bit about how we can determine that rate. I’m going to start out with some data on healthcare costs in Monroe County Government. The beginning data that I’m going to be presenting was provided by Apex Benefits, our benefits consultant, and our HR Director, Auditor, and several Councilors and the Commissioners’ Administrator have already been through all this with Apex Benefits so I’m really just going to give a very brief synopsis of what was more like an hour presentation when we actually met with the consultant. So Apex’s data on healthcare claims is based on data that we have up to July of this year. The way that they project our costs for 2016 and our premiums and everything is they use the previous entire year plus the seven months that we have for this year. So all of 2014 and up through July of 2015 are used to determine those costs for next year. Every month matters, I guess July was a pretty rough month as far as claims go and it did up the projected costs for 2016 somewhat so this is a little bit worse than those of you who had seen the data based on only claims up to May will have seen. So I’m not going to go into a lot of detail on the actual claims numbers they used to come up with our projected costs. First of all, on this chart that I’m that I’m showing you there are three columns: medical, prescription

of 175


drug, and dental; so each of the costs that you see are allocated to those three buckets. So like I said the first thing that the benefits consultant did is analyze the most recent seven months ending July 31, 2015, and then they analyzed the previous twelve months ending December 31, 2014, then they weight the two differently. They weight the most‐recent seven months at 70% and last year’s claims at 30% and that is how they come up with a projected number for 2016. So what we have is the blended number which, like I said, is 70% the most‐recent claims and 30% the prior 12 months’ claims; the blended number they have is $527.57 in the blue row and the abbreviation you keep seeing all along this document is PEPM which is “per employee per month” which is the way the costs are calculated. So $527.57 PEPM for medical, $184.56 for prescription drug, and $52.46 for dental. Then there are additional costs that come in in and above the medical, prescription drug and dental. First of all we have our stop loss premiums and this is really important when we start talking about our healthcare reserves. So Monroe County Government is self‐funded but we have stop‐loss policies that prevent us from being harmed by catastrophic claims. There are two different stop‐loss policies that we have. We have an aggregate stop‐loss policy which means that above a certain amount of aggregate claims for the entire County we don’t pay any more so it caps our total liability. We also have an individual stop‐loss policy which means that nobody can incur more than $125,000 worth of claims in a single year. So we’re protected both against the aggregate claims and then we’re also protected against individual claims but we pay a premium for that kind of coverage. We pay $128.40 for medical and prescription drug coverage for our stop loss and then there’s also an administrative fee that is applied to Apex, to the health insurance company, Anthem, and so on. So the stop‐loss premium and the administrative fees come out to $191.72 per employee per month for prescription drug and $4.40 for dental. Then we also have a couple of other costs that are added onto that. So this $903.86 is actually just the previous numbers totaled up; that is what we pay for the actual healthcare insurance: medical and prescription drug combined. We also have $18.04 that we pay for HRA, the health reimbursement account funding costs. We pay $104.90 for the Activate Clinic that we use and then there are Affordable Care Act fees of $5.11 PEPM. [This] leads us to projected healthcare costs of $1,031.90 PEPM for medical and prescription and $56.86 for dental. That is a 4.6% increase over 2015. So that is very important for everybody to know. That is one reason why we’re beginning this year quite a bit further behind than we would have liked to and there are actually two components to that; one of which is that we set our fringe rate last year lower than it needed to be to reduce the excess in our healthcare reserves so we’re bringing it back up to compensate for that – and I’ll talk about that in just a second – but then also about 4.6% is our actual increase in healthcare costs that this County is going to be seeing in 2016. I hope this isn’t too tedious. I just think it is really important that we all understand where these numbers come from. The very bottom line is taking certain assumptions that there are going to be 448 participating employees. We estimate a total healthcare cost for prescription, drug and medical of $5,547,520 for 2016. Now that is both the employees’ contribution and the County’s contribution. The next page of this document that came from Apex starts with the County’s portion of the total costs apportioned out to the medical prescription drug program, dental, life insurance, flexible spending account administration and COBRA administration for a total of $4,824,427. So that is a crucial number because that is the amount of money that the fringe rage has to raise. Anything more than that and our health insurance reserves increase; anything less than that and our health insurance reserves decrease. So that is the magic number that the fringe has to raise. First of all let’s look at the 2015 data here. Our estimated 2015 payroll was $21,546,401. Last year, for 2015, we used an 18% health insurance fringe rate which then at that payroll raises $3,878,352. Is everybody seeing that? That’s just simply that $21 million figure times 18%. So that is what our fringe would raise in 2015. Then we have our total Monroe County Government liability costs through July, which is about $2.8 million, and then our numbers projected to the end of the year. So we would be expected to incur $4,821,633 in healthcare costs

of 175


to Monroe County Government that is not the employees’ portion that is to Monroe County Government’s portion. Now the next figure is essentially the funding deficit. So remember if we look at that higher number we’re raising $3,878,000 from the fringe rate in 2015 but we needed to raise – to be fully funded ‐ $4,821,633. So that means that if everything works out correctly as projected we will have been essentially reducing our health insurance reserves by $943,000; that is we had a funded deficit of $943,000. The next line shows January 1, 2015, what those health insurance reserves were which was almost $2.5 million. That’s a very large number and then if you subtract that funding deficit our projected health insurance fund balance at the end of this year – that is December 31, 2015 – is about $1.5 million. Now fortunately that is almost exactly the number that we’re supposed to have. That is about the right amount to have in health insurance reserves and I’ll explain why in just a minute. But we were able to reduce the funded surplus in the health insurance reserves with a relatively low fringe rate but obviously that can’t be continued and we’re at a point now that we’ve reduced the health insurance reserves to where they should be [that] we need to set the fringe rate at a rate that raises exactly what we need to fund the healthcare plan. That is we should neither be in substantial surplus nor substantial deficit for the 2016 budget year. Originally we had advertised the fringe rate at 22%, a substantial increase from 18%. If we apply the 22% to the projected 2016 salaries, and this takes into account our proposed $1,000 increase for County employees and $500 for some Elected Officials that raises $4,993,276. Remember our bottom line liability that is at the top of this page, $4,824,000? We essentially what we’re saying here is that if we take the 22% fringe rate then we will be raising a surplus of almost $169,000 that would add to the health insurance reserves. That would bring us to an estimated health insurance reserve fund balance at the end of December of 2016 of $1.7 million. Now the benefits consultant’s estimate of what we actually need, the appropriate amount of health insurance reserves, is about $1.6 million. The way that number is derived comes from two things. It is the difference between our expected claims and our maximum possible claims. So in other words that is where our stop‐loss policy kicks in. So we need to be able to fund that difference, that delta, between the claims that the health‐care plan covers and our maximum possible before the stop loss kicks in plus a certain number of months’ worth of what they call IBNR which is incurred benefits not received [which] is basically people have started going to doctors and have had treatment and incurred costs but have not yet submitted that paperwork through the insurance company. So they have to assume that there is a certain amount of that and that our reserves have to be able to pay that – sort of like making payroll before we get our settlement. So when you add those two numbers together you get about $1.6 million. So that is the number we should have in our healthcare balance. So at 22% we wind up being a little bit over funded; at the end we’d be increasing our healthcare reserves by about $118,000 when really that is just slightly more than we need to increase it by; it is pretty close but it is slightly more. So I want to go to one more spreadsheet on this topic. This is probably more than anyone ever wanted to know about our healthcare system. So what I did here is a chart that shows – just taking several different fringe rate scenarios: 20%, 20.5%, 21%, 21.5%, 22%, 22.5% and 23% using projected 2016 salaries – how much those different fringe rates would raise. You will see that number in this line that I’ve highlighted is that $4,824,427; that’s what we need to raise. The line above it is what we would actually raise using that fringe rate. So what it comes out to is, at least in the group that we met with earlier, our recommendation is to use 21.5% as the fringe rate because, as you can see, that is a slight surplus in that we raise about $55,000 extra in the health insurance reserves by the end of 2016 and, as luck would have it, that is about exactly the amount that we would be coming below the recommended amount. So this kind of hits it right on the money, the 21.5%. Alternatives would be 22% or 21% but 21% runs at a $58,000 deficit, that is it would be projected to reduce the reserves by $58,000; or 22% which would raise a $169,000 surplus. So my recommendation is to go with 21.5% which, like I said, is slightly less than what was advertised. It saves us a little bit on the budget that was advertised but it is enough to keep at our current level – which is the appropriate level – of reserves.

of 175


Before I move on to the budget analysis, let’s go ahead and see if any Councilors have any questions or have a counterproposal. (Hawk) This is the number that we’ve been discussing for some time that was the right amount so I think we’re right in sync on this. I would suggest that in the future rather than reduce it down to 18% and the spend that money down on other things that if we end up with too much cash in there and we want to spend down those reserves that we are very cautious about using it for one‐time expenditures rather than investing it into payroll and then how do you meet the payroll the following year. That is a tough lesson to learn but I think it is one that we need to all be in consideration of. (McKim) From my perspective, and I think from the Council’s perspective, this is the most information, insight and transparency we’ve ever had into the health insurance numbers and I really appreciate all the work that Ms. Panzarella, Ms. Purdie and Mr. Dreyfus, from Apex Benefits, have put in to working with the County and working with the Council in giving us that level of understanding. (Hawk) I think it is important that the County employees take a look at this as well and understand that the benefit of having health insurance is many times the reason why our employees really want to work for Monroe County Government because this is a wonderful benefit that they might not receive elsewhere. (Munson) I have a procedural question. Would it be advantageous for us to have a motion to adopt this fringe rate so that it can be plugged into all the budgets? We could do so at this time if the Council wishes. (Hawk) That certainly is the fringe rate that I would support with the exception that that is tied to the amount of money we will raise if we pass the salary increase. But if for some reason we can’t come up with what that salary increase is going to be, if we can’t figure out a way to budget that, then we’re going to have to change this fringe rate because a lower salary in total is going to raise less money for the insurance. It is a puzzle. (McKim) Absolutely. Those numbers that I had were using the assumption that we funded the $1,000, $1,143 and $500 raises that we had proposed. (Munson) So we’ll need to revisit this at the end of our budget hearings when we know better what the salaries are going to be. (McKim) No, I understand that the numbers that are on the spreadsheet now are at 21.5% right? So we should be able to go with that unless we have to change it because of salaries. (Munson) So they were changed yesterday? Thank you. (Flory) They’re set up to calculate immediately. So if you didn’t like the change we could change it back. (McKim) I’ll go on to one more topic before we begin with budgets. So then the question is in the big picture where are we in projected revenues versus the departmental budget submissions? I’m really only going to talk about County General and COIT because those are obviously the funds in which we have to make tradeoffs and decisions and balance priorities against each other. You’ll remember that we had already talked about the revenues at a work session where the Auditor and Mr. Purlee presented their levy data and miscellaneous revenues and then also more recently we’ve received the COIT data. So all the revenues up there are exactly what you should be seeing in Gateway. There is one exception, the Council did make the decision to apply for the appeal for the excess levy and I am not including that $250,000 because I think there is a very low probability that we will receive it. We decided that it was worth the effort of appealing but we cannot depend on it so I didn’t include those numbers at all. Steve, otherwise, do you agree with these revenue numbers? Okay.

of 175


So then the only other thing I deducted from the revenues was the estimated circuit breaker amounts, that is the tax cap impact, and the DLGF’s recommendation was to use the current year’s estimate for the circuit breaker so I used $120,905 for the General Fund and, of course, there is no circuit breaker for the COIT fund. Just so you know what my columns look like, I have a County General column, a COIT column and then General plus COIT because to some degree the departmental budgets that we put in COIT versus the General Fund are arbitrary, we can move them around from year to year. So then those are our revenue numbers. Then we have our departmental requests which is the sum of all of the requests the departments have made as they were made with the one exception that the fringe rate was reduced from 22% to 21.5%; but otherwise these are as departments have submitted them. (Hawk) So that number already takes into consideration the 21.5%; you adjusted that number? (McKim) Right, that’s what I’m saying, that is the only change from what departments submitted is that we adjusted the fringe rate. So what that leaves us is in the General Fund – and I know your jaws are probably going to drop here – we have a budgeted deficit at the beginning of $626,000 and in the COIT Fund almost $1.4 million for a total of $1.9 million in requested expenses over budgeted revenues. That means we have a lot of cutting to do. I’m going to be inclined to not personally vote in favor of any increases that aren’t mandatory at this point because of that extreme deficit unless we can bring it down significantly. Now I wanted to throw in some other numbers that can at least throw this into perspective. Even though we don’t budget it based on past practices, we’re probably going to see almost $200,000 in unappropriated funds go out of the General Fund…. (Hawk) You might want to tell the public what that is. (McKim) Sorry. The statute allows certain expenses to be paid out of the General Fund without appropriation by the County Council. That includes travel for certain State‐called meetings for Elected Officials, that is not all Elected Officials’ training but each year the State calls several meetings of Elected Officials around the State, so that travel goes in there; certain election recount expenses; Special Prosecutors…. (Hawk) The payment back to someone who won their tax appeal and then the County must pay that taxpayer back the money. We do get a portion of that back from the other taxing units but it gets paid out of that unappropriated budget. We don’t even budget for the unappropriated, the Auditor just sends them the check when it is the correct time to do that. But it would be irresponsible for us not to understand that we’re going to have some expenses out of that, we’ve already been told. I don’t know whether or not figuring the $200,000 is even going to be enough. (McKim) It probably won’t. That $200,000 is more based on past history rather than on possible future [dark] box appeals, that’s correct. I have some numbers for reversions. Reversions are when departments don’t spend their money by the end of the year, it reverts back to either the General or COIT Fund. From past experience those reversions can be fairly substantial but the only guide I have is what we’ve seen in the past. The 2014 reversions were about $1 million in the General Fund and about half that in COIT. So typically we have seen some substantial reversions. Now of course those reversions make a good source of funds for one‐time expenses; for example, a consultant for the Zoning Ordinance would be one example of what that kind of one‐time funds could be used for. I put in the Election reimbursement for this year just because that had not actually showed up in the revenue projections for Harris for 2015. That is money that the City of Bloomington and the Town of Ellettsville were reimbursing for a Municipal Election. Just so everybody knows this number here of departmental expenses does

of 175


include the Presidential Election. So it shouldn’t be any surprise to us that this budget is substantially larger than last year for that reason alone. (Hawk) It is nice that we are aware that it wasn’t plugged in for revenue for 2015 but it ought not to be as a part of projected revenue for 2016 and that is what we’re looking at is projections for 2016. I think that puts you off by $258,000 right there because that is going to be sitting there in our cash when it gets paid back by the City but that is just going to be in the cash. When we look at our 16‐line statement it is going to be sitting there in the money that will be coming forward at the beginning of the year for our operating to get us through June. I’m just thinking that might be a bit confusing for the bottom line. (McKim) I understand that perspective; I see what you’re saying. But I guess what I’m trying to really get across is that – and we’ll talk about this when we talk about the Election Board budget no doubt – we have to look at Election budgets on a multi‐year cycle. Then there are just some numbers here that are probably underestimates of the additional appropriations during 2016 because we know that what we appropriate in the budget isn’t going to be enough. We know there are going to be departments coming back and asking us for more money. But I guess the point that I was trying to get at by putting in these numbers is that even after considering all those reversions and some pretty optimistic assumptions of additional appropriations that we still are at a $428,000 deficit of requests versus revenues even with all of those optimistic assumptions in place. I don’t mean to be too gloomy I just want to make sure we all understand that we have a lot of work to do over the next couple of weeks. (Hawk) If you add the $258,000 onto the $428,000…. (McKim) Yes, that would make it even worse. (Hawk) And it is. I mean that is just realistic. It is not next year’s revenue. (McKim) So if anybody has any questions or comments. (Dietz) I didn’t hear that last comment from Marty. (McKim) Marty doesn’t like this $258,000. I’ll pull it out…. (Dietz) No, I heard that and I’m fine with that being in there but she said even with something else being considered; there was another point that she was making aside from that number and I didn’t catch that. (Hawk) I’m sorry? (Dietz) I’m sure it will come up as we’re discussing this further. (Hawk) When you’re looking at these numbers and I’m sorry if that was in there earlier when I looked at these numbers I don’t recall having seen it. Has that been in there the whole time? (McKim) It’s been there a while, yes. (Hawk) I’ll have to say this man [referring to McKim] has worked on this over and over again to bring us up to date; continually working on these numbers and I so much appreciate it and I do not mean to be finding fault here at the last minute. (McKim) No, I understand your logic on that.

of 175


(Hawk) I just don’t recall seeing that in there before; I guess I was just looking at the County General one so much. So I’m sorry Rick I’m not certain what I said that [you missed]. (Dietz) That’s okay. I don’t mind having that number in there but your point about it – it is not about the budget so much as it is about what is in cash. (Hawk) And what year. What he’s presenting here is this is what our revenue is projected to be for 2016 and this is what our expenses are projected to be for 2016. So it would confuse us if we put…. (McKim) …2015 revenue as 2016. (Hawk) And regrettably that makes it not better. (McKim) Just one more very brief thing; I know everybody wants to get to budgets. But I just wanted to show a spreadsheet I did with a spreadsheet that Lorie gave all of us that shows the impact of the proposed raises – that is the raise assumptions that we used were the $1,000 for 35‐hour employees, $1,143 for 40‐hour employees, and $500 for certain Elected Officials. The approximate cost of General and COIT of that $1,000 raise is $529,000 so even eliminating the raise doesn’t get us all the way there. That is because there were a number of expenses we had this year: we have the increased fringe which was probably the most substantial; we have mandatory increases and step increases from Probation Officers; and we have the increases in costs from the Sheriff’s Deputies contract and the Jail contract. So once we apply all of those plus our own step increases when people go to the third‐year bump and that sort of thing – once we apply all of the policy and mandatory increases it really doesn’t leave us much room at all. So even by a limit setting all those raises to zero that only saves $529,000 for both General and COIT together. (Hawk) And at the same time you’re going to have to raise the fringe from 21.5% up to 22%. (McKim) Right, that’s true. (Hawk) We’d have to look at the numbers again to see what that is. (McKim) Yes, we’ll recalculated it. I just wanted to make sure everybody had the right perspective. Thank you for indulging me. (Munson) Marty, did you want to talk about the 16‐line statement? (Hawk) You got my email about that. What I really wanted us to remember is that while these spreadsheets that we’ve been looking at are perhaps easier to look at and understand where we’re going but that is not what we vote on. We vote on the financial statement, which is that 16‐line statement, which would show us how much our operating balance will be reduced and that is something that normally the Auditor keeps very close track on and makes certain that we understand how many years we can make our budgets work by reducing our operating by that much. It may look like we have a lot of money but that December settlement that comes in that is a part of the projection on that 16‐line statement is what we have to live on between the end of the year all the way through to our June settlement other than we get other smaller amounts in as we go and, of course, the income tax budgets, they get that in more regularly. But we cannot afford to spend down our operating of our property tax General Fund to the point that we would have to rely on going elsewhere to make payroll and that is why I thought Mr. Saulter, our Auditor, might want to present what he believes we need to hang onto for our operating and present a 16‐line statement up there so that we will remember the whole time because that is what we have to vote on at the end of the day. (Munson) Geoff, can you bring that up from the folder of 16‐line statements?

of 175


(Cobine) In relation to the notion of how much it would save if we had a zero raise increase, albeit that fringe would have to be recalculated and that is another variable in there, my understanding is that in addition to the County broadly needing to adjust that fringe rate to pay for the health insurance fund that the actual amount that employees are going to have to pay is also going up a little bit. So sort of in the context of discussing raises or no raises, that is one of those aspects – I don’t know what that amount is, I suspect we will come across that a little bit later – but that is going to be an additional cost that employees bear that a zero raise, what do we mean by that? Let’s keep that in mind. (McKim) Absolutely. That is actually a critical point and thank you for bringing that up. I actually did get some estimates on that from Ms. Panzarella and just taking the biggest numbers, let’s say, for an employee who elects to have their entire family covered and that they have Plan 1, it would increase by about $235 per year; Plan 2 is $168; and Plan 3 is $55 per year. So those are approximate increases based on the increased costs of healthcare provided by Ms. Panzarella that employees would be paying. So you’re right, if we don’t at least provide that level of increase then they’re actually backsliding. (Yoder) I can’t access this but there was an amount to show what the impact would be on $250 raise increase. I just wanted to see that amount. (McKim) So if we rolled back raises to $250 [which] would essentially keep employees exactly where they are now, that would give us a savings of about $400,000; although at that point we might need to go up to the 22% fringe rate. So it is hard to gain too much traction here, that’s the problem; there’s not magic bullet. (Hawk) What’s the difference again in going from 21.5% to 22%? (McKim) It was about $100,000, I think. (Hawk) That say $400,000 and another $100,000 so we’re still $500,000 and that’s not enough. Oh no, I’m doing it backwards. (McKim) No, it would be less; it would be $300,000. (Hawk) Because if you thought you were saving almost $400,000 but it was going to cost you $100,000 to save the $400,000 you really only save $300,000. (McKim) Right, exactly. (Yoder) So are we certain that if no raises are given that 22% in the fringe rate actually gets us to the place where we need to be? (Munson) That’s not calculated yet is it? (McKim) I wouldn’t want to commit to that. It would probably be between 22% and 22.5%. Is there anything with respect to the 16‐line statements you wanted me to project? (Hawk) I just thought the Auditor would want to comment on this; this is normally where the Auditor kicks in there and says “and this is what we need to hang on to for operating.” (Steve Saulter, County Auditor) Earlier this week I sent you projections of where the COIT Fund will land and possibly where the General Fund will land. This is based upon the assumption or the disclaimer that everything that you project will come in and everything that you project to go out will go out. With that in mind, the balance in the COIT Fund right now sits at $2.8 million so you do have a hefty balance. Even with that

of 175


assumption and based upon your budgets it will go down to around $2.1 at the end of the year. So again, it still has a hefty balance. The fund that I worry about is the General Fund. Several years ago, it was not uncommon for the General Fund to have $12 to $13 million sitting in it at various times. If the same assumptions I just mentioned for the COIT Fund hold true, it is projected that the General Fund will have a balance of about $7.5 million in it at the end of the year. Again, that could up a little bit depending upon the assumptions and projections or it could go down. That is at the bottom of the ladder of where you need to be. You should never probably go below $7.5 million at any time. What I mean by any time is there are two key times: the end of June which is after spring settlement; and the end of December after the settlement for fall. Right now it looks like you’re going to be hitting that $7.5 million somewhere in that range and that is at the bottom of the ladder, as I said. So it is very, very important that – I know in the past seven years I’ve sat here and talked about balancing the budget, I think it is important now because it looks like you’re going to be right at the bottom of your ladder and so this concept of balancing the budget – we’re talking about the General Fund – it is going to be equally important because you do not want to hear me come to you in June or in December and say, “oh by the way we are x number of days away from settlement and the General Fund is going to go in the hole.” So it is very important that you keep in mind is that $7.5 million is where you are projected to hit so it is very important that you balance this budget pertaining to the General Fund. (Hawk) And when you look at the amount that he is showing in the operating [there is] a balance of right at $6.5 million but that is also taking into consideration that the amount to be raised is $16.7 and remember that is over $250,000 more than what some of us believe will actually be raised. It is the $250,000 that we’re talking about for the excess levy that we are not real confident that we will get and there is also an additional dollar amount, something like $38,000, because when Bob Purlee does all of these and all of the 16‐line statements inside the frozen levy he always wants to add in a little bit extra in that County General just in case we have any of the other numbers off by anything because the State can cut us down to where it is supposed to be but they cannot, they’re not allowed, to raise it. So we want to make sure that we always advertise a little high there in the General so that we don’t leave money on the table. (Cobine) So unlike the numbers that Geoff was just going over, this statement does include that $250,000 appeal? (Saulter) Yes, $16,734,000 has the $250,000 in it. You have to show it as assuming that it is coming in. (Cobine) Because if you get it you have had to have advertised for it, right? (Saulter) Yes, but then if it doesn’t come in those numbers change by $250,000 at least. That 16‐line statement is actually sitting in Gateway because every fund in Gateway you have to do a 16‐line statement. Now in a lot of cases there will be zeroes through it because there are not tax rates and things like that. So what you’re seeing is in Gateway so I can easily provide that to you in the future. (Hawk) The reason it is so important for all of us to know what these numbers represent is that after the budgets have all gone through and we’ve voted on it, etc., and it gets up to the State then there is something that comes back from the State called the 1782s and that is where the State tells us whether or not we have our numbers right and whether or not they have to cut us and it is up to each individual Council member to know this is what we’re voting on. The totals of all these numbers goes into a special form and we vote on all the numbers combined, either up or down, and we’re saying at that time we’re voting on these financial statements here.

of 175


County General – Commissioners 1000‐068 Yoder made a motion to open Commissioners‐General 1000‐068 with the amount of $438,699.72 in the 10s; $4,900.00 in the 20s; and $2,575,083.81 in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total of $3,018,683.53. Jones seconded. (Julie Thomas, President, Board of Commissioners) I just wanted to point out that once again we’ve left a number of items in the Cumulative Capital Development Fund and we’ve also used some Cable TV money. Right now the Cumulative Capital Development Fund supports $995,794.68 in IT work for the County. So I just want to start off with that. I’m sure everyone’s talked about the salaries, so we’ll talk about that. We did a comparison of like counties to ours and looked at other Commissioners’ salaries, what we’re asking for including the $1,000 COLA is $7,579 for the member and Vice President and $8,252 for the President that comes down another $1,000 if you take off the cost‐of‐living [increase]. We did that based on what we saw in comparable‐size counties. We are full‐time employees; we are not part‐time. We do a great deal of work in the community in the county, as you all know, and we just would like to be recognized as being the full‐time employees that we are. So we could start with the 10s if you’d like. (Yoder) I wanted to reiterate and make sure it is clear that I personally appreciate all that you do and I recognize that much of the work that you do is well beyond part‐time. You just do what you need to in order to do your job and to do it well and that is very hard to calculate and put a fine point on that and I recognize that. And Commissioners Kiesling I know you’re back there so I just wanted to say how much I do appreciate what you do for the County. In looking over the numbers that we were given by WIS it is evident that perhaps the Council is middle range to the above and Commissioners are middle range lower and I’m sensitive to that and know that it is good to try to be equitable across those lines. Along those lines I also struggle with the work that all County employees do. All County employees here in Monroe County work very hard at what they do and I know that what you’re saying and requesting is not intended to slight that in the least and I just wanted to give a shout out that I certainly would want to give that kind of increase to all County employees. The concern is what we’re looking at right now with the budget and the amount of cuts that we’re going to make. I think it is good that we see this and that we’re very aware of the comparison county‐to‐county, like counties, and I have taken this into account. What I’ve been wondering if perhaps the County Council would be willing to consider foregoing the $500 raise that we would be getting if that happens to be at the end of what we decide and giving that to the Commissioners so instead of the big increase this time, I would be more in support of giving a $1,000 raise which would include their $500 per Commissioner which we are considering but in addition give the $500 that the Council would be getting. Instead of the Council getting a $500 COLA, we would stay the same and that $500 would be put forth toward the Commissioners’ raise[s], so it would be $1,000 for the Commissioners. (Thomas) I appreciate your consideration; that’s awesome. Really what we did is we worked with Council leadership and also placed some money into Stormwater Board as an option as well so we could talk about that now or later it is up to you Madam President. We also have some items in the 30s that could potentially be utilized although we have a few increases not of our own making, but we have some items in the 30s that we could possibly move as well if you’re interested. So we did want to lay this on the table and say, look, we’ve done the comparables, we are being paid part‐time and we are really full‐time employees. So I appreciate that. Thank you. (Cobine) I’d certainly be willing to consider Shelli’s proposal, when it comes up, along those lines. My perception also is publicly I feel like the Commissioners have gotten a fair amount of criticism just for bringing it up and I wanted to make clear to you that even though my biggest sticking point with this is the Council doesn’t have yet the overall salary view and I’m not really very comfortable thinking about this in isolation of that but I definitely want to acknowledge that you haven’t lost any points with me just for asking. So it may come to the fact that there’s always next year or something like that but it is definitely something that when we’re looking at

of 175


the salaries overall, equity for the region, compensation like that, this is definitely something that is a legitimate point to bring up and to look at whether we can do it or not. (Stoffers) Thank you for your comments. This is the forum. The editorial types don’t get to preapprove our request; you get to approve our request in this room at this forum. That is just the way it goes – all due respect to them. (Thomas) And we do understand the constraints that the County is under. We absolutely do understand that. As a former Council member I definitely understand the issues of budget constraints. We did this without knowing the full picture but we also know that there are other ways to fund this if there is any possible way to get part of it, we’d appreciate it, or at least acknowledgement that we are, indeed, full‐time employees would be a first step. Thank you. (Hawk) I’m in the process of weighing my thoughts and measuring my words here. First of all I wanted to say that I find it very disconcerting that what we seem to be more involved with is how much of a raise will the Elected Officials get? We’ve already heard the presentation that it will be a difficult thing for us to just keep our County employees whole. We used to act like a family. County employees were a family and if we couldn’t treat everyone fairly and evenly across the board we certainly were not going to take it from one group and give it to another group. That just was not the way we operated. I know that Elected Officials – I know personally – that while we may be considered part‐time most of us feel like we live our life for County Government and I do that because I love County Government, not because I expect a full‐time paycheck. However, for those people who believe they should receive a full‐time paycheck then maybe you don’t run for an office such as this. But all of that being said, I think when we are looking at what other Elected Officials make in other counties we have to take into consideration that Elected Officials, when you’re looking at salary comparisons, it is far different than say looking at someone who is over Technical Services because they could get a Technical Service job in any other county with their expertise. But those of us who are elected here in Monroe County are elected because the people here in Monroe County like us and trust us to represent them. That doesn’t mean that we could move to Allen County and suddenly get elected. It is what kind of person we are and that is how we get elected here to represent the people in this county. So I just find all of this not a very pleasant way to begin budget hearings. (McKim) Definitely I cannot support giving a larger raise to some Elected Officials than I can give to other County employees at this point. I just think it would cause too much discord in this County. We already have enough issues with morale in Monroe County Government and I want to do whatever I can to boost the morale of County employees. I know at this point we’ve already talked about how it might even be difficult to keep County employees from backsliding here. I do acknowledge that when it comes to Elected Officials, there is no such thing as part‐time versus full time. Elected Officials are Elected Officials, there is no status of part‐time Elected Official versus full‐time Elected Official. That status doesn’t exist. I know traditionally we’ve kind of treated the Commissioners, the Council and the Coroner as part‐time and we’ve clearly seen how the duties of the Coroner have increased over time to where calling the Coroner a part‐time employee is still kind of bizarre. And I acknowledge a big difference between the Commissioners and the Council is the Commissioners have operational responsibility; we have no operational responsibility and I totally acknowledge that the Commissioners have operational responsibilities that this Council doesn’t have. I could go along with Councilor Yoder’s proposal; I’m certainly willing to give up my own cost‐of‐living increase to fund a basic cost‐of‐living increase for the Commissioners but I definitely can’t support giving the Commissioners at this point more than other County employees would be receiving this year. (Hawk) Just so I understand you. You think that each of the Council members should take $500 and give it to the Commissioners? That’s ridiculous, totally ridiculous.

of 175


(Jones) Well I guess I’m willing to be totally ridiculous. I am also willing to give up $500 because we really do need to recognize the value of what the Commissioners are doing. Unfortunately we also need to balance that against the fiscal realities and what we would like to do for the rest of our employees. But I would like to go on to say that from a philosophical point of view I really wish that I could support this because in a democracy I don’t believe you can have truly representational government when most people would be totally unable to run for these offices. They don’t pay enough. The hours are very difficult. They pay part‐time and yet require the Commissioners to put in much more than that and it is also not always predictable. Very, very few people have a job or earn a living in such a way that would allow them to take this on which from the point of view of the democracy I find troubling. But then there’s reality to deal with. Philosophy is wonderful but it doesn’t always cover reality and the reality is that probably we cannot, at this time at least, afford the kinds of salaries that would actually make these jobs available to most people. (Hawk) I absolutely understand for those of you who believe that you would be willing to take $500 out of your pocket and give it to the Commissioners and I suggest that for those of you who think that is important you write them a check out of your personal checking account; don’t write it out of mine. I remember one time when we had an elected County Council member who thought that the best way for us to handle any raises for the County Council was to put it into social services and I said I would be happy to provide that if I get to choose where it goes and that got dropped real quick. (Munson) I’d like to make a comment that I hope will shed a little light on how this budget process has gone on with respect to raises. First of all the timing of the information that the Council puts together to look at projected revenues and estimated costs is scheduled in such a way that we are talking to departments to advise them to prepare their budgets before we have real numbers and that is an unfortunate reality. Therefore, we have to advise departments to put forth the maximum raise possible because this needs to be advertised to the public in order for us to be able to even consider the amount. We can never add to a proposed budget; we can only subtract from it. So we pay close attention to the advertising amounts and actually on our spreadsheets there is a calculated advertised amount that we reference and formulas are built in so that if we would go over the advertised amount I think bells and whistles would announce this, we have to give this much attention. Just to tell you how close this has been, health insurance information came about yesterday afternoon and that is why we have some staggering differences between what is proposed and what is probably going to be realistic. Lorie could you flip back to that spreadsheet that I showed earlier and I want you to show the Council and Commissioners salary averages and the Monroe County present salary. If you would just hide about eight rows in the middle, just knock out about eight counties there we should be able to see it pretty well if you would hide those. Now if you focus your attention on the Commissioner’s salary and the Council salary. This is what I paid attention to and this is what I sent to my Council colleagues so that they could. I think you will see that the Commissioners salary is under the average and the Council salary is actually above average. So I feel comfort‐able not in giving my $500 to be divided up among the Commissioners but to saying that the Council doesn’t warrant the kind of increment that the Commissioners do warrant. I think this is important information for all of us to look at. (Thomas) So we used comparable counties of similar sizes took out the biggest and lowest from the comps and I didn’t get a chance to read the counties that were chosen here but we came up with a different number of – without Allen and Hancock Counties ‐ $40,718. We used comp counties of Clark, Delaware, Hamilton, Hendricks, Madison, St. Joseph, Tippecanoe and Vigo, which are similar‐sized counties and then we took off the highest and lowest. By far Allen County being the highest and Hancock County being the lowest. So we took those off and came up with $40,718. Again, I could speak for Commissioner Stoffers and I think I could speak for Commissioner Kiesling when I say we would not want to take money out of any Council member’s pocket. We appreciate the gesture. It is generous. It is very kind. Am I correct in that? (Stoffers) Yes that’s accurate.

of 175


(Thomas) Okay, thank you. (Yoder) I just wanted to clarify. So this notion is not based out of kindness actually it was based out of to try to create more equity and this is the information that we have been given. We haven’t received the full WIS report of all of the County employees and where they fall in terms of like salaries across the board and as we get that information we will need to address it and need to make those adjustments. I just saw this as an opportunity to make one slight one. This isn’t anybody writing a check. At some point it would be an issue we would need to address and it seemed like a small little way to adjust that now. I do agree with Councilor Hawk it is a crying shame we have very large needs in our County and to start off here is unfortunate. I would totally agree with you there. But the thought process was based on numbers and not on emotion. It was just how are we going to begin to address these? And this seemed like one way to do that. (Hawk) It is my hope, of course, that don’t pass this today and that we will have time to analyze the numbers that many of us have been working very diligently putting together and once we’ve done that then maybe there will be a better meeting of the minds. But one of the things that I looked at and asked to have put together on a spreadsheet is how much revenue these other counties have and Hamilton County in particular has a huge income tax revenue and so, of course, their salaries, they have more money to work with. If we have Assessed Value growth then we can keep our tax rates low and yet we would be able to have different revenues and if we can grow jobs we will have more income tax revenue coming in. If we grow our Assessed Value we will have more money coming in for our rate‐controlled funds and if we have Elected Officials who are pushing hard to grow jobs and to grow Assessed Values and so forth that would bring in dollars and then maybe they could make more money. But that is a part of what we have to look at: how much money we have and what we do with it. So it is a very different thing for each county depending upon if they’ve hit their circuit breaker and what kind of revenues they have to work with. So I don’t think when you’re just looking at these totals that gives us a good answer to make that kind of a decision. When you’re looking at these totals, for instance, the surveyor will be paid different and that depends on, by law, if they are licensed they’re paid more than a surveyor who is not licensed. The sheriff’s salaries, you will see those are different. That is tied to whether or not you contract and whether or not they get any of the food money. There is a lot of other things that goes into what you arrive at for the sheriff’s payment. And for the commissioners, certainly some commissioners’ offices have a full‐time county administrator such as we have and many others do not and we, of course, have three full‐time legal staff as well as their support staff who support the County Commissioners and that is not what you’re going to find in many of these other counties. So there are a lot of other statistics that we would want to look at and I hope that we will not make a decision that we will regret later. It does not mean you couldn’t raise it later but remember you cannot raise or lower an Elected Official’s salary except for in the year. So if they were to get a raise, if we decided later after more study was done and you decided to adjust their salaries for next year, it would have to be done before the end of the year but I certainly do not support this. (McKim) I think on further reflection I think we have committed with the Council recommendations. We have committed to doing a full salary review of all County positions including Elected Officials. We ought not to do this piecemeal. I think we all acknowledge that there may be many County employees, including Elected Officials, who are not compensated correctly. One of the things that most stood out in the analysis that Cheryl did, I think, was not that the Commissioners were underpaid but that the Auditor is underpaid. I hate to say it but that is what really stands out most in the data. Not that I’m proposing giving a windfall now either. But I think we need to consider all of these increases in context. So I think we should stay where we are now with the acknowledgement that we have committed to all County employees, including the Commissioners and all the Elected Officials, to study this systematically yet this year. (Cobine) In addition to that, it seems like based on the presentation that we’ve seen both from Steve and from you that I feel as if, not surprisingly, but that we’ve sort of stepped into that mode of well I think we’d better assume that we can’t do anything and add it in later kind of mode. That sort of short circuits this whole con‐versation of we don’t know if we’re going to be able to do much of anything at this point in terms of raises for

of 175


anybody. So I agree with that sentiment as well but that, going along with Lee’s statement, there is what is ideal and what is reality here? So I think we’re more in the reality mode at the moment. (Dietz) The Commissioners have raised an issue of inequity in pay and it is a valid issue. We certainly have challenges across the board in terms of summoning enough funds to address all the priorities that we have. But I would be open to certainly considering a proposal like this but I would like to see it in the context of a compre‐hensive review across the board. I do think it would also indicate that there are discrepancies here that should be addressed. I would like to see that in the context of other staff members as well. Thanks for bringing that forward. Yoder made a motion to reduce the following lines from the requested amount to an amount reflect proposed COLA raises of $500 per Commissioner: lines 10.0003, 10.0004, and 10.005. Jones seconded. (Hawk) I’ll support that as long as that’s what we’re able to give according to our directions. Stonecipher called roll: McKim – yes Dietz – yes Hawk – yes Munson – yes Jones – yes Yoder – yes Cobine – yes Motion passed unanimously. (Munson) Council, because the raises proposed by the Commissioners were also budgeted in Fund 1197‐000 Stormwater, when we get to that budget I will ask for a unanimous consent motion at that time to have $36,000 in raises set out of that budget with no separate lines and deleted. I just wanted you to know where we were going. So we have an amended motion before us and I want you to then go through the 20s and 30s and then when we conclude that we will have public comment. (Thomas) The 20s are unchanged, so that’s standards. The 30s, there are some funds that show the 2.6 growth quotient increase including Stonebelt Center 30.0013, Centerstone 30.0023, and Options (which should be Life Designs if we could get that changed I’d really appreciate that). We asked for an increase in Dues and Memberships 30.0017 and we’re going to take that extra $3,500 out because we’re good sports. We’d also like another line name change Middle Way House, New Wings Project should be Jail Programming. McKim made a motion to amend line 30.0017 Dues & Memberships from $13,500 to $10,000. Hawk seconded. Stonecipher called roll: Cobine – yes Yoder – yes Dietz – yes Munson – yes Hawk – yes McKim – yes Jones – yes Motion passed.

of 175


(McKim) May I just suggest that for non‐controversial amendment votes we don’t necessarily have to do a roll call vote? (Munson) Sometimes I don’t know what is not controversial. (Thomas) The cost will go up for the employee shuttle. This is the last year for it. (Munson) What line is that please? (Thomas) 30.040. (Munson) And that is to stay the same or to change? (Thomas) That is an increase on cost that we were given by Rural Transit for the employee shuttle. (Munson) Okay, you’re just highlighting that? (Thomas) I’m highlighting an increase in cost. (McKim) My understanding is that Rural Transit was running at a loss for the employee shuttle and that this is absolutely necessary to cover the actual costs that they’re incurring so I certainly support that and I’m glad that next year that cost will go down with the garage. What is the projected opening date for the garage? (Stoffers) Spring, the approval process was long and interesting and so we lost construction time in the spring so in the spring [of 2016]. We think the shell will be poured by December and then all the other things start going into it. (Dietz) Do you anticipate then not using the full amount of these funds that you’re requesting because it would only be for part of the year or is that not correct? (Stoffers) No, we’re not going to be in that garage. It is pushed down the road and quite frankly when we’re done we’re done with the shuttle. We’re not going to keep them simply because [the Council has] appropriated money; when we’re done, we’re done. Mind you we’re going to have to secure some parking spaces from the City which we anticipate on 7th Street because, quite frankly, to get our approval we had to lose two floors. But we want to be completely away from the Convention Center parking and get out of the shuttle business. (Munson) We have no capital outlays in the 40s proposed. Let’s have the amended amounts read back to us please for the 10s and the 30s. (Shell) For the 10s it is $407,293.17; the 20s stayed the same at $4,900; the 30s [are] now…. (Hawk) We’re not through with the 30s. I have some questions on the 30s. There are a couple of things here, one of which I’m just hoping that the time will come that we will be able to bring the Extension Services back home to Monroe County‐owned property. We have this office space that under 30.0046 Temporary Space and that is where the Extension office is. I know that it is convenient for them to be where they are but I also know that those are dollars that we might decide that we can no longer afford to spend. It is just something I think we ought to at least consider. Also under this Middle Way House‐New Wings project, if you will remember that was a rather large amount of money that the County committed to and we paid it off and we were supposed to be paying it off and it was supposed to be paid off a certain amount each and then it was supposed to be completely paid off and that has happened; it is completely paid off. So now that line should not be Middle Way House at all. So now have we

of 175


decided to use that line number and now call it Jail Programming and if that is so is there any tie to Middle Way House or what is this Jail Programming? (Thomas) It is New Leaf‐New Life; it is not connected with Middle Way House. (Hawk) Okay so is this a brand new $10,000 to New Leaf‐New Life that we don’t have this year? (Thomas) No, we had it this year. (Hawk) We have it this year and under what line is it? (Thomas) It is in the Middle Way House‐New Wings Project line. (McKim) We could create a new line. (Thomas) Yes, we could create a new line; it doesn’t matter much to us. (Hawk) Okay, I just wanted to make certain that we’re all aware that we made a commitment to Middle Way House to help them and that commitment had been honored and completely paid for. The Jail Programming for $10,000 is there any way we could pay for that out of the Misdemeanant Fund or in any other method? It might be something we can come back to. If we can’t get the numbers to work out there may be a way that we can still provide the service and not take it out of the County General. (McKim) I completely agree that we should have another line though, that is confusing. Mr. Auditor is 49 available do you think? (Saulter) We can use 49 and then if necessary we can always change it. The important thing is that you approve the line and right now it looks like 49 is available but if it isn’t we can get back with you and change it accordingly. McKim made a motion to set line 30.0009 Middle Way House‐New Wings Project to zero and to create line 30.0049 Jail Programming and set it to $10,000. Jones seconded. Motion passed by voice vote. (Thomas) We aren’t really concerned with where this money for what is currently New Leaf‐New Life comes from but we just want to make sure that Jail Programming continues. It is vital for our community and for those folks in reentry and it saves us all money and heartache down the road. So I would really appreciate it if you don’t cut that until you have another place for it. Thank you. (McKim) The Misdemeanant Fund actually is used to pay – but it is actually also used to pay the person who provides that so this $10,000 plus what comes out of the Misdemeanant Fund makes up the total of those services and I do support – although obviously if we can find somewhere else to pay for it I’m happy to do that but I do support it. (Hawk) We could find a home for it. I’m not saying we cut it now I’m saying let’s look for a new home for that. Could you remind us what Professional Services 30.0028 for $40,000; what do you plan to use that money for? (Thomas) We have SPEA and we also have funds for consultants as needed. For example, last year we hired a short‐term part‐time consultant to help write a grant that I didn’t have time to work on more than I already had. So this is one of those things that happens; we don’t have a grant writer. And we got into the competition which was for Georgetown so it worked out well.

of 175


(Hawk) I also would like to ask under 30.0028, the Volunteers in Medicine, I think many of us had hoped that as the government healthcare was kicking in that it might be an opportune time for us to know that it was time for Volunteers in Medicine’s mission has changed somewhat. But perhaps this is not the year to address it because I know that they’re out trying to educate those folks to learn how to access that healthcare. But at some point in time there are a lot of other people out there who are out there educating those folks to learn how to access it and it is my hope that at some point in time that was supposed to assist communities to do what our Volunteers in Medicine has done and how we had supported them in the past but this is supposed to be now a part of the Affordable Care Act so I think it is something we have to continue to watch. (Thomas) We do have a letter that we received from Nancy Richmond who is the Director of Volunteers in Medicine and just to paraphrase because we asked the same question, “Client volume has decreased but they still have 1,000 appointments per month of folks needing medical care. There are people in poverty who don’t have access to healthcare at all.” They’ve taken the step and obviously they’re helping with the navigation, as you mentioned, for the folks who are eligible but “there are clients who need assistance with chronic diseases ensuring that their medications are appropriate and organized and they’re taking them correctly. But most importantly they’ve just taken on a new role of providing community‐based service,” which I think is phenomenal and I think the community is behind that as well. So that is the short story. I’d be happy to forward this letter to everyone on the Council. (Hawk) I’m familiar with it. And also I have a very dear friend who is alive today because of Volunteers in Medicine so I don’t want them to the shortchanged at all. It is just that as we evolve and things improve we need to say it is time, can we start reducing somewhat the support to them. But I don’t think this is the time but I think it is time for us to be asking and remembering that before Volunteers in Medicine there was another group that we started back many years ago and in order to start this community clinic what we had to do that year to support that was we took the County employees’ raises away, we could not afford to give the raise so that we could support starting this clinic and I voted for that and that was a really tough vote. That was written up in the paper and I still have that on my wall up over my computer at home to remind me that was the start of something really good but it is also something that our County employees had to give up a raise for us to get that going. So I think it is something we need to recognize that the County worked really hard to get that going. (McKim) I completely agree with Councilor Hawk but I also completely agree with Commissioner Thomas on the continued relevance of Volunteers in Medicine. A lot of times it has been said recently that they’re changing their mission [but] actually they’re not changing their mission by one word. They’re changing where they allocate some of the resources within their mission; certainly some services have become less important and others have not. But their mission calls for them to provide health education that empowers individuals to take responsibility for their own wellbeing. I think that mission is every bit as relevant today as it was two years ago. But in broad I certainly agree with Councilor Hawk that we should always be looking to see if the importance of a particular non‐profit may be not as great in the future and we have an opportunity to cut we can. But I think at this point Volunteers in Medicine is very relevant to the continued healthcare needs. (Munson) I hope the Commissioners and the Council will keep in mind that temporary space for the Extension Program on South Walnut Street has been very successful for the parents and children who participate in 4‐H and it is very difficult for them to get downtown to park places that don’t have parking and I hope that we can maintain this expense in our budget. (McKim) Is that even rent or is that just utilities and the cleaning contract? (Thomas) {Inaudible} upkeep. (Munson) It would be more if we were leasing other space, by far. A call was made for public comment.

of 175


(Scott Wells) Good evening. As a former County Councilman I would like to make some comments on the proposed salary increase that the Commissioners have been trying to get enacted. It is just amazing really to see, I would almost say, arrogance the process to where we got. All you’ve got to do is study what they did in July of this year. July 1 they proposed the $1,000 which was two times more than what you all wanted to have the $500 for the living raise increase. But here’s the key, July 13th the Stormwater Management Board meeting, they don’t have a notice of the $12,000 that each of them asked for and I gave you all a copy of this right here 10.0007, 8 and 9 to verify that. Each is asking for $12,000 but it was not advertised, there was no notice, it wasn’t even on the agenda. Now imagine your President of the Stormwater Management Board, Kevin Enright, wasn’t even informed of this and it was sprung on him at the meeting and, of course, the vote was three to one. The Commissioners wanted that $12,000 times three. I also want to go over what the Stormwater Management fee is all about. This is 2011, if you read it says right here, “The ordinance established a stormwater system user fee. That fee is $35 per home.” Nowhere in here does it say $12,000 for Commissioners. It is all about drainage, about the impervious surface area running off, the water, how do we protect our citizens from runoff; nothing about salary increase of Commissioners. But this is just part of the story. You’re not even talking about this yet. After this Kevin Enright calls me up and tells me how outraged he was about this whole procedure and basically it was a closed meeting meaning a violation of the open door law, okay. Acronym NOT, Commissioners NOT, the acronym not No Open Transparency and that is what the Commissioners are not doing. It is not the first time; this is like a recurring motif. This is just to me the ultimate here. So when you go over this next week, the Commissioners after the Stormwater Management Board they come back and they want to make sure they get that and so they come in and ask for $11,000 times three again; that’s $33,000. But here’s the bottom line. If you go with the Commissioners’ budget it is 22 times more than what you’re asking for for $500; if you go with the Stormwater it is 24 times more. To me it is an outrage to be asking for that kind of salary increase when, in fact, you know you reward people for doing good work and they have done some good things but let me tell you there’s a lot of meetings they’re not advertised and they’re getting away with this. Why should they be given an increase in salary like that? (Munson) So Council, we need to know the bottom line. (Shell) The final total being $2,983,776.98. Yoder made a motion to amend the previous motion with the amount of $407,293.17 in the 10s; $4,900.00 in the 20s; $2,571,583.81 in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total of $2,983,776.98. Jones seconded. Stonecipher called roll: Dietz – yes Hawk – yes Cobine – yes McKim – yes Munson – yes Jones – yes Yoder – yes Motion passed. County General‐County Buildings 1000‐161 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for County General‐County Buildings 1000‐161 with the amount of $129,501.73 in the 10s; $122,000.00 in the 20s; $1,448,087.63 in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total of $1,699,589.36. Jones seconded.

of 175


(Thomas) In the 10s we have the cost‐of‐living increase and relevant benefits as well. It is pretty straight‐forward; an increase of $4,069.96. In the 20s you can see in the year‐to‐date category that we ran short on a couple of things so we changed our budget around. So we’ve moved all building cleaning supplies to the 20s in County General, some of them had been in the Showers Building Fund, and reduced a couple of other lines. Most notably, 20.0006 Parts and Supplies for the Justice Building because we have upgraded the HVAC system and that is where most of that money was going. So that is a key reduction. Same thing in Material and Parts $2,000 in 20.0001. So those two reductions reflect the work that we’ve done on the energy performance contract and then the increase represents consolidating everything to one fund on cleaning supplies. The 30s are interesting. So you will notice there are some key reductions on a number of lines including 30.0003, 6, 7, 19 and 20 and these reductions are related specifically to the energy savings performance contract. They total one‐thirty‐eight, I believe. We are guaranteed to save $158,000 next year but some of the utilities aren’t in this fund. For example, Showers Utilities, the Youth Service Bureau Binkley House utilities, the Highway Garage utilities; so these are not the sum total of all the utilities that we pay in the County. So we reduced it, we just took a good guess at it. You will notice some small maintenance increases from ASI for Curry and Fiscus; but then you’ll notice we need a new line, and this is the ten‐year payment on that energy perform‐ance contract. So what we’re recommending is to place that contract payment payout in the same fund where we spend most of our utilities. (Hawk) As you can see the books, the payout for that Honeywell agreement is $188,000 and I understand that the reductions in the utilities lines is about $140,000 so that leaves an additional of about $48,000 more that we will be paying for the Honeywell versus what we anticipate the savings to be in this particular budget. So the other budgets are not in County General so that means County General is taking the hit for the $48,000. Had we anticipated that? (Thomas) It is a little over $45,000 because you’re including in there the slight increase from ASI for the main‐tenance of the two buildings at the bottom there. (Hawk) So $45,000. When you take a look at a $1,000 raise for each County employee that is 45 County employees for their raise. This was supposed to keep us from having to increase and this was supposed to be a savings to do this and yet it is really costing County General. So how can we address this? Do we really believe that we’re going to be saving $188,000 on utilities regardless of what budget it is paid from? Or do we believe that the best we can hope for is the $150,000 guarantee? Is that correct, it is a $150,000 guarantee [from] Honeywell? (Thomas) It is $157,900 so we call it $158,000. I will tell you that what you’re going to see, and some of these may already be in, but there is going to be $40,000 to $50,000 in rebates coming into County General Fund although that is a one‐time input. But that will be coming in if it hasn’t yet. We’re looking at being done in October. We’re also trying to account for rate increases as well because the guaranteed‐savings project cannot guarantee us money on rate increases; it can’t cover those things. So we have done our best to try to split this. We think there is going to be huge savings in the Showers Building because we are finishing out the solar panels on the roof. We think there will be some savings at YSB and the Highway Garage as well. But to apportion it out, it is not in our calculations. (Hawk) I just want to call our attention that this is what the majority here on the Council wanted to do. It is what the County Commissioners wanted to do. But we’re seeing that it is hitting County General by whatever that number is; it was close to $50,000. Decisions have consequences. (McKim) My understanding is – and I’m actually looking at the Honeywell document right now – that the energy savings was supposed to be $158,000 as Commissioner Thomas described and so we were recognizing $140,000 of that in the General Fund so that….

of 175


(Thomas) We’re actually looking at more than that because we took another $19,000 out of the 20s. That is capital expenditure avoidance because of the Honeywell project. (McKim) Right and we are supposed to see operational savings and cost avoidance as part of that. I guess my question is could be apportion some piece of that $188,000 debt service payment a little bit to Highway and a little bit to Juvenile COIT Fund? (Thomas) That’s fine with us. (McKim) We’d have to do it in a way that is equitable and justifiable. (Dietz) It is here out of simplicity for having it all in one place as opposed to being distributed. The flip side, as you know, is it is the General Fund which we need to be cognizant about. (Thomas) Right. And you know this is a ten‐year payment of $188,000 but the savings will last much longer than that. Also most utilities are paid out of these 30s so that’s why we chose this spot. We only control our budget, we don’t control YSB budget, and you know that, so that’s why we’ve chosen to do this. (Hawk) I just wanted to make certain because I think that we all understood that this $188,000 – I’m not sure that when we looked at that we realized it was going to hit County General as much and not the other budgets. So if we could all agree to take a little bit out of the other budgets that are supposed to be savings dollars in their utility bills as long as in their budget they’re supposed to be covering utility bills that certainly makes sense. But in addition to which I listened to some of the meetings from the group, Sustainability, and I think they thought they were going to get some of this savings but that’s not what we had agreed to. We thought the savings was going to help pay for the Honeywell contract so let’s hope that is what we’re all going to still continue to do. (McKim) Well we would have to make a decision to transfer anything to them; that’s out decision. (Hawk) I know but I’m just saying let’s remember our commitment and not forget that. (Thomas) This doesn’t affect them in any way; they don’t have a budget. (Hawk) I’m just reminding us of our obligation. (Dietz) I think the confusion might come from the fact that we have had a conservation ordinance that the purpose was to aggregate savings and then provide that for reinvestment. But when we moved forward with this Honeywell program, the notion being that the expenses would be covered by the savings so there hasn’t been an effort by any of the Council members to move forward with an appropriation of savings into that fund since we started the Honeywell project. (Hawk) Thank you for saying that because I’m not sure that group really had that message because I heard them in their meetings doing exactly what their job was supposed to be was trying to decide how this was going to work. (Thomas) They were simply providing recommendations to the Commissioners for future savings, what should be the next task. That is one of the things we’re working on. I am a member of that Board. It is a recommendation do the Board of Commissioners on what the next steps for energy savings should be. They’re not thinking they have a budget. (Cobine) And this is the Environmental Quality and Sustainability Commission. I wasn’t able to go to the last meeting but I’m on that this term. There was a bit of a discussion along what Rick was talking about in terms of

of 175


how this would work in the future and then there was an issue of the mechanics of calculating cost savings based on how you determine baseline temperatures. It got kind of in the weeds pretty quickly when it got to that stuff in terms of being able to follow it. But I’m not aware of anybody on that commission that has any expectation that there is going to be some sort of funding coming their way. It is more on the line of what Rick and Julie said, but yes we have to keep our eye on the ball. (McKim) We’re not obviously right here while we’re sitting here going to be able to figure out what portion of that $188,000 should be able to be allocated to a couple of different funds. In principle would the Commissioners mind if we allocated an appropriate amount of that payment to other funds that reap the benefits of the savings? (Stoffers) Yes. (McKim) So since we have the ability to reopen budgets throughout the process, why don’t we just see if there are any more questions or changes, vote on this budget with the idea that we’re going to come back before budget hearings are over to possibly move some of that to other funds as appropriate? (Thomas) You just need to ensure that you’re advertised enough to pay whatever you’re going to pay obviously. (McKim) Yes, thank you. (Dietz) I like that notion. I think that we can revisit it over the course of the next few hearings, figure out how best to allocate it and move forward from there. (McKim) Could we go back to the 20s? I guess I still am not understanding why the 20s went up so much. Is it because you moved a lot of cleaning supplies that used to be purchased out of the Showers Fund into the General Fund? (Jill Newman, Commissioners’ Financial Manager) That’s true and we also pay the cleaning supplies now for all the buildings from one company so we just combined all of them. So we’ve added the Fiscus, Curry, Showers, Community Corrections, Justice Building, Health and Courthouse. (McKim) It is just it is a 50% increase in the 20s. (Newman) So we’ve taken that 1) out of the Showers and 2) added to buildings. (McKim) Well is the Showers Fund not pulling its weight? (Newman) We try not to use that fund as much as possible so we’ve taken the contractual and the main‐tenance and repairs and tried to put them in the materials and parts and the cleaning supplies in the 20s in the County Buildings. (McKim) Are there spaces there that we should be filling that should be rentable or that should be rentable? (Thomas) That’s more of a Jeff Cockerill question. (Purdie) It is. I have recently learned that we do have some vacancies within that unit. Also the budget that you will see that is proposed for the Showers Building is actually in excess of the 2014 net revenue that we received. So even though we tried to move some of the expenses that are associated with our County buildings into County General, we still have this fund at a higher rate than what it has been netting into us.

of 175


(McKim) I may want to come back to this County Buildings fund later on in budgets after we get a chance to look at everything else. (Thomas) I think we also have the utilities issue at Showers with the Honeywell contract so it would be difficult to know what money that is going to be but that is going into Olympus right so that is something we’re not going to see right away. I think there will be some savings there but I don’t know what percentage will be in that building. So that is a conundrum that we face so we’ve done what we can to ensure survivability of the Building Fund. (Cobine) So it sounds like the Building Fund is funded primarily through rents and so this is a move to sort of forestall completely zeroing out the fund because there has been a little bit of a deficit there in terms of net income. I don’t know if this makes sense in this particular case since I don’t know the specifics of this fund but I know there are some other funds from other departments that we’re going to look at where they have a pro‐jection of one or two years, like if we take this out now this is the rate it goes down by, if we take it out next year, you know, so basically I’m agreeing with Geoff. It would be interesting to look at this and see how long it can last given the assumption that it is going to work the way it has been. Will it completely disappear next year or will that last for a little while longer? Can we continue to use something out of it versus County General if it is possible? That might be something for us to look at again in upcoming days. (Hawk) When some were convinced that we should purchase this building we were presented with we were going to be making money for County General and there was even a big check help up [representing] $200,000. What do you have planned for revenue from this for this coming year? Anything? (Saulter) Nothing yet. That is one fund that I’ve still not been able to analyze. (Hawk) Did we receive revenue this year for 2015? (Saulter) We have received periodically revenue from Olympus which is the management company. At this time I don’t know exactly what we’ve received. We can find that out and get the information to you. (McKim) The Olympus would go into the Showers Building Fund. I think what Councilor Hawk is referring to is something from the Showers Building Fund reverting to the General Fund which we have not seen. (Saulter) Nothing to that nature has happened because there doesn’t appear to be profit enough that will allow for that. (Purdie) Last year, I believe it was, it was agreed that the money would not revert back to County General. There was actually going to be, and there was a formula of some kind where a certain percentage we would need to keep like an operating balance always in that particular fund and just so you know right now – I can tell you what we’ve received in revenues in this fund this year. Through June we had $163,441.57 in revenues and our balance as of June is $49,705. So this fund is – we are stretching it to its nth degree at this point in time. My understanding also is that we’ve had some problems with having to move County offices over there then the County offices moved out, I think that was in 2013. So 2014 I think was when we really started being able to get people in there. We’ve had some tenants who’ve left; we’ve had other tenants who’ve expanded. I have been in conversation with the person who manages the property because I’ve looked at a recent report and I was concerned about what I was seeing. So I’ve learned since that time that we do have some vacancies over there and I have passed this information on to Mr. Cockerill, our legal counsel, who will handle this part of it from here on out. Does that help? (McKim) Let’s remember that, although there was certainly discussion about money flowing into County General, the Council and the Commissioners did not purchase Showers as a real estate investment to make money; they purchase Showers to provide space for County Government functions. The idea is that some of the

of 175


revenue from rental of surplus space could help defray the costs of the utilities, upkeep and maintenance of the building and if that is falling short that is certainly a matter of concern. Having to add expenses from Showers to County General is certainly a matter of concern but I want to make it clear that the purpose of this purchase was not to have money pour into County General. (Hawk) I believe it was presented that way. (McKim) But you understand what I’m saying. (Hawk) You and I both sat here and we heard it out of different ears. (Thomas) We haven’t gotten to the Showers Building Fund yet but you will see that we are spending County money on it that is being covered by the rentals. (Purdie) Ms. Newman handed me our Harris report dated August 31st and the revenues thus far are $214,066.31 and we have a fund balance now of $60,574.96. So it is not as dire as it was in June. Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for the County General – County Buildings 1000‐161 with the amount of $129,856.72 in the 10s; $122,000.00 in the 20s; $1,448,087.63 in the 30s; zeros in the 40s; for a total of $1,699,944.35. Jones seconded. After a call for public comment, Stonecipher called roll: McKim – yes Cobine – yes Hawk – no Yoder – yes Jones – yes Dietz – yes Munson – yes Motion passed. (Munson) I think it is the Council’s general understanding that the Council will revisit this at a future date and perhaps parcel out various expenses into other budgets and so you can look forward to hearing about this again. But for the moment, Council is very far behind schedule in our budget hearings and I’m going to ask everybody’s patience please. We need to take a 20 minute recess. When we reconvene I’m going to ask for a motion to amend our schedule to accommodate the Veterans’ Affairs because we have a number of veterans who wish to come and speak tonight and they are here waiting. We will reconvene in 20 minutes. (Munson) We’re ready to continue but we have a bit of housekeeping to do. We have some important schedule changes to propose and I would ask for a unanimous consent motion. Munson made a unanimous consent motion to move Veterans Affairs, Health and Highway forward to this point in the meeting schedule. Motion passed with no objection. County General ‐ Veterans Affairs 1000‐012 Yoder made a motion to approve Veterans Affairs 1000‐012 with the amount of $112,880.41 in the 10s; $365.00 in the 20s; $1,050.00 in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total of $114,295.41. Jones seconded. (Iris Kiesling, Vice President, Commissioners) I would like to introduce Larry Catt who is our Veterans’ Officer and he has a gallery of veterans here who are supporting his position.

of 175


(Larry Catt, Veterans Affairs) To start I wanted to say that the last report I got from the Government on the amount of money that we brought into the County in compensation and pension is $18,642,000 and that is a pretty good return for one and a half persons and I think it would probably justify having two people. We’re operating that office with one and a half persons. I would like to see it moved to two people. The require‐ments for this office have increased considerably since I started. We’ve had stuff handed down to us from the State, like we’re responsible for approving all licenses for Disabled Purple Heart; we do the fee remission for college students; hunting license; and the tax deduction that disabled veterans can get. So they passed that on to us. We sign the stuff. They want it all filled out in red ink, they want it transmitted via our new system which is Vetraspec which we will be doing all of our business over that eventually. One of the things that I would like to see is we get some of the equipment we need to support that. The Veterans Service Officers now are required to be accredited; so first you have to join the National Veterans Service Officer Organization and you have to belong to that to be able to attend the accreditation training. Now I took it in Indiana but a lot of times it is out‐of‐state so the Service Officer is going to have to do that and then they have to take 16 hours of con‐tinuing education. We have a pretty sizeable workload there that we’re dealing with in bringing in that amount of money. For example, since January to August we’ve had 1,778 phone calls and that’s some days off and we’ve had 630 visitors and about 250 claims that we’ve mailed out. We’ve been dealing with a lot of complex claims such as Aid and Attendance which helps offset nursing home care and requires a lot of documentation and a lot of work to get through it. We also have worked with people recently, a widow – whether male or female – and help them through that. In certain cases if the service member has died from a service‐connect injury we can get Dependent Indemnity Compensation for them which provides about $1,500 to $2,000 a month, their insurance Champ VA which is comparable to the military’s Tri‐Care, and provides some break for additional education and that is a pretty valuable thing. The veterans that come in to see us, there are some that are not really bad off but you can get for hearing disabilities, people that have worked around aircraft, artillery, on planes or in the engine rooms in ships can get that. But a lot of people that we’re dealing with right now are the veterans from Viet Nam and that Agent Orange has done a job on them. A lot of these guys look good but they come in and they’ve got four to six months to live and you’re working with them and then pretty close to that time they’re dead. If you saw them, now some of them come in and their fairly ate up by that stuff; we’ve lost a lot of veterans due to Agent Orange. That probably takes a toll more on Vicky than me, she’s working full time so she sees more of these people than I do. But we would like to move onto that full‐time position. I understand that before it is approved we need to get this before the PAC and we would be glad to do that. I had a little more information outlining the layout but I couldn’t get in my office tonight – don’t ever leave your stuff if you’re going to make a presentation; keep it in your pocket. (Kiesling) Thank you, Larry. I do want to notice in the budget that there should be a part‐time Veterans Officer and a full‐time Secretary and it looks like there is still [another] part‐time position in there and that position hasn’t been filled for a year so there is a little extra money in there. I have a couple of veterans who would like to speak to you on how important this position is. (Catt) One more thing, I’m planning to leave at the end of December and we need to figure out what we’re going to do. I can’t really advertise for a job until we know what kind of money we’re going to have to offer. So I would appreciate your help on that, thank you. (Kiesling) Larry, at one time I heard that the General Assembly was going to, or maybe the U.S. Government, provide some money for Veteran Service Officers. Has that ever come through? (Catt) No everything was stopped at the State. (Richard Dunbar, Post Commander, Burton Willary, American Legion Post 18) I’m proud to say we are the largest American Legion in the State of Indiana which I think speaks to how many veterans in Monroe County do care about continuing to serve which is what the Legion is all about is still veterans serving veterans. A couple of points I would like to make, it is our understanding that there are only five counties in the State of Indiana that

of 175


do not have a full‐time Service Officer, Monroe County being the largest one that does not have. I just took these numbers off the Department of Veterans Affairs website and we are the 14th largest county – 7,300 veterans that we have in Monroe County. We have about 1,400 of those that are Legion members and I’m just here to speak on behalf of them. Larry has done a terrific job but the American Legion, we are on the front line for these veterans; they come to us on a daily basis wanting to know what they’re eligible for and [what we can] do for them. In most cases, we have a Service Officer, we have Adjutant at our Post that knows a lot about Veterans Affairs but in almost every case we have to recommend that they talk to Larry Catt first. We can be an advocate for the veterans but it still has to pass through the Service Officer. So our recommendation and our preference would be to have one full‐time rather than two part‐time, just for the continuity of the position. I think when somebody would come in maybe one day they’re there in the morning, they’ve presented their case and they need to come back and follow up and maybe they come back two days later in the afternoon and it is a different person so they’d have to go back through the history of it. I think a fully‐funded one person would make much more sense. So I’m just here to speak on behalf of our 1,400 members; I know I speak for all of them in saying that Larry has done a terrific job doing it part‐time but it would be our hope that you would take a long look at – I think you would find that there might be better qualified people that would do it on a full‐time basis than if you try to get two part‐time. So that’s all I’ve got to say. Thank you. (Kiesling) I asked Mr. Turner Nolan to speak because he helped us to get this established after the previous officers left us. (Turner Nolan) I support what Commander Dunbar said. I would ask you to look at the number of veterans that we have in this community. I have had opportunity to help some widows of veterans and I’m telling you what they have to go through with they actually need the help. Larry is doing a tremendous job and I solicit your support of our veterans. (Kiesling) I won’t take up any more of your time but I will ask these folks here who are veterans here to support this to stand up. Thank you, I appreciate that. (Bruce Anderson) I’m here for full support for Mr. Larry Catt. Their plight is much more needed than I think is comprehended. But for starters I will say one thing. Mr. Catt wasn’t able to complete a task due to his lack of support by you guys where you guys seemingly pass off to a subcommittee to be able to create something when the subcommittee didn’t create what was needed to be able to have a full‐time or even assistant that way the man when he had to leave to go for a death in the family someone would be there to be able to take care of the mess. I missed a filing time by almost one month that I wanted for almost a year; you’ve got a timeframe that you have appeal to. It got messed up because Mr. Catt didn’t have all of what he needed or the support which should already be there. It is time that you guys stop trying to put your duty off onto a group of appointees. This is not a communist country. This is not mob democracy. This is a constitutional‐representative republic. Barack Obama is wrong. Number two, I didn’t appreciate when I called the office here to be able to show him support when I called here to this Courthouse and the County Commissioners and got the remark that it was by Mr. Catt’s recommendations did the active position of employees stand as they were. Ms. Angie tried to push it off onto Mr. Catt. That is an insult to Mr. Catt’s service to this country, honestly, seriously. You all need to take a good look at what you’re doing as elected to represent the public and pull your head out of your rear end and realize exactly what you’re doing. You obviously don’t know the difference of a constitutional republic versus a democracy just like the President of the United States. (Kiesling) Any questions or comments at this point? Where do you think we need to go? (Yoder) I’ll make a comment just as President of PAC. I spoke with you before you presented and we will make sure that we can sit down and look through the exact job description that you’re thinking and the PAC Committee will work with Nancy Panzarella with Human Resources with exactly the job description and duties that you would like this person to do and make sure that we can have that….

of 175


(Anderson from audience) You’re pushing it off on them when it is your responsibility….. (Munson) Sir, please. (Yoder) Just so you will be able to feel good about the person that you’re hiring and all the needs are there so we can first, compensate accordingly and appropriately and recruit the right person because it sounds like it is going to take certainly your loss will be felt very deeply in our County once you retire but secondly to make sure that we cover all the bases so we can get the best and most qualified person in that position. (Catt) One of the reasons that we’ve been able to do it with one and a half is because my assistant has been really a major part of that office. She’s learned as much as most Service Officers know and more than many and she is excellent, she works fast and she’s handled a tremendous load. If I was there by myself it would be about a half and not a whole, at least we’re getting whole production from her plus my half. So she’s been a really valuable part and the reason we’ve been able to operate with one and a half. One of the best things I did was hiring her. (Hawk) All you veterans here, I think you know that I always support the veterans and what they ask of County Government and it appears that maybe the process wasn’t started quick enough, is that what I understand so that we’re ready to do this? I’m going to just tell you once it has met with PAC you’re going to have my full support whatever the dollar amount is. This dollar amount might not be – they may come up with something higher than that. But what we’d have to make sure is that we do it before the end of the year so we get those salaries all set and ready to go for next year and do it as quickly as we can get to it so your request is honored because you want to know what it is you can tell others what the salary is going to be. It is pretty hard to say, “Come and work for us full time but we don’t know just what we’re going to pay you.” You may be assured of my full support of that but we need to make sure we’re doing it right. How did you arrive at this number, the amount for the full time? (Catt) Doubled the part‐time salary that I had. (Hawk) And is that what you were advised to do. (Catt) See the part‐time doesn’t have any benefits and I get paid for four hours so this far out of the $20,000 salary I made about $9,000 and there’s 17 holidays, I counted up all the working days and stuff in the year, and to get a guy that does that you have to have somebody that doesn’t need the job that has insurance and all those other things that you’re missing out on. A part‐time guy really does it because he wants to help the veterans, it is not for the money. (Hawk) Right, I really have thought for years that should not be part‐time because when a veteran comes and knocks on the door their better be someone there to answer it and there better be someone who understands how to support that veteran. And to think that we’re one of five counties in this entire State that doesn’t have a full‐time Veterans Affairs Office Director, that’s appalling. So I’ll support the full‐time position. I’ll support it the way it is presented right now if you wanted me to but I don’t think that is in your best interest. It may turn out much better than that and you should have been advised to get that going earlier so I regret that didn’t happen. (McKim) I’m certainly inclined to support it as well but with the proviso that we go through the process. Just to make it clear, this committee that we’re talking about is a committee of Councilors, it is not an appointed committee or anything like that that I think was insinuated. It is a committee of three Councilors who meet to really analyze these staffing issues in detail and make recommendations to the whole Council. It is something that last year we made the Youth Services Bureau go through also when they approached with a reorganization plan in budget hearings. (Anderson from audience) {Inaudible}

of 175


(McKim) So just to be clear, it is my understanding that line 2 which is labeled Secretary Part‐Time, that actually can be zeroed out because that is not even a position that exists anymore. McKim made a motion to set line 10.0002 Secretary Part‐Time to zero. Jones seconded. (Hawk) Because they don’t want that in there. (Munson) They aren’t asking for that. That appears to have been a mistake in the budget preparation. (Hawk) So then that duty is taken over by the Veterans’ Assistant, correct? (Munson) Yes, which his full time. (Hawk) Right, but I think at one time we were requested to allow it to go to two part‐time [positions] because that is what the people wanted to do; it wasn’t our idea. The office came to us and they had two people who wanted to work part‐time so that is why it went this way to begin with. (Kiesling) One person has a full‐time position now with the office; the other person retired so that’s why. Motion passed by voice vote. (Hawk) I would also like to suggest that when the PAC meets that they take a look at what 10.0004 is supposed to be classified at is that the correct amount of $28,495? (Munson) Please? (Hawk) Well, I’m looking at the Veterans’ Assistant 10.0004 to request the PAC look at that, see what it is classified at, and to see if there should be any adjustment in that as well while they’re looking at the entire office. It is just as a suggestion. (Munson) It is my understanding that PAC will meet before we have budget adoption, is that correct PAC members? Is that possible? (Jones) Our next meeting would be the first Tuesday in October, I believe. (McKim) We might have a WIS recommendation, I don’t think you can time it to coincide with budget adoption. (Flory) We have a history of fast tracking things that are important so I think we can do that in this instance. (Munson) Okay, thank you. (Cobine) I recall what happened last year – of course, I was watching [and] not on the Council – with YSB. Was that left in the budget or was that removed and then added back in after you went through the process? (McKim) It was removed and added back in as an additional appropriation. Cobine made a motion to set 10.0001 to base with COLA $20,453. Jones seconded. (Robinson) {Inaudible}

of 175


McKim made a unanimous consent motion to amend the amendment to $20,953. Motion passed with no objection. (Hawk) I hope that the Veterans here understand that we’re not saying no all the way through, we’re just saying let’s just get the process going right and we’ll work to get this done. Motion passed by voice. McKim called the question on the bottom line. Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for Veterans Affairs 1000‐012 with the amount of $71,529.61 in the 10s; $365.00 in the 20s; $1,050.00 in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total of $72,944.61. Jones seconded. Stonecipher called roll: Yoder – yes Dietz – yes Munson – yes Jones – yes Cobine – yes Hawk – yes McKim – yes Motion passed. Health 1159‐000 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for Health 1159‐000 with the amount of $924,999.99 in the 10s; $22,477.00 in the 20s; $218,550.00 in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total of $1,166,026.99. Jones seconded. (Penny Caudill, Administrator, Health Dept.) Good evening. Thanks for seeing us. I have a couple of Board members here tonight so we all appreciate being seen. I don’t have a whole lot of significant changes. In the 10s there was an increase in part‐time hourly. As you know we’ve been looking at our organizational structure and the Board decided that there’s nothing that we’re ready to move forward with largely but the primary thing was an increase in part‐time hourly. We do have several newer employees who are actually at that low end of the pay scale but the salaries are included at mid‐point just to have that in there as that safety net. The 20s are flat. We did a little bit of moving around but in general they are flat. And in the 30s again, looking at what we’ve expended we did a little bit of moving around with an overall increase of just $1,200. So I’m happy to take questions if you have them. (Hawk) I recall looking at your financial statement and it looked as though you operating budget was going to be appropriate. I know you work really hard on that yourself to make sure you stay within the guidelines and so I really appreciate that. (Caudill) Our revenue on fee collection has been increasing each year, which is good, although we don’t control a lot of that. We can’t control how many businesses are opening or how many birth or death records are requested but right now we’re on an upward trend which is good for our budget. (McKim) I support this budget as submitted. After a call for public comment, Munson called the question.

of 175


Stonecipher called roll: Munson – yes McKim – yes Jones – yes Hawk – yes Dietz – yes Yoder – yes Cobine – yes Motion passed. Local Health Maintenance 1168‐000 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for Local Health Maintenance 1168‐000 with an amount of $31,347.68 in the 10s; $6,200.00 in the 20s; $35,124.32 in the 30s; and zero in the 40s; for a total of $72,672.00. Jones seconded. (Caudill) This is our Local Health Maintenance Fund. It is part of the tobacco settlement so the total budget amount of $72,672 is a set amount that we get that we need to have our budget stay within and this supports some additional part‐time staff we use for Summer help and clerical and that sort of thing. After a call for public comment, Hawk called the question. Stonecipher called roll: Hawk – yes Jones – yes Yoder – yes Cobine – yes McKim – yes Munson – yes Dietz – yes Motion passed. Indiana Trust 2015 1206‐000 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for Indiana Trust 2016 1206‐000 with the amount of $50,541.18 in the 10s; $2,200.00 in the 20s; $1,345.26 in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total of $54,086.44. Jones seconded. (Caudill) This again is part of tax master settlement money. I need a balance of $54,261.98 as my final budget. It looks like this supports one full‐time Health Educator. That looked like that amount was reduced so if we could put that into supply line. McKim made a motion to set line 20.0001 Supplies to $675.54. Hawk seconded. Motion passed by voice vote. Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for Indiana Trust 2016 1206‐000 with the amount of $50,541.18 in the 10s; $2,375.54 in the 20s; $1,345.26 in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total of $54,261.98. Jones seconded. Munson called the question.

of 175


Stonecipher called roll: Cobine – yes Yoder – yes Dietz – yes Munson – yes Hawk – yes McKim – yes Jones – yes Motion passed. Cumulative Bridge 1135‐455 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for Cumulative Bridge 1135‐455 with the amount of $330,258.00 in the 10s; zero in the 20s; $12,091.00 in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total of $342,349.00. Jones seconded. (Bill Williams, Director of Public Works) Basically this money here is just for personnel as directed by the Council for the Bridge Crew that we have. (Munson) Straightforward, thank you. (Hawk) The Cum Bridge Fund is a rate‐controlled fund so the higher our Assessed Value goes that rate times that growth in Assessed Value then puts more money into this Bridge Fund and so it is always a good thing when we see our Assessed Value grow. We can never neglect taking care of our bridges and you’ve done a great job all these years. (McKim) And just a quick comment maybe for some of the newer Councilors that this is only the smallest part of our actual budget for the year for Cum Bridge. This is just the personnel and Workers’ Compensation but the Highway Department will come early in the year and make a presentation on the bridge conditions and the plan for maintaining and replacing our bridges. I don’t want anybody to think that we’re only spending $350,000 a year on bridges. Stonecipher called roll: Yoder – yes Dietz – yes Munson – yes Jones – yes Cobine – yes Hawk – yes McKim – yes Motion passed. 461 Year 2016 Cumulative Bridge 1135‐460 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for 461 Year 2016 Cumulative Bridge 1135‐460 with the amount of zero in the 10s; zero in the 20s; $120,000.00 in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total of $120,000.00. Jones seconded. (Williams) Annually we always appropriate $65,000 for bridge maintenance needs throughout the year whether that be cleaning in the spring or an emergency small structure replacement. Also our bridge inspection safety

of 175


rating we annually appropriate $50,000 so it doesn’t hit us all at once. The cost is generally $100,000 every two years for that inspection and it is required by the Federal Highway Administration so that we are able to qualify for federal funding. And lastly, the GIS aerials, this is a cooperative project between the City and the Assessor’s office for new 2016 aerial maps for next year, cooperating with the State on that project. (Dietz) Can you mention briefly about the benefits of that aerial program? (Williams) It is used by everybody, I mean anybody that taps into our website. We use it specifically looking for things in drainage ways, obstructions and things along that line. The Planning Department, for instance, may use it to review areas that have developed in the last two years. So there is a whole host of opportunities for usage of aerials. After a call for public comment, Munson called the question. Stonecipher called roll: Munson – yes McKim – yes Jones – yes Hawk – yes Dietz – yes Yoder – yes Cobine – yes Motion passed. Local Road and Street 1169‐000 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for Local Road and Street 1169‐000 with the amount of zero in the 10s; zero in the 20s; $1,258,000.00 in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total of $1,258,000.00. Jones seconded. (Williams) This is part of your gas tax that you pay at the pump, a very small portion of it. About $670,000, I believe, is what we estimate our revenue to be in 2016 based on information given us by the State Auditor’s office. Also we’re anticipating federal aid reimbursements of around $575,000. As far as projects go, we are looking at continuing to fund our Fullerton Pike project at $499,000; Hunters Creek Road project at $135,000; and Sample Road at $500,000. Also this funds our safety program such as striping, any pavement markings, as well as guardrail replacements. (Munson) Is much of this matching funds for federal and state pass‐through moneys? (Williams) Yes, especially the Hunters Creek, Fullerton Pike, and Sample Road, those three projects. And sometimes occasionally we will get railroad crossing safety moneys; it just depends on the need and condition of the pavement markings. (McKim) This is about the Elwren runaround. So it looks like there are still some unexpended appropriations there. Is there still plan to put a safety device or anything there to make turning easier? (Williams) We never have gotten around to doing that but we do have that anticipated trying to figure out some sort of a lighting system that would flash in the direction if a car was coming around that blind curve if you will through the underbridge at that location. The money is there to do it. (McKim) Okay so there still is some possibility; just nothing has happened yet?

of 175


(Williams) Yes. (McKim) Okay, thank you. (Hawk) I’m trying to remember if it was in the meeting that we were in the other day or another meeting but the suggestion was made that perhaps if we could get a group with CATS TV with us to go around to some of these projects and have it played back on CATS TV so as we used to do remember when Commissioner White was here and we did that a lot so the people at home could really see what was going on in our Highway Department and all of the growth that we have and how hard you folks work. I think that is important because these numbers mean something, it means service to the people in this county. So I would love to see us try to put something like that together. (McKim) I think we specifically said that in conjunction with Stormwater also since that was a new program to kind of tell people that story. (Hawk) Right, and so this would be another thing that we could do just as a matter of being really transparent with the people in this county to say this is what we’re doing. A lot of growth is going on right now and a lot of roads are being maintained and reworked and people are saying what’s going on? I can’t go my regular route and so forth. So I think it was just be wonderful. I know how busy everyone is but if we could take some time to do that so the folks at home would have a better understanding. (Munson) We could put a vehicle camera on the patching truck. (McKim) A real popular thing. Stonecipher called roll: Hawk – yes Jones – yes Yoder – yes Cobine – yes McKim – yes Munson – yes Dietz – yes Motion passed. Motor Vehicle Highway – Highway Administration 1176‐530 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for Motor Vehicle Highway – Highway Administration 1176‐530 with the amount of $717,403.00 in the 10s; $11,000.00 in the 20s; $500.00 in the 30s; $29,900.00 in the 40s; for a total of $758,803.00. Jones seconded. (John Chambers, Highway Superintendent) In the 1176‐530 budget the only increase we have is in the 10s and that is salaries and benefits. No changes in the 20s, 30s or 40s. (McKim) Snow and ice duty pay is in there? (Chambers) Yes it is. (McKim) Yes, I thought I remembered you saying that.

of 175


(Hawk) I was just looking for that at the last minute because I think we forgot that last time. (Munson) Last time? (Hawk) Well we had to redo it at the beginning of the year because we forgot to include it during budget hearing. (Munson) We did. Stonecipher called roll: Dietz – yes Munson – yes Cobine – yes Hawk – yes Yoder – yes Jones – yes McKim – yes Motion passed. Motion Vehicle Highway 1176‐531 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for Motor Vehicle Highway 1176‐531 with the amount of $1,669,542.00 in the 10s; $1,543,300.00 in the 20s; $375,000.00 in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total of $3,587,842.00. Jones seconded. (Chambers) In the 531 budget we, of course, had the increase with benefits in the 10s and in the 20s we increased it $191,000 which would be a $39,000 increase for salt which we are always needing more of; bituminous $150,000 increase; and $2,000 for the Profile Parkway flashing signal inspection. And before I end this, and I should have done it to begin with, the MVH budget comes strictly out of gasoline tax not the General Fund or property tax. (Hawk) Just as a caveat that when gasoline prices are lower people buy more gas, they’re not watching their dollars as much, and that brings in more money into this budget because the gasoline tax is so much per gallon not such much per total charge for your gas bill. So when people are saving money on gas or they’re buying more fuel‐efficient cars that absolutely just means less money for this budget. So there is a movement toward trying to figure out some other way to get more revenue coming into this through the State and others to try to bolster this just a bit. But something I just find curious on here under Capital Outlays, we still have that durapatcher thing down there and I remember when we went to look at that durapatcher and that line item is still there. That poor thing has been worn out for years I’m sure. But when we get something going in County Government we can’t get rid of the line. After a call for public comment, Stonecipher called roll: Yoder – yes Dietz – yes Munson – yes Jones – yes Cobine – yes Hawk – yes McKim – yes Motion passed.

of 175


Motor Vehicle Highway – General and Undistributed 1176‐533 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for Highway General and Undistributed with the amount of $280,636.00 in the 10s; $20,300.00 in the 20s; $278,150.00 in the 30s; $342,700.00 in the 40s; for a total of $921,786.00. Jones seconded. (Chambers) In the 533 budget, this is where we have an increase in the salaries and benefits, of course, and this is where the snow duty comes in in that line. We had no changes in the 20s or the 30s and we had a decrease of $39,753 for a vehicle appropriation that has been paid off. After a call for public comment, Stonecipher called roll: Munson – yes McKim – yes Jones – yes Hawk – yes Dietz – yes Yoder – yes Cobine – yes Motion passed. Westside Economic Development Area/Richland Township TIF 4920‐000 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for the Westside Economic Development/Richland Township TIF with the amount of zero in the 10s; zeros in the 20s; $1,801,220.00; zero in the 40s; for a total of $1,801,220.00. Jones seconded. (Williams) Again basically, as mentioned, four things that we’re paying for are the bond payments, as mentioned, $762,000; our TIF annual review that is required of the bonds and by the State Board of Accounts; insurance is required of one of the bonds; and then the remaining portion the Redevelopment Commission requested we put the additional balance to be collected into the engineering and construction line. At a later time they may deem it necessary to transfer it down into one of the existing lines into a project that has been approved in their plan. I will mention a couple of projects of note that we paid for out of this fund this year: the first phase of the Karst Farm Trail and also we’re well underway of the second phase of the Karst Farm Trail so I have about five miles paid for out of this. (Hawk) I’m just really grateful that the Redevelopment Commission has been working so well with our Richland‐Bean Blossom School District. You may wonder why I’m discussing that with this budget but indeed that is where the dollars come from is from that Richland TIF over there. It has been an interesting last year and a half since we became more fully connected to what is going on in that Richland TIF and I appreciate all of the hard work both of you folks have put into this. It has made a big difference and I appreciate that. (McKim) I’m very excited to see the progress in the Karst Farm Greenway of course. I got to see it completely paved on Sunday and there were people using it already, the new phase, so that was good to see. My under‐standing is you also have the contract for the engineering for the Hartstraight Road connector on the Commissioners’ agenda for Friday? (Williams) Yes, that’s to be paid for bond proceeds that was discussed and approved earlier this year.

of 175


(McKim) That’s great; glad to see that moving ahead. After a call for public comment, Munson called the question. Stonecipher called roll: Hawk – yes Jones – yes Yoder – yes Cobine – yes McKim – yes Munson – yes Dietz – yes Motion passed. 46 Corridor Economic Development TIF 4921‐000 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for the 46 Corridor Economic Development TIF with the amount of zero in the 10s; zero in the 20s; $210,162.00 in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total of $210,162.00. Jones seconded. (William) This TIF began receiving funds in 2005. Currently the funds received in the TIF pay for two things, as mentioned the TIF annual review for $500,000 and then also the disbursement to the bank for a portion of the bond payment. It is a developer‐backed bond. The developer pays the remaining balance of the bond payments. (Hawk) I just know that they will be happy to see more money come into there as that begins to become more fully developed. The developer is really holding the bag for this. It would be good for the community as well as for the developers. After a call for public comment, Stonecipher called roll: Munson – yes Jones – yes Cobine – yes McKim – yes Hawk – yes Yoder – yes Dietz – yes Motion passed. Fullerton Pike Economic Development TIF 4922‐000 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for the Fullerton Pike Economic Development TIF with the amount of zero in the 10s; zero in the 20s; $248,593.00 in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total of $248,593.00. Jones seconded. (Williams) The only two items to be paid for out of this TIF that was created in 2008 are the TIF annual review at $3,000 and the remaining balance to go in the engineering and construction line of $245,593 is what the estimate is. I might state the only project in this TIF is the Fullerton Pike project.

of 175


After a call for public comment, Stonecipher called roll: Yoder – yes Dietz – yes Munson – yes Jones – yes Cobine – yes Hawk – yes McKim – yes Motion passed. Storm Water Management 1197‐000 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for Storm Water Management with the amount of $352,941.00 in the 10s; $146,000.00 in the 20s; $533,185.00 in the 30s; $100,500.00 in the 40s; for a total of $1,132,626.00. Jones seconded. (Williams) In the 20s and 40s there are no changes in our request from last year to this year. In the 10s we’ve increased all our full‐time employees such as contract and office staff employees in accordance with the Council directive and benefits adjusted accordingly. We have also placed a portion of the three Commissioners’ salaries with no benefits and a portion of the Surveyor’s salary at $12,000 each and the Surveyor would have full benefits from that $12,000. The remaining balances of those salaries would be paid for from the General Fund and/or COIT. The Treasurer’s partial salary of $5,000 was removed from this. In this budget also we have increased the Intern Part‐Time Hourly from $3,500 to $9,000. The total 2016 budget for personal services is as Ms. Yoder stated previously. The other change is in the 30s which we have decreased the Miscellaneous Drainage Improvement line by $8,584. I have to mention that when we were putting this budget together as we do with many of our budgets whether it be Local Road and Street or MVH, we received a lot of emails and directives from the Council, the State Auditor and the Commissioners. So the accusation that was made previously tonight that things were done behind closed doors, they weren’t done any differently than any of the other budgets that probably have come before you tonight. It was published on the agenda of the Drainage Board in adequate time so there was nothing just added at the last minute. (McKim) I think we had already agreed that we were going to take the $12,000 out of this so I will go ahead and make that motion but I’m also going to move that we put the Surveyor’s salary back to just one‐quarter rather than $12,000. It just makes it a little easier to calculate I think. McKim made a motion to remove the three $12,000 salaries and set those to zero and set line 10.0004 Surveyor to $11,344. Hawk seconded. (Dietz) I’m just curious about the rationale with regard to the Surveyor. If you could expand on that because it is not a significant amount that you’re requesting it be reduced. (McKim) In the past, ever since this budget has been created, that budget has covered one‐quarter of the Surveyor’s salary. It is a number that can be justified on the amount of time he spends on that function versus other functions and it is just honestly a lot easier to calculate. (Dietz) So you’re objecting to the rounding? (McKim) I’m not really strongly objecting, I’m just trying to restore it to the way it was.

of 175


(Yoder) I just want to make sure the Treasurer has adjusted her budget to reflect the $5,000. (Flory) It is my understanding that money actually never did go into the Treasurer’s budget. The last discussion I had with their office was that money was supposed to just be transferred over into the COIT fund but not into the Treasurer’s budget in any way. (Yoder) So there’s nothing to worry about or look out for when we get to the [Treasurer’s budget]? (Flory) That’s $5,000 that won’t be coming into the COIT fund if it is deleted from this budget. (Hawk) It would be on the financial statement under miscellaneous revenue I would think. If it was going to go in there it would have showed up under miscellaneous revenue? (Saulter) Yes. (Munson) I am in support of removing the $36,000 for Commissioners’ salaries and keeping the Surveyor in this budget because he does do work for this particular operation. I was very concerned when I saw this because this is not a tax fund but a fee fund and the fees are paid by people who occupy a portion of the county, the unincorporated part of the county. Storm water in the City of Bloomington is handled through the city and those fees are paid through the city; the same with the Town of Ellettsville. So someone who is serving the entire county and they’re also serving storm water I think that is an appropriate expense but someone who is serving just a portion of their time for the unincorporated area that is not fair to the taxpayers of the city or the Town of Ellettsville. So I was particularly concerned to track this particular budget. So I support the motion that is present. (Williams) If there is any reduction of funds is it possible to put that money back in miscellaneous drainage improvements in the 30s. (McKim) I have Lorie calculating that now; I’m just waiting for that number. I was ready for you. (Robinson) $36,656. McKim made a unanimous consent motion to amend the motion to set Miscellaneous Drainage Improvements 30.0021 to $283,029. Motion passed with no objection. (Hawk) And that removes the Commissioners’ portion and it puts the Surveyor back in at one‐quarter as we had started when we started the Storm Water budget. (Munson) It puts the fees available for expenditure. Hawk called the question. Motion passed by voice vote. Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for Storm Water Management with $316,001.00 in the 10s; $146,000.00 in the 20s; $570,129.00 in the 30s; $100,500.00 in the 40s; for a total of $1,132,630.00. Jones seconded. After a call for public comment, Stonecipher called roll: Hawk – yes Jones – yes Yoder – yes Cobine – yes McKim – yes

of 175


Munson – yes Dietz – yes Motion passed. (Julie Thomas, President, Board of Commissioners) I just wanted to say something while everybody was still here. Bill is obviously retiring on Friday and we’re going to be really sad to see him go but we have appointed Lisa Ridge as the Interim Director of Highway. So I wanted to let everyone know that before you left. So, thank you. (McKim) Bill, how many budget hearings is this for you? (Williams) I think this made number 33. It has been a pleasure and I appreciate the support through the years, that’s for sure. It has been a pleasure working with all of you. I leave you in good hands with Lisa. She knows probably a lot more than I do about this stuff. She’ll do fine. Cumulative Bridge 1135‐455 Yoder made a motion to correct Cumulative Bridge with the amount of $329,206.00 in the 10s; zero in the 20s; $12,091.00 in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total of $341,297.00. Jones seconded. (Munson) Thank you. This is just housekeeping. Any questions or comments? Munson called the question. Stonecipher called roll: Munson – yes Dietz ‐ yes Yoder – yes Cobine – yes Hawk – yes McKim – yes Jones – yes Motion passed. County General – Fleet 1000‐069 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for Fleet General with the amount of zero in the 10s; zero in the 20s; $92,000.00 in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total of $92,000.00. Jones seconded. (Thomas) As you will notice there’s just basically been some cuts for a total of $3,700 in cuts. It is just that our fleet is in better shape than it has been before thanks to the great guys at Maintenance and Highway and we’ve been pretty vigilant about making sure we are replacing cars earlier so they don’t cost us more in repairs than their value is. So therefore we have a cut of $3,700. After a call for public comment, Munson called the question. Stonecipher called roll: Dietz – yes Hawk – yes Cobine – yes

of 175


McKim – yes Munson – yes Jones – yes Yoder – yes Motion passed. Showers Building Operating Fund 4914‐000 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for Showers Building Operating with the amount of $110,485.58 in the 10s; zero in the 20s; $185,782.00 in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total of $296,267.58. Jones seconded. (Thomas) So again you’re going to see some reductions. We’re trying to keep the fund healthy but one of the key reductions I will point out is 30.0001 Contractual Services which has been reduced because we’ve upgraded the heat pump system through this Honeywell contract, so that is one of the advantages. (McKim) I think we already shared our concern on unrented space and Ms. Purdie already indicated she shares that as well. (Hawk) I’ve been around real estate for more years than some of these people have been alive. You don’t sit on valuable property and let it sit there empty and then wonder why we have no money. No one manages rental property in that manner. When you let something go that should be bringing in revenue and then we say we have no revenue, well duh. It is just not right. (Thomas) I don’t believe the comment was we have no revenue. (Stoffers) No implies zero and it is well more than zero. What was the number? {Answer from staff table inaudible.} (Jill Newman, Financial Manager, Commissioners’ office) We also moved offices from One City Centre to the Showers Building to free up that space as well so that also eliminated some rental spaces at the Showers Building. So we’ve taken a lot of County offices to the Showers Building. (Thomas) That came out of County General that rent [for the offices that were moved to Showers]. (Dietz) Earlier when we were talking about savings that we may end up looking at these budgets again in terms of allocating the General Fund expenses for that contract but we will probably end up doing that at the end of our process. (Thomas) I think the problem is that even though everything is being installed this year, the way the Showers Building works things don’t come around immediately. You have to wait a year before you see what money you have left at the end of a year. So I think we’re trying to rush things just a little on seeing that savings. What happened was we were taking money out of that fund at the beginning of the year which we should never do, we should wait until the end of the year, keep an operating balance, and then remove the rest of it and put it in County General. That is how it should go. So there has been a year lag because we switched over. So that is part of this as well. We’re just trying to fix this so that it is predictable and as energy savings come in I think you will see in future years that number will decline meaning more money will go to County General.

of 175


After a call for public comment, Stonecipher called roll: McKim – yes Cobine – yes Hawk – no Yoder – yes Jones – yes Dietz – yes Munson – yes Motion passed. User Fees Cable Franchise 2502‐000 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for User Fees Cable Franchise with the amount of zero in the 10s; zero in the 20s; $513,526.93 in the 30s; $2,125.00 in the 40s; for a total of $515,651.93. Jones seconded. (Thomas) So looking at this budget there are a couple of things I need to point out. One is that we are going to have to come back at the beginning of the year for an additional. There is something that was left out of this budget. The total value of what was left out is $121,728.80 which is $110,000 for the copier maintenance contract; $7,500 for software development services; and $5,000 for telephone maintenance. So that is coming back to you but this is not a County General fund. The other thing I want to point out is we are asking for a CATS increase that matches the growth quotient of 2.6%. We have reduced some lines slightly. We moved the Sheriff and Animal Control. We reduced the Ellettsville to move it too. HR software got moved to CCD. We also moved the grant software to Cum Cap. So those are the reductions but we are again coming back in January to replace and reinvest in those things that we need like copiers. (Munson) Thank you for those explanations. (Dietz) Just a couple of trivial comments. The first line in the budget is Commercial Access TV which I don’t think is the correct way to describe it. Community Access Television so I just want to make sure that budget line reflects that. Also 30.0006 maintenance is missing an ‘n.’ Then in terms of the investments that you’re wanting to make, the copiers and that sort of thing, are those regular costs that have been in this or is this a one‐time or new purchase? (Thomas) No this is a contract. I think we approved it this year but it is a new contract and some offices are using these as their printers as well. So it is scanning, copying and printing for most offices. So that’s in there. And I did forget to mention the increase in Everbridge, I’m sorry about that, that is on our contract with Everbridge [which is] the emergency alert system. I missed that one, I’m sorry. (Dietz) I just note for the benefit of the public that the revenue for this fund comes from Cable Television fees, not from a tax. (Thomas) Right. 2014 revenues $566,000. (Hawk) Of course I’m always happy to support our CATS TV but I would like to state that many of us have called, we have requested having the Tuesday public meetings held by the County Commissioners to be covered by CATS TV many times. The comments have been made at other meetings, well we decided that on our Tuesday meeting, only the Tuesday meeting is not covered and it is only [not] covered because they’re not asked to cover it by the Commissioners. I’m very disappointed that the County Commissioners as a body will not ask CATS TV or allow CATS TV to come and cover those meetings. The public wants to know what is going on when we are

of 175


doing the public’s business. I will support the budget for CATS because I know it is not their fault; I know they would be here if you would allow it. (McKim) So the 2015 budget looks like it is a total of $618,000, is that correct? And that does not include an additional $100,000 that you’re planning to come for an additional appropriation for? (Thomas) Yes that’s correct and that’s the difference. I believe the copier contract was a difference from this year and that’s why you can tell it is missing because it is short. (McKim) But I guess I’m saying then that the 2016 request looks low then too because the 2016 request is lower than 2015. (Thomas) That’s what I’m saying but we’re missing the $121,000 piece that is mostly having to do with the copiers, that’s why it is low. We’re coming back in January to adjust this…. (McKim) Because it got advertised $100,000 to low. (Thomas) Exactly and we’re not going to put anyone else, obviously it is only this fee and this fund. It is easier and cleaner. We will come back early in the year. (Munson) I want you to have a copier and a printer and I certainly do support the cost‐of‐living increase for CATS, they earn every bit of it. Thank you. A call was made for public comment. (Michael White, CATS General Manager) I can’t believe Bill has done 33 of these meetings. This is my 30th one by the way. With me also tonight in case you ask questions beyond my depth I have our Production Manager, Martin O’Neil, as well as Gary Lettelleir who is the Chief Financial Officer for the Public Library. Just a couple of brief comments for the public more than members here. Of course, Monroe County is one of the most steadfast partners that CATS has had all of these years. The other partners are the City of Bloomington, the Town of Ellettsville, and, of course, the Public Library of which CATS is a department. Without those partners I would not be standing here now and the transparency that this body and these other bodies’ support I don’t think would be the envy of all these other communities around the country. Many of these stations are beginning to close down. So because of that and other reasons I really appreciate that this body has supported CATS all these years and we’ve been here six years longer than C‐Span so this has been going on a long time. I’m here for any questions you might have. And, by the way, we’re happy to work with the Highway Department on talking about any sort of changes to come, happy to work with you on that and the Highway Department. (Hawk) Many of us would just not know what to do with our every evening if we weren’t watching public meetings on CATS TV so we appreciate you allowing us to watch the meetings while we are still home and we’re not getting in the car and having to drive in here to sit back there because Lee Jones is up here in the meetings until how late, but we are there with her at home with our feet up watching you make these decisions. I mean the Plan Commission meetings go on forever. But it makes a big difference to those of us who want to participate and know what is going on but many of us still have other jobs we have to do and we can watch the public meetings and still be able to get our business line if we need to. It is so important that we have CATS TV there to cover because the community really believes that all of these public meetings will be covered and that they can turn it on [or] pull it up [online] and be able to watch it. You provide an excellent service and we appreciate it. (White) Thanks to the staff of CATS who are up there in the rafters right now doing the heavy lifting. McKim called the question.

of 175


Stonecipher called roll: Jones – yes Munson – yes McKim – yes Dietz – yes Yoder – yes Cobine – yes Hawk – yes Motion passed. Cumulative Capital Development 1138‐000 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for Cumulative Capital Development with the amount of $489,097.73 in the 10s; zero in the 20s; $505,000.00 in the 30s; $1,916,000.00 in the 40s; for a total of $2,910,097.73. Jones seconded. (Thomas) There’s not a lot to say on this one. We are at the .0333 rate. As you see we’ve picked up software licensing from last year, we continue that to this year. Some of the things, for example, you will see Justice Building Repair/Remodels in half because we’ve done the heavy lifting of engineering in HVAC and Courthouse repair is similarly lower. So you will see some of those cuts. Then we have a total of 2.911, that is more than we’re getting in but we do have money in our fund so we’re going to be spending it down a little bit. (McKim) Are Special Projects the garage? (Thomas) Not entirely. There are two payments of $205,542.41 that are due for the garage. (McKim) Then voting machines, we’re buying more voting machines? (Stoffers) When we have an election come up it is better that we have some appropriations available to deal with situations as we approach election that may look like 2008 or 2012. We don’t know. (Thomas) It is just there. (Stoffers) You’re going to take up a Clerk’s budget later that is going to reflect some bad activity for 2016. (Munson) Can Cum Cap be used for a contract payment? A lease payment? (Stoffers) It only can be used for the things that are defined by State statute and what we define in the Monroe County Code. It is limited to those uses. (Munson) But it was be a lease payment for voting machines? (Thomas) Right. (Stoffers) Absolutely. (Munson) Thank you that is what I wanted to know. So depending on the Election Board budget we may come back to revisit this.

of 175


(Stoffers) The statutes are very specific and the Code is. For example, we can’t go buy a vehicle for say the Building Department but we can go buy a vehicle for the Sheriff’s Department. The uses are very narrowly tailored. (Hawk) Why do we have a storm water drainage in this budget? (Munson) Is that equipment? (Thomas) Which number are you on please? (Hawk) 40.0032 is there something about this I’m not recognizing? (McKim) That’s the storm water drainage on behalf of the airport, right? (Thomas) Yes, that’s the payment. (Hawk) Thanks for reminding me. As just a reminder whatever we put in this budget, they can move it around as long as the bottom line total in the 40s, they can move it all into one line. Where is the payment for the garage? (Thomas) It is within Special Projects 40.0038. It is more than half of that amount. (Hawk) So the 2016 request for the garage is $725,000? (Thomas) No, the garage itself is two payments of $205,542.41. (Thomas) What we did is we carried over, we added 211 from our base of last year and we covered part of the garage with that and the rest of it is coming out of what we use Special Projects for, things like replacing the limestone steps of the Courthouse, things like that come up all the time. That is what Special Projects are for. (Yoder) I have a question about the airport development. It looks like it is, if I’m reading this correctly, an additional $90,000. (Stoffers) That was the Airport Director’s request of us. He makes a request every year. (Munson) Commissioner Kiesling said these were matching funds for grants. (Stoffers) Yes. After a call for public comment, Munson called the question. Stonecipher called roll: Cobine – yes Yoder – yes Dietz – yes Munson – yes Hawk – no McKim – yes Jones – yes Motion passed.

of 175


Monroe County 911 1222‐000 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for Monroe County 911 with the amount of $267,149.08 in the 10s; zero in the 20s; $595,399.56 in the 30s; and $50,000 in the 40s; for a total of $912,548.64. Jones seconded. (Thomas) I’m not sure there’s much to say on this one. It is pretty self‐evident. Maybe we will just see if you have questions for us. (McKim) I think one thing of note here is that this does include the City Dispatch Interlocal which I know we kind of put in suspense until we got the Interlocal Agreement resolved. Now I know we’ve resolved it entirely on our side I believe. Do the Commissioners know what the status is on the City’s side? (Stoffers) We were presented with an MOU and we decided to go with the MOU for the ensuing year. (McKim) Does that mean it just continues the current terms? (Stoffers) No actually it bumped $1,918.83. (Hawk) Could you tell us again what? (Stoffers) We’ve had an Interlocal with the City for – Geoff you probably know how many years we’ve had this – at least the last 10 to 15 years. We’ve had an Interlocal Agreement and there was a State law that said that we had to share 911 funds with entities that had dispatch and that law did change. The law changed because the State told all the counties that they had to consolidate their dispatches. That law changed January 1, 2014. Quite frankly there was nothing in State law that compelled us to continue that payment yet we did continue that payment. Now you deappropriated it previous for 2015. The MOU that we have with the City for the ensuring year has that back in it. On the other hand, there is no State law that requires that any longer. (McKim) But when you say the MOU you’re referring to the Interlocal Agreement. This Council approved that also. (Stoffers) I’m just saying there was some discussion in the office about whether we should continue doing that because we were compelled to do that by State law. The law changed. (McKim) I guess my question is really where does that Agreement stand on the City’s side? Have they signed it yet? (Thomas) I haven’t seen it. (McKim) So we’ve done everything we should have but it is awaiting approval by the City Council, is that correct? (Stoffers) That is the way I understand it. (Hawk) The deadline was today for budgets to be entered into Gateway and the City had not done it at last I heard. (Saulter) At 5:00 I checked before these budget hearings started and the City did comply and file it in Gateway. (Hawk) Can you tell me what the percent increase is for the City?

of 175


(Stoffers) Do you mean the $1,900? (Thomas) She’s talking about the Dispatchers up at the top here. (McKim) You mean we pay at City scale rather than County scale. (Hawk) So we have to always whatever the City’s increase is we have to cover it whether we give our employees a penny. It just sort of like the State says this and the City says that and the County just sits back and goes oh okay, whatever. So what is the percent? (Stoffers) I don’t know off the top of my head. You have a good point to make; on the other hand, you can’t really have two people from two different units of government doing the same job and getting paid some kind of differential. That’s probably a bigger problem. (Hawk) I don’t argue that point. I’m just asking what was the percent? I bet there is someone sitting here on the Council who knows what the City’s pay increase was. (Dietz) I can’t really speak to the dispatchers though. We can easily find out by requesting from the Controller or the Police Chief what that proposal was. But again it is like our discussion here, it is a proposal until there is a final vote by the Council. (Hawk) Okay. Could somebody just look at these numbers and tell us what the percent increase is or is it a flat [rate]? (Thomas) I think it is difficult to say because I don’t know how they organize their personnel system. There are people making different wage levels. I have no idea how they organize their wages. I think it would be an assumption to say it is this percentage because you can do the math. I don’t know that is accurate, I think you need to ask the City. (Hawk) It just seems to me that when we’re talking about salaries we’re just going to vote on it because oh well we don’t know. (McKim) My bigger concern actually is that the City owes us quite a bit of money from the software maintenance and part of this Interlocal Agreement, the MOU, that we have all signed here specifies their repayment of essentially $75,000 a year and we’ve used that in our revenue projections. So I really want to make sure that the City moves forward with that in time to be able to make that payment. So I’m a little bit concerned that we’re including the Interlocal Agreement amount here in this budget but yet we still don’t actually have a signed Interlocal yet with the City. (Hawk) We’re once again committing ourselves to this but the City doesn’t commit back. This has been going on a long time. But what else to do? And they know it. (McKim) Mr. Flory, do you have any idea of what is going on? (Flory) They are talking about getting it on the City Council agenda sometime in September and moving forward with it. I guess I would point out that if for any reason they didn’t carry through with it you could deappropriate the money by next year. You should know by the end of September that they’ve acted on it and adopted it. (McKim) I think we have an answer that we can deappropriate it if we need to so I’m okay.

of 175


After a call for public comment, Stonecipher called roll: McKim – yes Cobine – yes Hawk – yes Yoder – yes Jones – yes Dietz – yes Munson – yes Motion passed. Showers Building Debt 4603‐000 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for the Showers Building Debt with the amount of zero in the 10s; zero in the 20s; $1,964,000.00 in the 30s; and zero in the 40s; for a total of $1,964,000.00. Jones seconded. (Thomas) We’re looking forward to February 1, 2017, when this building is paid off. After a call for public comment, Stonecipher called roll: Jones – yes Cobine – yes McKim – yes Hawk – yes Munson – yes Dietz – yes Yoder – yes Motion passed. General Obligation Bond Debt Service 4605 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for GO Bond Debt Service with the amount of zero in the 10s; zero in the 20s; $2,050,000.00 in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total of $2,050,000.00. Jones seconded. (Thomas) This is just working toward getting an appropriation for this bond. There has been a lot of discussion about how this is supposed to work between the Auditor and Ms. Purdie. (McKim) This is the debt service side; this is not the bond fund for the projects. (Saulter) Yes, this is the $2 million debt and that is where the tax rate is assigned to. The project portion will come later. (Munson) Okay, and traditionally the Commissioners have approached the Council with a list of projects and we’ve had extension discussion at that time. (McKim) We already took one vote on proceeding with the bond as well. After a call for public comment, Stonecipher called roll: Dietz – yes Hawk – yes Cobine – yes

of 175


McKim – yes Munson – yes Jones – yes Yoder – yes Motion passed. Human Resources 1000‐067 Yoder made a motion to approve the budget for Human Resources with the amount of $150,984.22 in the 10s; $2,000.00 in the 20s; $7,000.00 in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total of $159,984.22. Jones seconded. (Nancy Panzarella, HR Director) It is a pretty much flat budget except for in the 10s, the recommended COLA for both of our salaries and the longevity for Rynn and the one‐year bump for Rynn. Otherwise it is a flat budget. After a call for public comment, McKim called the question. Stonecipher called roll: Jones – yes Munson – yes McKim – yes Dietz – yes Yoder – yes Cobine – yes Hawk – yes Motion passed. RECESS (Munson) Council, we will take a recess of the Council and we will reconvene at 5:00 this Thursday here in the Nat U. Hill meeting room and we will continue the budget hearings. Thank you.

*** *** ***

of 175


The Minutes from the Budget Session of the Monroe County Council held on September 1, 2015, were approved on ________________________________, 2015.

Monroe County Council

Aye Nay _______________________________ ________________________________ Cheryl Munson, President Cheryl Munson, President _______________________________ ________________________________ Shelli Yoder, Vice‐President Shelli Yoder, Vice‐President _______________________________ ________________________________ Ryan Cobine, Member Ryan Cobine, Member _______________________________ ________________________________ Rick Dietz, Member Rick Dietz, Member _______________________________ ________________________________ Marty Hawk, Member Marty Hawk, Member _______________________________ ________________________________ Lee Jones, Member Lee Jones, Member _______________________________ ________________________________ Geoff McKim, Member Geoff McKim, Member Attest: ________________________________ Steve Saulter, Monroe County Auditor

of 175

MINUTES MONROE COUNTY COUNCIL

COURTHOUSE, NAT U. HILL MEETING ROOM SEPTEMBER 3, 2015

Pursuant to proper notice, a Budget Work Session of the Monroe County Council was reconvened at 5:00 p.m. on September 3, 2015 at the Monroe County Courthouse, Nat U. Hill Meeting Room, Bloomington, Indiana 47404. The presiding officer was Cheryl Munson, President. A quorum was present, including:

Councilors Present: Cheryl Munson, President Shelli Yoder, Vice President Lee Jones Marty Hawk Ryan Cobine Rick Dietz Geoff McKim Also Present: Michael Flory, County Council Attorney Steve Saulter, Auditor Marilyn Stonecipher, Deputy Auditor Kim Shell, Council Assistant Lorie Robinson, Case Manager, Courts RECONVENE The meeting was called back to order by President Munson. ANNOUNCEMENTS (Munson) I want to begin with a couple of announcements. The first concerns openings on two Monroe County Commissions. One is the Environmental Quality and Sustainability Commission. The second is the Women’s Commission. Applications for those Commissions, if you are interested, can be found on the County website over on the left panel and those applications are sent via email to the County Council office. That address is on the application. A second point of beginning is to have an update of where we are after Tuesday’s budget hearing and Councilor McKim is ready to give that to us. (McKim) I am only going to spend about 30 seconds on this. What I’ve done on the spreadsheet that is in the drop box called Budget Analysis 2015‐09‐03 is that I updated the tab labeled Departmental Requests with any amended amounts that we passed on Tuesday. I also highlighted, I used green if we finished the budget without any intention of revisiting it. That doesn’t mean we can’t revisit it but nobody expressed any intention of revisiting it. Then I highlighted in yellow the requests that we completed but there was some intention expressed of revisiting them. So Veterans Affairs we were interested in revisiting that and then also County Buildings. So that updated the number of departmental requests and it updated the revenues minuses expenses number from the General Fund to about almost $580,000. We did not touch the COIT Fund at all so there were no changes in COIT. We have a couple of items in COIT tonight so those numbers may change. So with that I suggest we move forward.

of 175


Parks & Recreation 1000‐803 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 Budget for Parks & Recreation with the amount of $785,646.05 in the 10s; $88,315.00 in the 20s; $57,300.00 in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total of $931,261.05. Jones seconded. (Chuck Stephenson, Administrator, Parks & Rec) This is Kelli Witmer, Assistant Administrator, and Evelyn Harrell is our Park Board President. (Munson) So would you like to tell us about your budget; any major changes from the previous year? (Stephenson) Probably the biggest change is that you had put in $21,000 for seasonal healthcare last year and for various reasons that was not used so that will be coming back to the Council budget and we think that the best way to handle that is for additional appropriations as we need it. So we would ask that you just remove the $21,322 from our current budget. (McKim) I definitely agree with the strategy of removing the ACA money because, as Mr. Stephenson has already said, none of that has been used in 2015 and there is a good chance that not much, if any, will be used in 2016. So with a $785,000 budget in the 10s it gives plenty of time if an employee chooses. By removing that money it doesn’t change the policy that they’re entitled to that benefit. If they choose to exercise that benefit then they can and you can certainly transfer money and if you run out at the end of the year we can always do an additional appropriation. But it seems like there is enough slack in your 10s that if, by some chance, an employee does elect that benefit. McKim made a motion to set the budget line labeled Seasonal Staff Fringe ACA to zero. Jones seconded. Munson called the question. Motion passed by voice vote. (Munson) I have a comment and that is the 2016 increases in gas and oil lubricants and in horticultural supplies and both of those are about $4,500. Can you tell us about those? (Stephenson) You increased our gas oil line last year because we were going to start taking on the Karst Greenway and we had some delay in starting that because Bill Williams asked us to wait until he was close to the final inspection on it. So I think that it wasn’t until almost June until we started doing some work on it. Since then, of course, it has been full blown. And the horticultural supplies what you’re seeing here is I think that line is gone now isn’t it? (Munson) No, 20.0022. (Stephenson) We have $4,500 left and that will take us through the rest of the year for all of our fall fertilizer and supplies, seed and so forth for Karst Farm Park, Detmer, and Flatwoods. (Munson) Okay, thank you. (McKim) I want to make sure I understand for the overall budget, the only increases you have over 2015 other than the Council‐specified raises and fringe is related to the Greenway and is maintenance and is essentially continuing what the Council already additionally appropriated during 2015. So that’s just become kind of the new base that we have to reckon with. (Stephenson) It won’t be long until the next phase is completed. They have all the base coat down as far as the asphalt and they backfilled almost the entire asphalt, the parking lot is complete. So they will have the topcoat put on in short order with this kind of weather. So it will be done in a couple of weeks it looks like.

of 175


(Munson) Rentals and leases ‐ that is an increase of $4,000. Do you want to just tell us what that is for? (Stephenson) We had asked for $4,000 to do some clearing for what we thought would be ready to do on the IC Trail and also on the Monon Corridor but we weren’t ready for that. The IC, DNR won’t let us start that until next year and as far as Monon we just haven’t got to that point yet. So we will need that next year but we have transferred some funds out of that but it went to equipment and vehicle maintenance. (Hawk) Where did it go to? (Stephenson) Equipment and vehicle maintenance. (Hawk) So you are anticipating you will come back for an additional appropriation when those trails are finished and ready for you to start maintaining? (Stephenson) That would be fine. (Hawk) I’m not asking you to do that, I’m asking if that is what your plan is and if so are you saying in 2016 because you’re saying next year and of course we’re looking at the 2016 budget so you’re talking 2016 you’re going to need additional money to maintain trails? Do I understand that correctly or not? (Stephenson) Well we’ll probably need that $4,000 again. But if you want to take it out now and then us come back for it when we need it then we can do that. (McKim) That’s not maintenance right? That’s development of Phase 2B. (Stephenson) That’s development, right. (McKim) So that would be a reasonable thing to do as an additional appropriation because there is no guarantee that we’re going to be ready to put in that phase of the trail. (Kelli Witmer, Asst. Administrator) Maybe to clarify. Earlier this year we asked for an additional appropriation for $4,000 for rental of a fecon and since we’re not going to be using it we will need to rent it next year so we will need that $4,000 next year. We did not rent the equipment this year so we transferred the money and did other things with it or we can return that $4,000 to you if you would like. (McKim) I was just going to ask if you had planned to revert it. (Witmer) We can if you would like because we did not use it for the intended use. Jones made a motion to remove the $4,000 for line 30.0010. Yoder seconded. Munson called the question. Motion passed by voice vote. Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 Budget for Parks and Recreation 1000‐803 with the amount of $764,324.05 in the 10s; $88,315.00 in the 20s; $53,300.00 in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total amount of $905,939.05. Jones seconded. After a call for public comment, Stonecipher called roll: Dietz – yes Hawk – yes Cobine – yes McKim – yes

of 175


Munson – yes Jones – yes Yoder – yes Motion passed. Parks Non‐Reverting Capital 1178‐000 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for Parks Non‐Reverting Capital with the amount of zero in the 10s; zero in the 20s; $1,000.00 in the 30s; $59,000.00 in the 40s; for a total of $60,000.00. Jones seconded. (Stephenson) This is our non‐reverting account and the Park Board is considering an addition onto our current maintenance building because we have run out of space. We have no room for storage of equipment or supplies and when our equipment is inside our current building there is no space to work. So we are wanting to add onto that current building and use our 1179 {sic} to do that and we’re hoping to get that accomplished either late this fall or next spring. (Hawk) Could you tell me if this has been presented to the County Commissioners and they have voted in favor of this since they’re the ones in charge of what we can do – what we can do with County buildings is really up to the County Commissioners so do you have this approved by them to do this? (Stephenson) Do we need to get approval from the Commissioners? (Hawk) Yes because they’re over all County‐owned buildings and County‐owned property. So you would need to make certain that they agree to do this. That is my first question. The second is I’m assuming you’ll contract with someone to come and do this work for you, is that correct? (Stephenson) Yes. (Hawk) Okay, and so you’ll not buy a part of the materials or anything until you’ve got every bit of the total contract together before you would move forward and there is a very real reason why I’m saying this because we’ve ran into some problems in other areas. So I know that is how you would behave. I’ve known you forever and you make sure that you have everything in line but just wanted to make sure you knew that. (Stephenson) Yes, we’re working with the Planning Department and we’ve talked to at least one of the Commissioners about it and so…. (Hawk) You want to work with the Building Department. (Stephenson) …yes, and the Building Department. Of course, we’ll have to get them to do a building permit and then to do their inspections on it before can utilize the facility. (Hawk) They may ask that you put in some plantings and you folks are real good at that. So I’m sure if they ask you to put in additional plantings around the building you will be right on top of it. So I have every confidence in you to do it. (Stephenson) Well they have a system they use and I don’t know exactly the formula for the number of trees and shrubs and the amount of grass and they look at the entire site, not just that little specific patch that we’re dealing with. So if it is required then that is what we will do. (Hawk) The only thing I would state is that it takes the specific permission of the County Commissioners to move forward.

of 175


(Stephenson) Yes. After a call for public comment, Stonecipher called roll: Cobine – yes Yoder – yes Dietz – yes Munson – yes Hawk – yes McKim – yes Jones – yes Motion passed. Weights and Measures 1121‐308 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for Weights and Measures with the amount of $56,595.41 in the 10s; $3,910.00 in the 20s; $2,300.00 in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total of $62,805.41. Jones seconded. (Scott Sowder, Weights & Measures) I kept my budget flat from last year. Pretty small budget; pretty self‐explanatory. (Munson) That’s always good to see a flat budget when we’re in the position we are now. (Hawk) I’ve had several people discuss with me that we perhaps need to go to some of the grocery stores that are selling in bulk to see if the way you measure it where you are picking it up and then how it ends up being perhaps something different at the cash register. So if you’ll just be aware of that, there has been some concern. (Sowder) I can look into that, yes. (Hawk) Thank you. (McKim) When is the last time that you’ve increased fines for non‐compliance? (Sowder) I think they were increased last in 2003. That is something that Lee and I had discussed previously and it is something I will be looking at. I’m looking at making other changes to the ordinance too and I will probably present it as one package. (McKim) Is that something the Commissioners would then have to pass? (Sowder) Yes. In different jurisdictions in the State since the implementation, a lot of them have based their systems off Monroe County’s system and a lot of them have raised their fines, so it is time. (Jones) I’ll just elaborate a little bit on that that one of the things we had discussed is the possibility of escalating fines for businesses that seem to be unwilling to cooperate easily and quickly. I would like to go on and say the thing that I usually say because it is so important for people to understand that we really could not have commerce if weights and measures weren’t kept standardized. So what Mr. Sowder does is just an incredibly important thing for us to be able to conduct business in our county. One last thing, and this is just so we can be warned for the future. You have mentioned to me that you have several pieces of equipment that

of 175


probably aren’t going to be hanging in there a whole lot longer. Can you anticipate when we might be seeing requests along these lines? (Sowder) I will be getting with the Commissioners about that probably this fall during our slow period where I have more time to look at it and look at costs and get estimates. (Jones) Thank you. (Munson) Thank you, I support what you’re planning to do in the future. After a call for public comment, Stonecipher called roll: Jones – yes Cobine – yes McKim – yes Hawk – yes Munson – yes Dietz – yes Yoder – yes Motion passed. Planning Commission 1000‐079 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for Planning Commission with the amount of $554,998.49 in the 10s; $7,691.00 in 20s; $39,600.00 in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total of $642,289.49. Jones seconded. (Larry Wilson, Director, Planning Dept.) Jason Eakin, Assistant Director, is here along with Richard Martin, the President of the Plan Commission. We have a couple of changes, one in the [10s] category where we are hoping to move three Planner positions from 35 to 40 hours a week. This was submitted to PAC and then PAC having heard the story several times decided that this should go on to the Council. What it comes down to is the entry level education for a Planner is a Master’s Degree. Currently everyone in our office except for the Office Administrator has a Master’s Degree. We’re finding it increasingly difficult to recruit somebody out of graduate school with loans to pay off at a 35‐hour week. Secondly, we compete against other departments all of whom have 40‐hour per week pay schedules. Moving these three individuals to 40 hours a week will bring them closer to the market rate. They will still be a little under the City but yet we will be within reach. Nationally we’re still going to be in the bottom three percent of planning salaries. This is nationally what a planner with a bachelor’s degree and no experience receives. A planner with a bachelor’s degree is sort of like somebody who has a bachelor’s degree in law or medicine. It is not really a degree that allows you to come in and take a position and really work through and have necessary training in order to handle the job well. In the last year we have lost one planner and are soon to lose our senior planner, Jackie Scanlan, both of whom are moving to the City. It is not totally based upon wages. I think there are reasons people try to enhance their resume by gaining more experience. There is more of a chance to specialize within the City and there is more opportunity for advancement. The one other thing that is not directly involved with our budget that I think is a concern is after the three‐year bump you’re done except for the cost‐of‐living allocations and so after that three‐year period we’re at risk of losing people to higher salaries because there is no real incentive other than longevity pay to stay on. So the total increase of moving three Planners to 40 hours a week is roughly $15,000 to $16,000 over the year, not including the benefits. That also gives us the ability to have more people in the office during the workday. Right now what happens with a 35‐hour week if the individual Planners have meetings at night, and we have a lot of night meetings, they take comp time and therefore if they’re not in the office and somebody comes in to

of 175


meet about a project they’re not there and so they have to reschedule or leave a message if they call on the phone. So it will give us more coverage. It will also give us more staffing to do special projects. We’ve been doing a much better job I believe in supporting things like historic preservation and alternate transportation and other things that are beyond what was being done by the department a few years ago. When we advertised for our last Planner I we had to advertise twice and ultimately we had one person who we hired that was qualified and if he had no applied we would have had to start over and advertise again. It is just hard to compete on a national level at 35 hours a week. It is a professional job and it needs to be 40 hours a week. The other change in our budget is in the [30s] I believe. I know we’ve talked to Steve about there are two grants pending for historic preservation education. One is from INDOT, one is a joint grant I believe from Historic Landmarks and maybe the State. They’re both education grants related to I‐69 and we created two budget line items for them in the [30s]. Both of those are pass‐through grants. Again it may not end up in our budget is my understanding, they might go through a different budget. But again those are pass‐through grants. So our only real change is to increase three positions to 40 hours per week. The [20s] and [30s] are the same, they’re flat. Also Jason handed out – again we traded these activity levels every year so you can get an idea of just whether we’re busy or not. As you can see we basically are increasing the number of permits and petitions every year. Also I will note that our revenues have gone up. In 2010 it was $76,000; last year it was close to $150,000. Right now we are about $109,500 so we will probably end up in the $140,000 or $150,000 range this year. It is hard to predict. But we have made efforts to increase the amount of money coming in from our charges for fees and petitions. (Munson) Thank you. (Cobine) I appreciate that presentation, it explained it well. And again, the PAC that sent this on to the Council, it seems we were eager for everybody to hear this story. This is something that I definitely want to support and I hope that at the end of the budget cycle there is enough for us to do this because I definitely see this as part of, much as Lee was talking about Weights and Measures, having adequate and good planning is part of the infra‐structure of commerce and life in the county. So we want to be able to keep that working at the capacity that is needed and it sounds like this is a boost that is definitely needed. (Dietz) I will be supporting moving forward with this. I think we need to shift to 40 hours there if possible given the critical demand and the intersection of this and so much of our commercial life in the county and residential life. Thank you. (Yoder) I am in support of this. We have heard this, we’ve been talking about it for a couple of years now. I just recognize the strain that is on the County budget looking forward to 2016 and beyond. So it is complicated. Although I do recognize that this is foundational to the overall growth of our county and so the only thing that comes to mind is do you cut your nose off to spite your face kind of thing. So that is where I am. I am convinced it is a good thing. I am concerned about where we stand with looking at the additional impact on the budget, so that is what I’m struggling with right now. (Hawk) I regret that for some reason you continue to go back to PAC because it not PAC’s role to decide how many hours your employees would work. Did I understand you to say….? (Wilson) It was submitted to PAC because it involves a change in the job description. (Hawk) That, of course, is their role.

of 175


(Wilson) We realize that; this was no attempt to bypass the entire Council, just to make sure that when we came to the Council they would say you need to go to PAC first which has happened in the past occasionally. So that was the idea. (Hawk) Right. Once they decide what the job description is, what their recommendation will be because, of course, they just bring us the recommendation and the entire body decides whether or not to accept the recommendation. But it certainly is not their role to decide how many hours that would be. That is up to the County Council because that is a budgetary issue. I know how many extra hours you folks must be putting in because it seems like you’re on CATS TV every night. I mean you folks are meeting all the time and I’m hoping that is about to come to an end here. (Wilson) We’re sort of the Andy Griffith show of CATS. (Hawk) And right, I know you like being a star and we appreciate that but at some point in time….. So as much as I would like to see that your folks would be able to receive more money because that is really what this is about most of our departments could come and tell us the same story. So especially in this year when we’re just trying to keep County employees whole, we want to hopefully be able to give a raise unless somebody comes up with a miracle that is going to be difficult. So I find it particularly hard to say I would vote in favor of increasing any staff hours or number of staff until we can figure out a way how we’re going to fairly treat across the board. But I do appreciate the hard work. Your staff has put in so many extra hours between the BZA and all of the additional meetings and I’m hoping that with this contract to move forward with what you folks are doing that perhaps it won’t take as many meetings along the way. (Jason Eakin, Asst. Director, Planning Dept.) I just wanted to add, you know, I understand where things are in the overall budget and the difficulties that you’re having and some of the decisions that you’re going to have to make but retention is really critical for us as well. I know you said it was getting more money but really retention is such an issue for us because the timeframe for someone to get familiar with all the ordinances, you’ve seen the books, some of you, and they’re thick and it is a lot to get through, it is a lot to learn, knowing who to talk to, where to point potential economic development opportunities to in the County and in the community. It takes time to develop that knowledge base and we’re losing it every couple of years and it is difficult to replace, it takes time to replace. So there is just that loss that we’re suffering. We try to bring in the best people we can every time but we are consistently seeing them move on to other opportunities and a lot of times it is not a lot more money but it is just enough that it is making it difficult. (Hawk) I hope you do know that I understand that. We are getting the same thing from our Auditor’s office because we’ve not been able to increase the salaries there to meet and to be able to generate someone who will stay there and that is causing problems throughout the County services. So we’re going to have to look at how we’re going to address that at some point in time and I suppose it is up to this Council to pick winners and losers but today I’m going to hope that the County employees will be the winners. So I do understand though the dilemma. (McKim) Before I move on to the salary issue or the hours per week issue; the grants, is it really the appropriate place to have these grant lines in their General Fund budget or should we just be creating another fund. Because the problem is the revenue doesn’t show up in our numbers. (Saulter) More than likely they probably need to be stand‐alone funds. When I talked to Jason earlier this week I said it wouldn’t hurt if you placed it in there until more information could come my way or come the way of the Council and you can decide to set it into a separate fund. More than likely it probably needs to be in a separate fund or funds but I understand talking to Jason that these are two separate grants so therefore you have to have two separate funds. McKim made a motion to set lines 30.0012 and 30.0013 to zero. Cobine seconded.

of 175


(Munson) Planning has had a historic preservation grant in the past about 10 years ago and I know that is how it was handled so this is the right way to go. Motion passed by voice vote. (McKim) So on the salaries, I feel pretty much the same way, unfortunately, that Councilors Hawk and Cobine have expressed in that I completely understand the rationale. One spreadsheet I’m looking at your budget on the other one I’m looking at the fact that we still have a $1.8 million deficit to close and I’m not seeing $1.8 million worth of cuts in these future budgets so I’m not sure how we can pay for it. You’re asking for three salaries to be moved. One year we moved the Director to 40, another year we moved the Assistant Director to 40, and then another year we moved the Senior Planner to 40. Is there any principled way to choose one of those three that would be moved or are they all essentially equivalent? (Wilson) They’re equivalent in the sense that they have the same qualifications. We still have a Planner I classification that gives us the ability to hire somebody with a bachelor’s agree and experience but again those are few and far between. The one thing I will throw out as an option here, this is so important to us to get these three positions because we don’t know which one is going to be vacant, that is one of the problems, and then we end up having to move people around. It is also somewhat inconsistent to have somebody with the same real job, PAT IIIs, and two are working 40. So what I would suggest and we’re willing to do this would be to move the part‐time line we have, the hourly work study which is 12.7801, which is $15,000, what we use that for is during summer months when we have SPEA fellows or maybe even other former SPEA fellows and so on to do special projects. It is much more important for us at this stage to have three professional Planners working 40 hours a week than to do summer projects. What we can do is if we have a summer project we could come for a special appropriation mid‐year when we knew what money would be available at some time. I think that way our budget will, as far as I can tell, be flat if we do that. (McKim) There are also benefits. (Wilson) I understand. (McKim) That’s a trade; I’m actually willing to take you up on that. (Wilson) It is close. (Yoder) Is it possible to see what it would look like if we zeroed out…. (Wilson) If you zeroed out that line it should reduce the budget down. (Yoder) But take into consideration what fringe and benefits would….or are those already in there? (Wilson) Those are already in there. (Yoder) Okay. (Jones) I would like to point out that this really has much more to do with economic development than it does with salaries, hours, or anything of that sort. One of the biggest complaints that we get in this county about the process that people go through if they want to develop a piece of property is how long it takes them to get to the point where they can actually get to work. We are just ingraining this in our system if we cannot manage to pay somehow for the level of professionals that are actually needed to undertake this work and figure out a way to be able to retain them long enough so that we can actually get the value from them. This is something that I

of 175


actually have quite a bit of concern over and I have discussed it with the Council fairly frequently. So if people feel that we really can’t do this right at this point I really hope that we will make this a very high priority as we reach the end of our discussions. It is much more critical than most people realize. (Munson) I probably know the Planning Department better than most departments after years of work with them including the Plan Review Committee and I really appreciate Mr. Wilson’s recommendation about reducing the part‐time hourly and I think that even with the 40‐hour a week salary that the amount is under what we should be but we can’t talk about this without a comprehensive review of all salaries for the County. So I would favor reducing the part‐time hourly by $15,000 knowing that it is still not getting us where we want to be. (Cobine) This might feel like splitting hairs at this point but this is one of these things where as I acknowledge my initial comment I hope that we have enough at the end of this process to be able to fund this to 40 hours. It is perhaps just sort of a symbolic gesture but if anybody were to move at this point to reduce it down to the 35‐hour a week level I would vote against that at this point because I agree with Councilor Jones that this is very important to do with the understanding that we may have to go back later in the process, mark it in yellow on Geoff’s spreadsheet and say well we might have to take that away later. So again it is sort of a symbolic thing at this point because if we need that to be able to make everything work I’m going to come down on that side. But I do think this is important in the way that Councilor Jones has expressed as well. McKim made a motion to set line 12.7801 to zero. Jones seconded. (McKim) That is the part‐time hourly, they said they’re willing to give that up and I appreciate your being willing to set priorities like that. You know the priorities better than we do so I will go along with that. Motion passed by voice vote. (Hawk) We increased a line there so that each member of the Plan Commission could make additional money per each meeting and yet it was set at a cap because just going through all that they’ve been through in this past year but I would think going into next year we ought to be able to return to semi‐chaotic normal. I thought I’d through the chaotic in there because it seems as though it is always going to be that way. How many thousand could we save there if we went back to our original, let’s see it was $7,250 in the past and we raised it up? (Jones) Let me make this clear that in the past each Commissioner got $50 a month for hours and hours of work, they’re now getting $150 a month for hours and hours of work if they have attended at least three meetings. Anyone who doesn’t get to three meetings doesn’t get that money. (Hawk) Nobody does it to make the money. I’ve got that. We don’t sit here on the County Council to make money. (Jones) It also helps cover the actual expenses we have in going to visit sites: the gasoline, the flat tires, the various getting the car towed out when it is stuck. Those are for us to pay for ourselves. (Hawk) Right and I understand all that. I thought that we increased it particularly just because of the workload for this year. I don’t think anybody thought it was going to be on there forever but if that is what the majority of the Council believes it should be. I’m just looking for some additional dollars for you to make the budgets work. (Jones) Am I correct that there is only one committee that might use up this year? I’m not at all sure that any would but even the Urbanizing Area Committee is still going to have a great deal of work to do and all the other committees are standing committees. They have regular meetings that are regularly‐scheduled, they’re very long meetings.

of 175


(Hawk) Not everybody has the time to donate for that. You know I get it and I think that it would be real easy to get burnt out and say look I did my stint at this and I’ll pass this on to someone else. (Munson) What line are we referring to? (McKim) It is 12.7001 Plan Commission. (Munson) Okay. (McKim) What is the schedule for passing the Urbanizing Area Plan? The newspaper headline was so discouraging I thought. (Wilson) I think the procedure for completing the Urbanizing Area Plan, it has to have a vote by the Plan Commission to send it on to the Commissioners and the Commissioners would have to approve it. It is on the agenda, I believe, for September. It is unclear whether it would be passed at that time. It is just a case once it gets to the stage where the Plan Commission is comfortable in making a recommendation to send it on to the Commissioners that will likely be approved by the Commissioners fairly quickly. (Eakin) There are discussions that we wanted to have following the public hearing weighing the input that was received and what we’ve been hearing from the public so I think there is going to be some additional time needed before that would be passed and then there are some other issues to contemplate about the second phase of the project and the timing of when that would happen and where that will all fit. So it could be this year but it could be into next year. (McKim) Are there any major revisions being contemplated to Phase I? (Eakin) I think the biggest issue is that there is additional work that has been identified that should be done related to formulating the framework for regulations in terms of form‐based code and some of the key things you want to do within that realm and then also looking at the zoning map which is probably the most difficult thing you do in setting forth the updating ordinances and so on. So we wanted to do additional study to make sure that has really taken all the issues into consideration and without getting too much in the weeds on the policy of it. It will be a fairly‐lengthy process but I think the proposed schedule for that is about one year additional. (Jones) Just to clarify, the point that we’re approaching right now is just okaying a plan and a plan by itself doesn’t really have much meaning. Once the plan has been okayed we have to create an ordinance to support the plan. So there is no real reason to think that the workload is going to be letting up any time soon. (Yoder) So I know you spoke to this briefly, I believe, a moment ago but I want to revisit it. There are two Planner GIS Specialists and then there is one Planner I. Could we incrementally this year look at increasing both the Planner I GIS Specialists to the 40 hours and hold off on line item 10.0006 for Planner I who it appears maybe because of when they were hired they were hired later? I just see a difference in salary. (Wilson) The difference is they’ve only been on the job less than a year. Actually there will be a certain reduction automatically because we’re losing Jackie who is already past the three‐year bump and at some point we will bring somebody in that will not be being paid at three years. So in effect, with the $15,000 and the fact that we’re not going to have a three‐year bump, one less three‐year payment, it should be almost flat based upon that even with raising three positions because salaries go down significantly if it is not a three‐year. (Munson) That is a very good point Mr. Wilson.

of 175


(Hawk) I wanted to add just because I think it is something we need to look at and just remember that in 2013 the Plan Commission for the Commissioners’ budget was $4,840 and in 2015 it is $16,200 for a different of $11,360 and right there we go a long way toward increasing those salaries that you were speaking of. It appears there is not support for that but I think…. (Yoder) I couldn’t hear, if you could start from the beginning. (Hawk) Is there any way you can put that on the screen? There it is. Under line 12.7001 you will see in 2013 it was $4,840 and it has jumped to $16,200 for this year and planned for next year. So the difference is $11,360 and that is not a great deal of money but for those people who are serving, they’re not serving for the money anyway and if they really wanted to advocate to help us come up with the dollars to increase the salaries that might be a way to at least consider it and if we don’t consider it today perhaps we will keep that in our bag of ideas as we go through these budgets. (Wilson) Jason has done some calculations and with the $15,000 the difference in salaries is less than $1,500 excluding benefit adjustments which will be taken care of by the fact that we’re losing a three‐year person at the Senior Planner position. So it is pretty well awash at this point from last year to this year, not including benefits because we don’t know exactly what those are going to be. (Jones) I would just like to point out and Richard you can maybe back me up on this, I believe the Commissioners were paid $50 a month for 25 or 30 years and I would guess that it will stay at $150 a month for another 25 or 30 years. So I think this is going to work out pretty quickly. (Richard Martin, President, Plan Commission) The way we’ve operationalized this amount of money is that the Plan Commission members are eligible for $50 for each of three meetings during the month. We keep track of how many meetings everybody goes to. Not everybody goes to three meetings. Some people go to two, some people go to one, some people, as we have recorded, are going to nine. So there is a tremendous difference. I suspect that if you go back and you look over the year you will find that we are not spending that entire amount because some members are not attending all of the meetings. We have members who do not sit on sub‐committees because they have other appointments that give them obligations in other places. We have some committee members who chose not to sit on subcommittees, which is their right, so that they’re not going to get the number of meetings that are necessary to get the full $150. It is done on an allocation‐per‐meeting basis. So if you look at the total amount of money that was budgeted versus how much was actually spent you’re probably the difference that you’ve been talking about at least. It just depends on how much workload each individual member of that Plan Commission takes upon themselves to do. Some of us have obligations that require us to be at at least three meetings, since I’m the President I have to be there. Some of us don’t have those obligations and choose not to do so, that is up to them. (McKim) So do Elected Officials who serve on the Plan Commission, do they also get this extra pay as well? So County Commissioners who serve on the Plan Commissioners who serve on the Plan Commission also get extra pay. (Martin) Everybody who serves on the Plan Commission is treated the same way in this respect. (Hawk) So it is their opportunity to make another $1,800. I wouldn’t do it for $1,800; I wouldn’t want to serve on the Plan Commission. But that is not what we’re talking about here because Richard I’ve known you a long time and I know you don’t do this for the money. I know you do this because you love planning and you love serving and I appreciate that. I’m just saying we’re looking under every rock for every penny because we would like to give our County employees a small raise. I just threw it out there for open comment and if people are interested, fine; if they’re not. (Munson) When was the last time that fees in the Planning Department were increased?

of 175


(Wilson) If you will look at the handout you will notice that 2011 we increased them. We have not increased them since then. (Martin) The thing that really bumps up our revenue are big projects and we’ve had some big projects come forward that had to come forward in several different forms paying new fees each time they did so. We’ve had some that have come in and have been well presented in the beginning and those are the activities that generate a lot of revenue for us. They’re also the activities that take up an enormous amount of staff time. Most of the staff time is answering questions; people come into the office or call and we need to be able to respond to those people. You need to understand that when Larry and I sign a plat we create value for the county. The plat subdivides land which adds value to the Assessed Valuation of the county. That act is what does it. Now I understand Assessed Value doesn’t always turn into more revenue but it does provide an opportunity for investment in the community that would not otherwise exist and it is a fundamental part, as Lee said, of our economic develop‐ment that we have mechanisms for doing this and that we do it in a timely manner. One of the activities on our plate for this coming year is to revise our ordinances having to do with cell towers. We created this ordinance some time ago, the State legislature in its wisdom has decided that we have to respond to cell tower requests in ten days. That changes everything now. So when they come in we’ve got to start doing things right away so we don’t get this delay that we’ve had available to us before. We have other situations where the State is changing the rules and regulations on a state level regarding planning and zoning and we have to respond to those. So there are several issues that David Schilling has pointed out to us where Larry now has to start crafting new ordinance provisions which, in fact, implement State code and we have to do that on an ongoing basis. Every session they have, something impacts us. (Yoder) So right now with it removed what I’m seeing the amount looks higher in the 10s category than what I read originally. (Munson) It does. (Yoder) I’m trying to figure out why that is. (Robinson) What? (Yoder) So the motion that I read, in the 10s category I read $549,998. (McKim) Those numbers are transposed. It looks like you should have read 594 rather than 549. (Yoder) Okay. Well I’ll be changing it anyway so we’re all good but I was trying to figure out how that could be. (Jones) Thank you, Shelli. (Munson) Good eye, Shelli. Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for Planning Commission 1000‐079 in the amount of $578,850.99 in the 10s; $7,691.00 in the 20s; $32,600.00 in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total of $619,141.99. Jones seconded. A call was made for public comment.

of 175


(Jim Shelton, Chamber of Commerce) We support this motion to get the Planners to 40 hours for all the reasons that Ms. Jones and Mr. Martin stated. Thank you. Stonecipher called roll: Cobine – yes Yoder – yes Dietz – yes Munson – yes Hawk – no McKim – yes Jones – yes Motion passed. County Fair Board 4908‐000 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 for County Fair Board with the amount of zero in the 10s; zero in the 20s; $94,770.00 in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total of $94,770.00. Jones seconded. (Tony Scherschel, President, Fair Board) The budget is basically the same as last year except we expect to have a little more money this year from building rent because we are renting more buildings and with the north horse barn being finally completed and ready to go we will be using it for storage. The expenses, since our insurance went up a little bit that increased that some and the Caretaker technically isn’t a caretaker anymore. If you’ve been online or anything you will notice that he has got us a website and is bringing us up to the 21st century so we increased his salary a little bit to correspond with that. Of course you will notice that as of last year the $90,000 approximately is a little over half of what our basic board budget is. The total fair budget with the fair on is approximately $490,000. I asked Cheryl about any increases and she said I’ll put that on the bottom just to have it there so everybody could see it. So since we didn’t have any raise last year she put last year’s on there plus this year’s. I fully understand a lot of counties give very little and some none to their fair so we are exceedingly happy to get what we get. Any questions? (Yoder) I’m glad we can do this now; I believe last year there were some issues. Thank you for working so hard. The website, your leadership, great, thank you. (Hawk) I’m reviewing their financial statement. Mr. Saulter, do you believe their financial statement supports the budget they have presented? (Saulter) From what I have seen, yes it does. I’ve worked with Mr. Scherschel. He and I have developed a relationship where he has shown me some things about the Fair Board that he probably hasn’t shown anyone in the County for years and I feel very comfortable with the numbers that have been presented on the budget for this year and for past years. (Hawk) So you’re saying yes it is appropriate? (Saulter) Yes I am. (McKim) Thank you for being here. (Jones) I’m just glad you didn’t have to do this during the fair.

of 175


(Munson) Well actually right after the fair they had to get their budget ready so they didn’t have hardly a moment’s rest. (Scherschel) Not hardly and there’s other things going on. A lot of people think when the fair is over everything is calm; no it is not at all. After a call for public comment, Stonecipher called roll: Yoder – yes Dietz – yes Munson – yes Jones – yes Cobine – yes Hawk – yes McKim – yes Motion passed. Building Commission 1000‐312 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for Building Commission with the amount of $585,472.35 in the 10s; $4,085.00 in the 20s; $40,975.00 in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total of $630,532.35. Jones seconded. (Jim Gerstbauer, Building Dept.) We are a very active department. We do building inspections and electricians’ licensing and other things for the County and for the City of Bloomington. In fact all over the County including Ellettsville. The budget has been thin and tight for a number of years and we’ve always kept to that and we’d like to continue at least with keeping the costs low as we possibly can. With activity strong we are asking you to approve this budget. The [10s] have changes recommended by Council; the [20s] have no change; the [30s] have slight changes due to actual costs that we have tried to make some corrections as well; and no change to the [40s] category. (Hawk) I thank you for working with me and going over the budget with me. It is a very clean, clear budget. There’s really nothing to try to cut. (Munson) Ms. Robinson, would you show the 30s please? After a call for public comment, Stonecipher called roll: Munson – yes McKim – yes Jones – yes Hawk – yes Dietz – yes Yoder – yes Cobine – yes Motion passed. (Hawk) I just wanted to note that we lost another long‐time employee there for the same kinds of reasons we heard from the Planning Department. It is hard to keep the Inspectors with the kind of experience they have to work for that kind of money and yet that’s is what they have to do. So I just wanted to tell you I understand it is going to take you a long time to get new people trained and it is difficult for your office and yet you continue to work well with us so I thank you for that.

of 175


Emergency Management 1000‐361 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for Emergency Management with the amount of $135,098.72 in the 10s; $3,444.00 in the 20s; $20,473.00 in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total of $159,015.72. Jones seconded. (Jim Comerford, Director, Emergency Management) Our budget for this next year in the 10s it is automatic changes and one of them is that Lisa will go to a three‐year bump next year so that is calculated in there. The only other change in the budget is I did add $1,000 in the radio and CD siren to reflect the increase we’re going to have on the siren contract due to new ones. (Dietz) This has been discussed in your meetings. I just want to thank you for all the work that you are doing on behalf of the County and for bringing forward a very straightforward budget for us. Thank you. (Hawk) How much of this budget do you believe will be reimbursed back to us? I mean the State pays for…. (Comerford) Oh, the State, it is 50% of the base salary of the two salaries. It would be a little over $40,000 except that Lisa is just finishing up her pregnancy leave so it will be a little under $40,000 probably because of that. (Hawk) I think most of us know that but remember you’re talking to the public at home as well. (Comerford) 50% of the base of the two positions is reimbursed. (Hawk) Thank you. (McKim) I have to say every time we hear you budget it always makes me think of Warren Henegar because he’d always talk about the “tornado sireens.” (Hawk) People in my neighborhood can hear it and I can even hear it so that means it works. (Jones) I live in the middle of nowhere and I can finally hear a tornado siren, so thank you very much. (Comerford) We have our four new ones in so there will be about four spots that are going to get increased here in the next little bit. It is like pushing a rope uphill getting these things put in because you have to deal with the utilities to get the poles put in and get power to them before you can ever install the sirens. We were hoping to have them done by the end of August but it may be another month. After a call for public comment, Stonecipher called roll: Hawk – yes Jones – yes Yoder – yes Cobine – yes McKim – yes Munson – yes Dietz – yes Motion passed.

of 175


Emergency Right to Know 1152‐000 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for Emergency Right to Know with the amount of zero in the 10s; $100.00 in the 20s; $14,050.00 in the 30s; $6,000.00 in the 40s; for a total of $20,150.00. Jones seconded. (Comerford) This is actually the local Emergency Planning Committee which is actually a quasi‐state agency and therefore this is actually a state budget that you approve. The money that comes into this fund is from business and industries reporting fees for having hazardous materials on their sites plus there is money that comes back from this budget we spend for training. There is a training grant and when you spend the money out then 80% of that comes back. So this fund all works within itself and so it is self‐funding and this is just the budget. I’ve been here six or seven years now and that is the exact same number that has been in there every year. After a call for public comment, Stonecipher called roll: Cobine – yes Yoder – yes Dietz – yes Munson – yes Hawk – yes McKim – yes Jones – yes Motion passed. Public Defender 1000‐271 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for Public Defender with the amount of $1,127,228.45 in the 10s; $8,000.00 in the 20s; $98,150.00 in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total of $1,233,378.45. Jones seconded. (Michael Hunt, Public Defender’s Office) This is Heather Stuffle, she is my Executive Assistant, and this Michael Spencer, he is my Chief Deputy. Madam Chairperson and members of the Council this is, I believe, a fairly vanilla budget. The increases were what were suggested in the 10s categories, what the Council hopes to be able to do. The only other increases are down in the 30s and I increased two or three categories. Those are mostly based upon my best guesstimates from past years and this year and some of that, as I’ve explained before, for example, Special Services. Those include depositions, experts, things that we need to do trials and we just never know. Sometimes we have several what I would call big trials or trials that are of very serious crimes and those require us to hire certain experts or do certain tests that we might not do in other cases and I can’t predict that. So I upped that a little bit and a couple of the other categories but that is it. So if you have questions I will be happy to try to answer them. (Hawk) I believe that the Special Services could be funded out of the other budget. Do you see anything by statute that says we cannot do that? (Hunt) No except the other budget is the Supplemental Fund which is money we get from the State for reim‐bursement and that, because we’re funding five or six people of that we still have more revenues than expense but it is getting close. So I think if we start putting this type of thing in…. The other reason it is not by statute but as part of the regulations to be in the program it basically says that the supplemental funds are to assist or help the office. In other words the County is not supposed to opt out of funding a program and if you totally opted out of that particular budget I’m not sure that the Public Defender Commission would approve that.

of 175


(Hawk) If they didn’t we’d see what happened. As you might be aware if you’ve been listening to these meetings at all we are struggling here trying our best to find even a small raise for our County employees so that they can at least remain whole and not lose because many of their insurance costs have gone up and we need to find dollars wherever we can. So I would like to suggest that we at least consider that. (McKim) I am in favor of what Councilor Hawk is suggesting as well. I don’t think we’d talking about the entire line but even just the increase, that certainly couldn’t be considered to be opting out of providing a service if all we did is essentially fund the increase of $6,700 or say $10,000 out of the Supplemental Fund. Right now the revenues look good. I just looked at the end of August report and it looks like revenues have exceeded expenses to date by about $50,000. So is there really a compelling reason why we couldn’t just move $10,000 of Special Services over to [the Supplemental Fund]? (Hunt) The problem is I didn’t put it in the [budget advertisement] so I don’t know how that works. (McKim) We’d have to do it in January but we’ve done that before. If all we did is remove $10,000 it would certainly leave you with plenty. (Hunt) The only other thing I would say is that if in the future, as I’ve done in the past, if I would come back to ask for an additional personnel in any category, in the past, at least lately, I’ve taken that out of the Supplemental and so then that again puts a strain on that whether it balances out. (McKim) We certainly realize it is not a bottomless well. I do see that. McKim made a motion to set line 30.0001 Special Services from $60,000.00 to $50,000.00. Hawk seconded. (McKim) I would certainly support the additional appropriation in January in the Supplemental in that amount. (Hawk) We will have to do it. Motion passed by voice vote. (McKim) In general how are the caseloads holding up? (Hunt) Alright so far. I would say we haven’t – we don’t get paid for misdemeanors and when football season starts we tend to get a lot of alcohol offenses which run the caseloads up but we don’t get reimbursed for those. So so far we’re doing okay. I would say we do have more serious cases than we have had before but we haven’t had a big increase in just total caseloads. (McKim) Thank you. Also I just wanted to welcome Ms. Stuffle. (Hawk) When you’re looking at both of these budgets and the salaries as split some in one and some in the other, it is my hope that you folks as well as other departments will assist us in figuring out what the total is so that we’re not having to work so hard to figure out what the salary is and what the increase is so that we could know, just by looking, are you giving them the State‐required increase for the ones that are supposed to and then the ones that are supposed to be getting the County increase. That was hard to try to figure out. (Hunt) Right, and I agree and if it can be put in a simpler form I’m all for that. Yes, as we noted here, I think I’ve explained this the best I can, there is a committee on the State level that decides about pay raises for certain State officials including judges. This particular year they determined that judges, prosecutors and certain others at a certain level would get a 2.2% pay raise. That occurred July 1st because the State is on that fiscal budget. We are asking that start January 1st for myself and Michael and then the other people are comparable to the Prosecutor’s office and we just put the $1,000 in those and we split it up.

of 175


(Hawk) The Prosecutor’s office, the ones that you’re saying are comparable, would not get the State raise either. They would get the either the County raise if we’re able to give one or not. (Hunt) The Prosecutor and the Chief Deputy already got their raise; their other people would get a County raise if there is a raise, yes. Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 Budget for Public Defender 1000‐271 with the amount of $1,127,228.45 in the 10s; $8,000.00 in the 20s; $88,150.00 in the 30s; and zero in the 40s; for a total of $1,223,378.45. Jones seconded. After a call for public comment, Stonecipher called roll: Hawk – yes Jones – yes Yoder – yes Cobine – yes McKim – yes Munson – yes Dietz – yes Motion passed. Supplemental Public Defender Fee 1200‐000 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for Supplement Public Defender Fee with the amount of $814,229.69 in the 10s; zero in the 20s; zero in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total of $814,229.69. Jones seconded. (Hunt) This is simply the Supplemental Fund and it only includes salary and benefits and so I’ve just done the proposed increase and that is it. After a call for public comment, Stonecipher called roll: Dietz – yes Munson – yes Cobine – yes Hawk – yes Yoder – yes Jones – yes McKim – yes Motion passed. Convention Visitor and Tourism 1127‐000 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for Convention Visitor and Tourism with the amount of zero in the 10s; zero in the 20s; $1,836,794.00 in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total of $1,836,794.00. Jones seconded. (Mike Campbell, Convention & Visitors Commission) With me here is Talisha Coppock and Mike McAfee and Shawn Hanlin, who is also on the Commission. So as far as the budget that we are requesting you see that we have an increase year‐over‐year but tax revenues are sufficient in order to cover the increases. So we are

of 175


requesting $1,477,963 for the Visitors’ Center, Commissioners’ expense, professional fees and Convention Center services round out the total. (Cobine) I would be curious to hear a little bit more about the nature of the increases and what different things are [you] going to be doing or what things are more expensive that you have been doing all along? (Mike McAfee) We are budgeting up to 3% for raises. That is a max, we probably won’t even give that much. That is just a part of it. Quite a bit of it goes into just increases in costs of overhead and operating expenses. But every increase we get goes right into marketing and promotion for us. We try to put as much as we can into sales efforts, marketing efforts, more digital advertising and that type of stuff. (Talisha Coppock) And this aspect for the Convention Services for the Convention Center, ours will be going into convention incentives. So we will reduce the room rental in return for a number of overnight rooms a group can bring in because we use it as a leverage to get more business in. And then also building maintenance is a sub‐stantial part of this budget as well just to keep it fresh and new. There will be new carpeting going in in January on the second floor. The way we sell that building is based on how it looks and feels to a group and so that is why it is important to maintain it. (Hawk) Just for the public to understand when they’re looking at this budget, Commissioners’ expense does not go to the Commissioners. Do you want to explain what is covered under Commissioners’ expense? (Campbell) That is a good point. In the Commissioners’ expense we do use that for a couple of different things that come up throughout the year. If there is something unanticipated that funding is there. In the past we’ve funded different studies out of this expense line item. But primarily what we’ve used it for is incentives for booking. So our business, the tourism business, is really fundamentally designed toward incentivizing people to come to Bloomington and Monroe County rather than other locations. So an incentive to make it more attractive for those groups to stay with us rather than another location is what those funds are primarily used for. (McKim) Also for the benefit of the public, where does the revenue for this budget come from? (Campbell) The revenues primarily come from the Innkeeper Tax which is levied on all overnight stays. There is a 5% tax that is split among the organizations. (McKim) So not a penny of this comes from either property tax or income tax? (Campbell) Correct. (McKim) Speaking of Innkeepers Tax then, we’ve had a couple of new hotels come online recently. How are the Innkeepers Tax revenues looking? (Campbell) Well that’s one reason for the jump in tax revenues is that at this point we’re tracking about 8% ahead year over year. A lot of that has to do with new supply in the market and that the tax is being drawn in from those new opportunities to have people stay in Bloomington. (McAfee) In 2014 we finished 49,000 room nights ahead of 2013 and right now we are 15,000 room nights ahead of last year. (McKim) So are new hotels bringing the rates down at all? (McAfee) Yes, average daily rate is down a couple of dollars in the market for the year and that is due to competition.

of 175


(McKim) And how is Sunday through Thursday business looking? Is that changing or is it still basically you’re full on the weekends and kind of empty during the week? (Campbell) The largest amount of increase we’ve had over the course of the year has been on the weekends. There has been some uptick during the week in demand but the overall average has stayed the same or gone down through the week. (Hawk) I notice that you don’t have anything in there for maintenance and there was an agreement some time ago. (Coppock) It is a different budget. I think there is a Capital Improvement budget that you will talk about next. In ours we have $117,000. Under that Convention Center Services line $117,000 of that is for maintenance. After a call for public comment, Munson called the question. Stonecipher called roll: Yoder – yes Dietz – yes Munson – yes Jones – yes Cobine – yes Hawk – yes McKim – yes Motion passed. Convention Center Operating 4005‐000 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for Convention Center Operating with the amount of zero in the 10s; $5,000.00 in the 20s; $572,688.00 in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total of $577,688.00. Jones seconded. (Coppock) The Convention Center is moving into its 25th year. This revenue reflects what is brought in from room rentals, percentage that we receive from catering and other services. So that money comes in, it gets deposited at the County, and then we get it back out through these line items. So it is primarily the manage‐ment contract for all the personnel, insurance, those types of expenses and then utilities type expenses, basic operations and it is a flat budget this year. After a call for public comment, Stonecipher called roll: Munson – yes McKim – yes Jones – yes Hawk – yes Dietz – yes Yoder – yes Cobine – yes Motion passed.

of 175


Convention Center Debt 4602‐000 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for Convention Center Debt with the amount of zero in the 10s; zero in the 20s; $637,000.00 in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total of $637,000.00. Jones seconded. (Campbell) This account is to pay on the loan for the property procured around the Convention Center and then also for the loan for upgrades for that Center. (Cobine) What is the lifetime left on that? (Coppock) 2020 and 2021; there are six different loans that make up that for the different parcels that were purchased and so they start ending in 2021. One has a balloon payment that will need to be refinanced if we haven’t done anything before then with that property. (Munson) What is the source of revenue for this fund? (Coppock) The Innkeepers Tax. There is about $150,000 that comes in from the properties that were purchased and so there are 30 residential and six commercial units that pay into this fund as well. I think at this point there is about $450,000 that has been built up and another five years in 2020 we could use part of that for that balloon payment. (McKim) Is there any prepayment penalty on any of the debt service? (Coppock) I don’t know. We’ve asked our loan officer for some detail on that so I could find that out. (Campbell) That is something we anticipate doing but we don’t have the answer at this point. After a call for public comment, Stonecipher called roll: Hawk – yes Jones – yes Yoder – yes Cobine – yes McKim – yes Munson – yes Dietz – yes Motion passed. Convention Visitor Capital Improvement/Maintenance 4909‐000 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for Convention Visitor Capital Improvement/Maintenance with the amount of zero in the 10s; zero in the 20s; $75,000.00 in the 30s; and zero in the 40s; for a total of $75,000.00. Jones seconded. (Campbell) This account is for capital improvements primarily to the properties which we do have in our charge, primarily the Convention Center and the Visit Bloomington offices. We use this for planned capital improve‐ments and also for unanticipated capital improvements that might come up throughout the year. (Munson) What is the source of revenue? (Campbell) This is derived from the Innkeepers Tax.

of 175


After a call for public comment, Stonecipher called roll: Munson – yes Jones – yes Cobine – yes McKim – yes Hawk – yes Yoder – yes Dietz – yes Motion passed. (Munson) Thank you all for all that you do for Bloomington and Monroe County. You do a lot to help or economy and we hope to see many more visitors. COIT Distributive Share Auditor 1121‐002 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for Auditor in the amount of $610,023.03 in the 10s; zero in the 20s; zero in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total of $610,023.03. Jones seconded. (Steve Saulter, Auditor) To my left is my Chief Deputy, Therese Chambers, and over my right shoulder is Becky Border, Financial Director. The budget that we’re presenting to you just has the basic $1,000 raises. We have three employees that will get a one‐year bump. That is basically it because the 20s and 30s will come in another budget. (McKim) Is there in increase in part‐time? (Saulter) Oh yes, I’m sorry. We have a position that is part‐time and we have been able to determine it is about 44 to 45 hours in a pay period and at the current rates we’re looking at $20,000. Therefore, that would be the slight increase in part‐time hourly. Hopefully what we’re planning down the road is the possibility of looking at getting more hours and then bringing this into a full‐time position. Of course we’d have to go through PAC and we understand that. (McKim) Could you not put the extra hourly in Ineligible Deductions? (Saulter) We thought about it for about 10 seconds because after hearing what the Council feels on the Ineligible Deduction funds we decided not to put personnel in there of any kind. (Hawk) I know that you’ve had a lot of turnover in your office. Would you say that salaries being higher would create a situation where you would not be losing people either to other offices in the County or to the private sector? (Saulter) We lost good people. In June of this year we lost both the Payroll person and the Claims person and each situation was a little different but the underlying [reason] was money. I’m glad Marty brought this up because she is my liaison and she knows what we’ve been doing here recently. We’ve been in contact with WIS after we lost the Payroll and Claims people in a short period time, key and important positions in the County, we decided to look further at the job descriptions and we realized that probably almost 50% of the time that these people spend is on internal auditing. They basically audit the work of the financial managers in the other departments. So we’ve been talking to WIS and once we get information we will go to PAC and our goal is to try to bring the salaries up compatible to a financial manager. Nothing against the financial managers of the departments, they work hard; but even the WIS people were totally surprised to realize that almost 50% of the Payroll and Claims positions is internal auditing of the work of the financial managers. Hopefully within the next

of 175


30 days we will have some information. Our plans are to go before PAC and present our case and see what happens. (Hawk) I asked that question because I wanted you to be able to bring the other Council members up to date as well as the public but also as a reminder that every department head that sits there in front of us who loses valued employees because of the salary structure will come to us with the very same story. So sometimes it takes sitting here for a while and knowing that and having to say no when there is no money. It is easier to say yes to everyone. I would love to be able to do but we don’t have the money to say yes to everyone. But I do want you to know that we are listening and hopefully we will be able to address some of the situations there in the Auditor’s office at some point because for years I have said the Auditor’s office is the center of the wheel. If that office is not running smoothly the wheel is not going to turn around, not for the schools, not for the City, not for the library, not for the townships, not for Ellettsville. It takes that Auditor’s office to make sure that payroll is right, Assessed Value is right, the budgets are put together right and it takes long‐term committed County employees to gain that knowledge to be able to make that work right. We’re all going to suffer far more by not having the Auditor’s office fully staffed with competent people fully trained that affects every taxing unit throughout the County. So I’m just saying it is essential that we take a hard look at how we can assist in helping them improve their services to everyone. (Saulter) The success of the Auditor’s office so far in the sense that we’ve been able to restore integrity and at the same time improve the efficiency of government as we go is the staff. I sit at the top and I am the County Auditor but I have a wonderful staff. It starts with the lady to my left as the Chief Deputy, the lady over my shoulder as the Financial Manager, and everyone else in the staff. We’ve worked as a unit and a team even though we’re probably two people short. So again thank you very much but don’t thank me, thank the staff. (Jones) I certainly agree that the staff is incredibly important in every office in the County. The Auditor’s office certainly carries amazing responsibility. I was curious, in your job descriptions what is the general education level that is required? (Saulter) Any of the job descriptions? (Jones) Just in general. (Saulter) In general at least a high school diploma and adequate experience pertaining to the job in question. (Jones) So no one is required further education? (Saulter) Well I think the Financial Director requires a college degree. I’m not certain if there are any others that have a specific educational requirement. (Hawk) Well you can have every degree in the world and if you can’t figure out how to add and subtract and make these books work it will make no difference. I mean look what we’re having to pay someone to come in and try to get out books balanced. It is just time for us to properly reward the people in these offices that keep the wheels moving here. Many of our best employees of the County Auditor in the past have been around forever. They may not have a college degree but they are the ones who know how to put together the numbers that keep us out of trouble and if they are not there we get in big trouble. We know the kind of trouble we’ve had. We’ve spent thousands of dollars and that’s what happens when you get new staff and they’re not trained. (Munson) Thank you for having a flat budget until the bottom line of part‐time and that is the increase of $5,000 there. We may need to revisit your budget because we’re going to be challenged to reduce our deficit overall. So I will support it for now but I just want you to be advised that we will revisit that as well as the cost‐of‐living adjustment amount.

of 175


(Saulter) I understand. After a call for public comment, Stonecipher called roll: Yoder – yes Dietz – yes Munson – yes Jones – yes Cobine – yes Hawk – yes McKim – yes Motion passed. Auditor’s Ineligible Deductions 1216‐000 Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for Auditor’s Ineligible Deductions with the amount of zero in the 10s; $10,000.00 in the 20s; $15,000.00 in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total of $25,000. Jones seconded. (Saulter) This is a normal budget similar to prior years. If you look at this year’s budget you’re going to see a substantially higher budget. That is because we encumbered money over to finish paying the conversion of the software for the property side. We’ve had some issues because we lost the Payroll person in a quick manner we had to bring down Harris, our software vendor, to help with payroll and training. Fortunately when you are an old customer like Monroe County is to Harris you’re going to get charged a $1,000 fee. If we were a new customer we would probably not get charged at least for a year or two because it is hidden in maintenance costs. Our maintenance cost is lower with Harris. So 2015 is out of the ordinary. This [2016] budget of $25,000 is what it would normally be. The way I have it projected right now the cash balance is right under $90,000. From what we’ve been able to determine that needs to be paid between now and the end of the year plus a projection of what is coming in on this fund we think we will end the year with about $100,000. Based upon the budget we’re asking you to approve tonight that will basically get you into 2016 and about three years of the next Auditor’s administration. Then at some point in time it needs to be looked at to possibly bring the 20s and 30s back into the General Fund. Our new system has created a lot of good reports that help us. I’m going to ask Therese who works with the new system whether or not we’re finding more people. (Therese Chambers, Chief Deputy Auditor) We are indeed. Connie Axsom is in the process right now of research several that we’ve ran across so far just in the past month and a half. And I just want to take this opportunity too to thank you all individually for helping us get our new system because we absolutely love it. So thank you. (Hawk) Regarding the Payroll Administrator, will they be working out – I know there was like a delay in getting retirement plans paid – is that something your Payroll person does or that something HR does? Who is supposed to be doing that? (Saulter) PERF? (Hawk) I understand there was just a problem with retirement plans getting paid on time. (Saulter) Our Payroll Administrator does have access into the PERF so I would start with that person first although HR would probably be a close second simply because of the fact the Auditor’s office is trying to work hand‐in‐hand with HR because basically the instructions we’ve given our staff is if an item looks like HR, walks like HR and talks like HR then send it to HR first. We’re trying to have a better line of communication that way. So a lot would depend on what the situation is but the Payroll Administrator would eventually see it and try to fix it accordingly but HR might get involved too.

of 175


(McKim) I wish I had moved the $5,000 from the Auditor’s general budget to this budget. (Munson) Council McKim we can reopen that budget. (McKim) How much of a hardship would that be on the Auditor’s office? (Saulter) It would not be any hardship it is just a matter to keep in mind you have a fund that stability is not very good. We may, for example, with our new software find all kinds of people and all of a sudden that money starts flowing in. We do, if I may add real quickly, there are five or six people that were in the original batch that we found that still owe back taxes and they are all up for tax sale. So you might catch some through the tax sale process. But then that means everyone on that original list which was about 35 to 40 we’ve been able to get the money paid all in at once or on a payment plan. (McKim) We’ve just been scraping all of the other budgets for any increases so I think I am going to do that after we finish this budget. (Hawk) We’ll do what we need to do. (McKim) Since it is advertised at $25,000 we can’t do anything with this one now anyway. (Saulter) No, you can’t. After a call for public comment, Stonecipher called roll: Munson – yes McKim – yes Jones – yes Hawk – yes Dietz – yes Yoder – yes Cobine – yes Motion passed. COIT County Distributive Share Auditor 1121‐000 McKim made a motion to reopen the budget and simultaneously set line 12.7801 part‐time hourly to $15,000. Jones seconded. After a call for public comment, Stonecipher called roll: Hawk – yes Jones – yes Yoder – yes Cobine – yes McKim – yes Munson – yes Dietz – yes Motion passed. COIT County Distributive Share Treasurer 1121‐003

of 175


Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for Treasurer with the amount of $427,372.28 in the 10s; $23,800.00 in the 20s; $33,950.00 in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total of $485,122.28. Jones seconded. (Catherine Smith, Treasurer) Good evening, Councilors; thank you for having us. This is Hans Huffman, Chief Deputy Treasurer. I’m here to present my budget for your approval. So basically it is a flat budget in everything but personnel services. It is actually a smaller budget than even 15 years ago. We can continue to try to keep it low doing a lot of work ourselves, trying to do thing in‐house and trying to do them right the first time so we don’t have to repeat items. One of the things I think that is interesting is we worked very, very hard with people in tax crisis to get them on payment plans and get them to pay their taxes on time so that we collect a very high percentage of taxes first time around compared to other counties. We do this by really knowing the people, handling the bills ourselves a lot, and working with our constituents. Obviously our work increases every year. As you heard from the group with the Visitors Bureau, we have more hotels, well we collect all that Innkeepers Tax. We collect lots of taxes you guys probably don’t think about. You obviously think a lot about property taxes but we do many different taxes. So as we move forward, our workload does increase. We know nobody has any money to give anybody anything and we respect that. We respect the work that you have to do but we are asking for an increase in the personnel services lines. (McKim) So this budget includes both a new position and an upgrade of an existing position, is that correct? (Smith) Actually the position that we’re requesting is not really new, it was taken away last year and it is a restored position; yes, and an upgrade and the upgrade is this person has been well below everybody else across the County and this is the position that we lost that create the – sat empty for four months and we got behind in the work. This is a very critical position. (McKim) What is the current classification of that position? (Smith) It is a PAT II. (McKim) And it has gone through PAC from my understanding and it has been sent to WIS for reclassification? (Smith) Yes and even as far as when we did the original WIS study we stopped just short of doing a financial managers and this position was identified then as too low and it just has been that way for years and unfor‐tunately this is an extremely critical position in this County and no one is going to work and stay working even with the promise of an upgrade down the road if they continually do not get it and we just can’t – you saw how expensive it is when there is no one doing this position and this position cannot be done by anybody else in the department. We have a very small department anyway and this is the person who has to be kept separate from the other people to keep the money separate. (Cobine) When this came through PAC not too long ago, these two positions I recalled from last year when I was sitting on the other side of this desk watching things go on, Council at the time I remember was very reluctant to proceed with those positions before the result of the whole reconciliation had gone through and I recall thinking at the time that seemed like a prudent, conservative way of dealing with things but when we were looking at this again with PAC I kind of felt like in the long run this may have contributed somewhat to the problems of the office which I know you certainly have advocated all along. So I have a similar feeling about this as I did with the – as Councilor Hawk said, it is easier to say yes to everybody than to say no so I’m very much of the same opinion on this as I was with the Plan Commission. It seems like a pretty critical issue to address in some way and I very much hope that we are able to do that. But again, there is a little bit of procedure built up in this in terms of waiting to hear back from WIS in terms of what they come back with their analysis too. (Dietz) Rolling back the clock about a year I vaguely recall being in support of moving forward with this and I think for the same reasons that have already been articulated with regard to other positions there are some that we probably need to invest in to keep our house in order and I will be supporting this.

of 175


(Yoder) My concern is moving forward with 0003 without the WIS recommendation coming back and waiting until we get that information. I would be more comfortable with that. It just seems perhaps premature for that position. I just want to have that WIS recommendation to look at. The restoring of the position which would be 0004 we’ve had a long conversation about that and I realize that the department has struggled with fewer people and in the case of doing the right thing for the County I will support – I mean it is so hard because of what we’re looking at financially with our County, it is really tough – I’m leaning toward supporting adding this position but I just realize once you add somebody it is really hard to ever go back and it is just tough. But I would like to wait on that WIS classification until we have more information. So that’s kind of where I am and I am processing this. It is a tough decision because I know you need it and yet I know that the County is really looking at a shortage this year, so that’s where I am right now. We talked earlier and I am in support of it but I just didn’t know where we would be County‐wise. (Munson) So Treasurer I appreciate where you are with staffing and I also appreciate where we are with all departments and our projected deficit and so I am reluctant to increase the Financial Cash Book salary by $6,475 at this time. With other departments we have said we want to wait to see what the comprehensive review of salaries will turn up and we need to talk about this County‐wide considering all departments. So I would rather see a reduction on that particular line but I think we should have another round of questions and comments before I would make any motion. (Yoder) So just to clarify from the Treasurer, we have sent it off to WIS we just haven’t received the information back; is that correct? (Treasurer) This is the reclassification I’ve been asking the 7‐1/2 years I’ve been Treasurer. Okay now it has cost us $150,000 recently to work on a project where that when the person walked out the door the banks were balanced to the penny, every single bank was balanced to the penny. We had no backup plan, we had no strategic plan, and we had no one to assist in that. At the time the Council decided that we should wait several months before somebody was hired. During that time the books went undone because you had to have somebody to actually do the work. In addition to that the person left because they were promised years before that the reclassification would happen. Now what we stand to lose is a person who has now been trained to do that and if that person walks out the door we’re going to be right in the same situation with no backup. Now you guys are the financial body. I will do any kind of work. I will work as hard as I can work, try to explain things. We keep talking about big errors in the Treasurer’s department but the error that we had was nobody to do the work and no trained person to do the work and the work sat undone for four months and when the person came in to do the work they had a giant backlog with no training from the previous person. That is the risk we have right now is the knowledge walking out the door. Now I just want to be very honest with you because I won’t be Treasurer much long and I want you to hear it from me, someone who has lived this. I don’t like to make mistakes. I like every ‘i’ dotted and every ‘t’ crossed. No one wants to stand up here and talk about this but let’s at least address what the real issue is. The issue was not some big problems which we keep talking about but no one to do the work and no one to do the work resulted in a person leaving because they were still a PAT II doing high‐level accounting work. You know we talked earlier about who paid the bills. I think it was someone on this side asked, “Who pays retirement?” Well I’ll tell you who pays retirement, the Auditor’s office and the Treasurer’s office and he receipts money, the Treasurer receives all the money in that we take all the money in physically that used to go to the Auditor’s office. So now we’re assuming all this extra work that is growing and I just see a possible worse train wreck than the one we have. And I just think I need to be honest about it. There is not a person out there that I don’t care about looking at you guys. You’re just wonderful people and I see what you have to go through and I feel sorry that there is not enough money to go around. But I just don’t want us to dig ourselves into another hole and spend more money we don’t have. (Munson) Which is more important in terms of your operations – because you know your operations better than we do – is it increasing the salary of the Financial Cash Book line or is it restoring the Deputy Judgement salary line?

of 175


(Smith) Councilor Munson that is an excellent idea and without any doubt it is upgrading that position. The stability of that position is probably one of the most critical positions in this County and so upgrading it is my highest concern, even if I have to cut my own salary to do it. (Munson) Thank you. Knowing that certainly influences my thinking. So let me ask my fellow Councilors their thoughts. (McKim) Just given the overall size of the deficit I definitely can’t support the new position – I know you call it a restored position – I can’t support that position at this time. On the upgraded position since we don’t have the results back from WIS we can’t actually approve that reclassification now but we can still budget for it. In fact, that was WIS’s recommendation is that we budget for it even though they didn’t have the results back yet. I appreciate hearing the prioritization that you were willing to put on the stability of the existing position. Without seeing the WIS results yet I can’t guarantee that I will vote for the reclassification when it comes time but I am willing to leave it in the budget for the reclassification as things are right now. McKim made a motion to set line 10.0004 Deputy Judgments to zero. Jones seconded. (Dietz) As I mentioned before I plan to support the category one budget as presented. We’ve been hearing this same request for years. We need a separation of duties and I think that needs to be funded as a priority. (Cobine) I recall also from the PAC meeting where we sent this on to WIS a little bit of discussion about the nature of the work in the office and the way that when you don’t have enough people being able to do good customer service for all the people that come through the door and at the same time having to switch from that to the kind of detailed reconciliation of making sure that when this came in it got recorded the right way, it is two very different modes of doing work and when you don’t have the opportunity to sort of do those in chunks of time together it is going to lead to more errors and it is the sort of thing you’re talking about where it is not just one big one but little things will creep in when you’re having to constantly switch back and forth like this and that. So that is an important consideration to take in mind with this along the lines of what Councilor Dietz was saying. (McKim) I still want to remind everyone of that deficit that is not dropping very quickly. We’ve been pretty good with holding the line on increases in costs so far so I hope we don’t backslide on that. (Hawk) You mean new people? Or any increases? I don’t intend to support any new positions or increases other than what we have suggested as far as the cost‐of‐living raise and just hope that at the end of the day we’re still going to be able to provide that raise. Every time we suggest that we’re going to just means that we’re not sincere truly about trying to give a small cost‐of‐living raise. (Yoder) So to add to what Councilor McKim was saying, we have not received any recommendation from WIS on that position and the recommendation was budget for it but we still would have to vote on whether or not we’re going to do it based on whatever we received from WIS. If it comes back from WIS and in fact this person has been doing the work of this higher classification it has been the practice of our Council to honor that and to say we recognize the work that has been done by this individual and we are going to compensate accordingly. In my experience on the Council that has been the practice. (McKim) To make it go into effect immediately rather than at the next budget cycle. (Yoder) And if we budget for it then it is taken care of. If it comes back and it is not then it doesn’t get spent. We still have to vote on it but it would just sit there and revert back to the County. That is my understanding. Do I have this correct?

of 175


(Flory) That is correct. You will have an opportunity to either increase it or decrease it when you do your final vote and you would have to change the Salary Ordinance in accordance with whatever salary is to be paid out. So there are many steps built in here where you can either increase it later or decrease it later. The WIS report should be coming in I hope in the next few days with an opportunity to report back to you before budgets are closed out. (Smith) I’d like to volunteer to cut $2,500 out of my budget and I will cut it out of my own pocket if we need to use it I will be happy to do that. Would that help you? That will pay not quite half but very close. (McKim) Remember the motion on the floor right now is just to eliminate the new position, Deputy Judgments. (Smith) Oh, I’m sorry. (McKim) No, sorry, I was just reminding. (Robinson) This doesn’t pertain to 0004 but 0003 was a PAT II midpoint and this new number doesn’t fall into the salary grid so I’m wondering what the reclassification was supposed to be. PAT IV? So that salary for 35 hours should be $41,286. (McKim) Once we clear the current motion…. (Munson) Yes, we can go back to that. Thank you for watching that. So Council we have a motion and a second to reduce line 10.0004 Deputy Judgments to zero. After a call for public comment, Stonecipher called roll: Munson – yes Jones – yes Cobine – no McKim – yes Hawk – yes Yoder – yes Yoder – yes Dietz – no Motion passed. (Munson) Now we have further discussion about this budget; that is for line 10.0003 Financial Cash Book and the corrected amount for this particular position should be…. McKim made a unanimous consent motion to set line 10.0003 Financial Cash Book to $41,286. Motion passed with no objection. (Smith) Can I ask what that increase would be from last year? (Dietz) $5,493. (Smith) Okay so as I mentioned earlier the offer that I’m going to make to pay out of my own pocket the expenses that would now clear more than half of that. (McKim) I couldn’t hear what you said.

of 175


(Smith) Okay, I’m sorry. So if I will cover up to $2,500 expenses out of my own pocket next year to meet you guys half way. I just feel like this is so critical that I’d be willing to do that. (Hawk) You’re not allowed to do that. (Smith) Okay, $500 out of travel and education and $2,000 out of contract services. (Hawk) We’re not allowed to do that. (McKim) Well hang on, she just had some things – I agree that we’re not going to ask the Treasurer to take it out of her own pocket. What about part‐time hourly? Or do you use all of that? (Smith) Well we could certainly reduce it by that and come back to you if we have – we are getting a little bit better every year. We are trying not to spend a penny more than we have to obviously at any time for anything but we do rely on that heavily. Many times Marty has said, “Come back if you really need more money,” and we’ve been very good about not having to do that but we’ve pulled some late night to assure that happens. But if that is what this takes then that is what we will have to do. (McKim) I’m going to support it as is. I might support a reduction if somebody else made the motion but I’m going to support it as is. (Cobine) The only other increase is this miscellaneous printing if I’m looking at that right. Could you talk about the nature of that perhaps and is that another possible source of funds? (Smith) Miscellaneous printing is what is it costs to print out tax bills and bill them. So the only reason we’ve had that steady with postage going up and the expense of paper going up is because we try to get as many things out via email as we can but that takes manpower to do that. (Cobine) Does the $5,000 increase – again, I’m assuming that is sort of a best guest not to necessarily question the integrity of that number – is that something that is based on the increase in postage costs or the anticipated number of actual paper mailings you’re going to have to do? (Huffman) For that line we moved it from postage up to cover printing. When we sent out tax bills we got a much better postage rate so we spent less there but we still have other costs we have to do with printing and when you have to print envelopes every other year or so there are costs associated with that that we will need to cover. (Munson) Council we have a revised motion here. Councilor Yoder would you restate for us please? Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for COIT County Distributive Share Treasurer 1121‐003 with the amount of $382,135.32 in the 10s; $23,800.00 in the 20s; $33,950.00 in the 30s; zero in the 40s; for a total of $439,885.32. Jones seconded. A call was made for public comment. (McKim) I would very much like to support that additional position. I’m looking at the bottom line right now and it just seems insurmountable to be able to give a cost‐of‐living increase to employees. But also I appreciate your prioritizing, I like that when department heads are willing to not just say we need everything, everything is important, but you’re willing to prioritize and tell us really clearly what will benefit your department. We know you know that better than we do. (Hawk) Tell me where 10.0003, what dollar amount?

of 175


(McKim) $41,286. (Hawk) Okay so everybody is voting to do that without the WIS? (McKim) Right, with the understanding that doesn’t give them the reclassification but we anticipate it in a matter of days before budgets are even over. (Hawk) So you anticipate it is going to be approved? (McKim) No, I don’t think we’re saying that. We have no idea what it is going to be. (Smith) We were not negligent about getting it done, it has been done for months; it is just getting it back. So sorry for the inconvenience associated with that. (McKim) No, I know and Mr. Flory asked for it right away and they preferred to just deliver it along with the full salary study. So I know that worked to your detriment in this case. (Hawk) I think that would end up being the same as the First Financial in the Auditor’s office and those positions are not anywhere near the same responsibility. So I don’t anticipate it will come back from PAC and be the same as the First Financial. I mean there is just no way, they just don’t have the same responsibility at all. (McKim) Well we would have to reopen it and adjust that. (Yoder) Yes we could reopen and adjust it. We are not approving the reclassification. (Hawk) But you are approving a bottom line everything in the 10s can be moved around. So if we put in a dollar amount that we are approving, and I’m not saying that anybody would do this but they could, if they have dollars left over in one line they could move it down to hourly or whatever. Folks that is the way it works. (McKim) Right, that’s why before adoption if it comes in lower and we approve something lower then we will have to make sure we clean that up and deappropriate it. (Hawk) But if it doesn’t come in before that. Why not vote on it the way it is and then increase it if it comes in? When do we make a practice of approving something before we get the report back? I mean we just don’t. (Jones) I believe we’re doing this because WIS recommended it. (Flory) It is almost six of one and half a dozen of the other. If you have it highlighted that you want to make sure by the time you wrap up your budgets, you know where this is. One problem with taking it out now is you’ll think that it is out there but if you know when the WIS report comes and it is higher you want to put it back in you won’t have that in the back of your mind as you’re looking at all these levels of these budgets and what you need to cut. So if you’ve kind of made the commitment now that if it does come back higher from WIS one of your priorities would be to fund it at this higher level then there may be a benefit to putting it in the budget right now knowing you’re going to come back and look at it at the end as opposed to taking it out now and having a false feeling that you’ve just saved six or seven thousand dollars. Where is it more effective for you to have the money: out there possibly to be put back in at the end or in there right now so that you know when you’re looking at other hard decisions you don’t have the cushion of thinking we’ve saved six or seven thousand dollars over here? Because you really haven’t, you’ve almost made a commitment that you will be putting it back in would be the only way I would summarize it.

of 175


(McKim) I would have approached this differently had we been at the beginning of the reclassification process rather than hopefully only days away from the end. I know the Treasurer has been working very hard on this; I know HR has been working on it. (Hawk) There are deadlines to get that back before budget hearings so that we’re not sitting here debating this at budget hearings. There is supposed to be a deadline, I think it is March to get it into PAC to get it back from WIS before we ever start any of those. We need to get back to those deadlines so that department heads have a realistic expectation when they come to us for their budgets. (Munson) Okay, we have a motion and second. (Dietz) Is this the final vote? (Munson) This is the final vote. It is to reduce the 10s by $30,575. (McKim) Well that’s not actually the motion; the motion was on the bottom line, right? (Munson) Oh, yes. (McKim) That is the effect of it. (Munson) And she read it already so it is what you see on your screen. Stonecipher called roll: Munson – yes McKim – yes Jones – yes Hawk – no Dietz – no Yoder – yes Cobine – no Motion passed.

*** *** *** (Munson) We have a housekeeping question from Ms. Robinson before we recess. (Robinson) I will pull the fund up for you. On Tuesday night County Buildings was approved with an incorrect number in the fringe. It has been corrected on this worksheet. The full‐time health number did not get reduced to 21.5%. That is the only change in this fund with a different bottom line. County General‐County Buildings 1000‐161 Yoder made a motion to reopen County General‐County Buildings 1000‐161. Jones seconded. Motion passed by voice vote. Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for County General‐County Buildings 1000‐161 with the amount of $129,501.73 in the 10s; $122,000.00 in the 20s; $1,448,087.63 in the 30s; and zero in the 40s; for a total of $1,699,589.36. Jones seconded.

of 175


(McKim) I’m still going to reopen and I’ve been working with Ms. Purdie to try to figure out if a little bit of the Honeywell expenses can be distributed to a couple of other funds. That is still pending, it is just going to take us longer to finish the analysis. After a call for public comment, Stonecipher called roll: Hawk – no Jones – yes Yoder – yes Cobine – yes McKim – yes Munson – yes Dietz – yes Motion passed. (Hawk) To be clear I’m not objection to your making the corrections, it is just I didn’t vote in favor of this budget to begin with. County General ‐ Veterans Affairs – 1000‐012 Yoder made a motion to reopen the 2016 budget for Veterans Affairs. Jones seconded. Motion passed by voice vote. Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for County General‐Veterans Affairs 1000‐012 with the amount of $64,049.39 in the 10s; $365.00 in the 20s; $1,050.00 in the 30s; and zero in the 40s; for a total amount of $65,464.39. Jones seconded. Hawk called the question. Stonecipher called roll: Munson – yes Jones – yes Cobine – yes McKim – yes Hawk – yes Yoder – yes Dietz – yes Motion passed. Storm Water Management 1197‐000 Yoder made a motion to reopen the budget. Jones seconded. Motion passed by voice vote. Yoder made a motion to approve the 2016 budget for Storm Water Management 1197‐000 with the amount of $314,934.15 in the 10s; $146,000.00 in the 20s; $572,215.85 in the 30s; $100,500.00 in the 40s; for a total amount of $1,133,650.00. Jones seconded. Stonecipher called roll: Yoder – yes Dietz – yes Munson – yes Jones – yes

of 175


Cobine – yes Hawk – yes Motion passed. (Munson) Is housekeeping completed? (Robinson) Yes. When the Commissioners funds were taken out and the Surveyor’s amount in line 10.0004 was reduced to $11,344 the fringe, FICA and PERF were not adjusted. Councilor McKim asked me to give him the difference and I didn’t realize that this fund should stay the same for the bottom line. So that makes Drainage 30.0021 slightly higher for $285,115.85 and the bottom line to stay as advertised. (Yoder) Didn’t we just do that? (McKim) I thought we just voted on it. (Munson) I thought you were saying there was something additional, I’m sorry. You don’t need to tell us what we already did because we done it. RECESS (So Council I think this concludes our budget hearings tonight and I want to thank everybody who has been sitting to our left doing the hard work of keeping the numbers together. We will recess until September 8th, that Tuesday, at 5:00 p.m. here in the Nat U. Hill meeting room of the Courthouse. Thank you.

*** *** ***

of 175


The Minutes from the Budget Session of the Monroe County Council held on September 3, 2015, were approved on ________________________________, 2015.

Monroe County Council

Aye Nay _______________________________ ________________________________ Cheryl Munson, President Cheryl Munson, President _______________________________ ________________________________ Shelli Yoder, Vice‐President Shelli Yoder, Vice‐President _______________________________ ________________________________ Ryan Cobine, Member Ryan Cobine, Member _______________________________ ________________________________ Rick Dietz, Member Rick Dietz, Member _______________________________ ________________________________ Marty Hawk, Member Marty Hawk, Member _______________________________ ________________________________ Lee Jones, Member Lee Jones, Member _______________________________ ________________________________ Geoff McKim, Member Geoff McKim, Member Attest: ________________________________ Steve Saulter, Monroe County Auditor

of 175

October 27, 2015 at 5:30 PM Work Session Agenda - AMENDED · 10/27/2015 · 1 | Page October 27,...

Documents

Transcript of October 27, 2015 at 5:30 PM Work Session Agenda - AMENDED · 10/27/2015 · 1 | Page October 27,...