Plan Commission - Regular Meeting

We'll call the August 20th plan commission meeting to order. We have a roll call, please. Yes. Jason Carneahan here. Bill Hartman. Bill Van present. Sandy Harrison here. Jerry Yoder here. Frank Palver here. Suzanne Davis here. Angie Holt here. Tyler Lanning here. Alicia Rogers here. Mike Mccerowitch. Andrew Cruz here. Chris Gmer. Meredith Wright here. Okay, we will stand for the pledge of allegiance. United States.

Now have a moment if someone would like to lead us in a word of prayer. Our heads. Father God, we just uh come to you just now, Lord, in this uh plan commission meeting, Lord, and we invite you in to uh give us clarity. We want to make decisions for you and uh for your kingdom and for the residents of this county. And uh Lord, we just want to praise you and we just can't wait to see what you have for this this great county. Father, in Jesus name. Amen. Should have all received the minutes from the previous meeting or I guess from the June meeting. Uh if there's no additions or corrections would entertain a motion to approve. I'll make a motion to approve.

I will second. Motion and a second to approve the minutes. All those in favor say I. I. Oppos? Same. Minutes are approved. Also, the claims from June and July were in there to review. Same. If there's no questions or corrections, entertain a motion to approve. I'll move to approve. I'll second it. We have a motion and a second to approve the claims from June or July. All those in favor say I. I. All oppose. Same. Okay. Claims are approved. No old business. Correct, Chris?

Yes, they're correct.

So, new business, a new Butler ETJ agreement. Um so Butler is currently in the process of rewriting their comprehensive plan and um Indiana code requires that when a comprehensive plan is a new comprehensive plan is written or a or a rewrite is happening um an interlocal agreement between the municipalities and the county is required. Um we have an interlocal agreement um with Auburn um Garrett Waterlue Butler currently has an ETJ. Um there's just no agreement as far as um kind of spelling out the the uh facts of who does what um for that. And also um there's no vote on this today. We're just uh looking at this. Butler will be reviewing theirs I believe at the next plan commission meeting. Um it does require a public hearing from the city of Butler. Um for ours it's just basically relinquishing um zoning authority um from county to Butler. Um again currently there already is an ETJ so it's already um done but it's just having the interlocal agreement um in place. Um you've most of you I believe have seen the ones between Auburn Garrett and Waterlue. Those have been done um over the last probably five or six years. Um this language is very similar um almost exact. The parts that are highlighted in yellow are parts that um the city of Butler uh mayor and city planner need to review to see if that's something that they want to do. Um for instance um I believe for Garrett sewer hookup is

required for annexation only. So they will not do sewer hookup outside of their municipal limits. So that for instance is is taken out. Um but for Auburn obviously they have Bear Creek, Diamond Lake Estates, those sort of things that are part of um their sewer that is outside of their jurisdiction. So they do require hookup. Um so that's why that's highlighted. Um on page four it's just um those are the standards that um we have used for the city of Butler um or sorry city of Auburn Garrett and Waterlue for the street sidewalk and culde-sacs. Those are per an exhibit B on page 12. Um I doubt those will be changing but again just highlighted for them to review with their street department. And then um addressing is just highlighted so they are aware of what um the addressing requirements are for the county um currently already practice this but again it's just putting it in writing um as to um who does what. Um on page five um again it's all similar similar information as to what they do now. um just highlighting um what it is, for instance, their board of zoning appeals um hearing officer or or what type of requests um are allowed to go before the uh board of zoning appeals in the ETJ. Um so again, we're not looking to approve this today. They are looking at extending the map um of or the boundaries of the ETJ. Those are in your packets on two separate maps. Hopefully you printed them. If you printed them back toback, you're going to be doing a lot of flipping. Um, if you printed it one-sided like I did and I did for Angie

because I'm a nice guy. Um, you will uh put them you can put them side by side. Um, currently the city of Butler practices extra territorial jurisdiction up to County Road 24 over to County Road 28. um their south boundaries of County Road 32 or West Southshore Drive um ends at their town limits but extends to those uh uh over to County Road 28 and then over to County Road 63 and does kind of some little jog um up to um matching where their town limits are and then over to County Road sorry but that's just a boundary over county road 61 and follows the boundary north to 24. Um they are looking to kind of square that off. um would allow them to practice extr territorial jurisdiction planning and zoning um for areas that they may um want to annex in the future. As we've talked in the past, um ETJs are are are more so used by municipalities for areas that they would wish to annex so that when development happens within the ETJ, it matches what their zoning is. So, for instance, we wouldn't if if we would do a subdivision within their boundaries, um our ordinance requires them to be um depending on the zoning anywhere from um 15,000 square feet, I believe, up to two acres. So, if it's considered agricultural, you guys know we require two acres for agricultural. If they would annex that, it wouldn't match any of their um require or their zoning districts as far as um subdivision lot size. Um wouldn't probably meet their setback requirements as well. So, it's more used and geared towards um when they're ready to annex those properties.

Um go ahead. on on the boundary of 24. Is that just the south side? The boundary of 24 is the north Oh, yes. Sorry. Just the south side of 24. South side of Yep. South side of 24. Yep. That's already

And that's already ETJ. Yes. So on your maps, um if you want to look at your the one that has the red boundary to the south, um that's the new proposed ETJ expansion. Um the gray area um that's not doesn't have a boundary of red is the existing ETJ. So um kind of up for discussion today, uh Andrew Provines, the city planner from Butler is here um as well to answer questions that you have. And Andrew, feel free to jump in if you've got anything additional you want to say about um ETJ. Again, it would be just formalizing what we currently um practice with the city of Butler. Um the proposed expansion is the only thing that would really be quote unquote changing.

I'm here if you have questions. This comes out of a a comprehensive plan that's been trying to get passed for like four or five years. Yeah, it's been through two city planners and it has not been passed. Um, you're the third. I'm the third. I'm the third city planner. Um, and we're we're actually going to do it this time. Um, as far as the ETJ, that was actually not something that I put together. This is actually was presented years ago um by the previous city planner.

Uh, and it is it kind of squares off. There's we're obviously not looking to go further west. That's a very small segment of city um property right there or or city included jurisdiction. It's not like we want to go further there. We want to go further south though because that is a pretty large section that meets that boundary. So kind of square it up with the top side. Uh couple things to note. Um we don't currently uh have really a plan to do anything with this. Chris had mentioned annexation. We actually are not looking to annex anything right now. We're looking to finalize this comprehensive plan, finalize our ETJ and get a formal agreement in place. Um, I call Chris often and I said or I say, "Who's supposed to take care of this in the ETJ?" Because there is no written procedure or this is our responsibility, this is the county's responsibility. So, it's like, "Hey, Chris, want to do the addresses for me or should I be doing those? Hey, Chris, want to do this or should I be doing those?" Because we don't know. Um, there's just not a good layout of here's what is within our jurisdiction and what is not. So,

and to clarify that, what I was meaning about the annexation was isn't immediate annexation. It's over the course of 10, 15, 20 years. So, yeah, as long as your comprehensive plan would be Yep. And it is required by the comprehensive plan. Yeah. And that is something we really would like to get passed in the next couple months. Yeah. It's been sitting out there, like I said, for like four or five years.

And as you guys are aware too, especially when we just discussed um St. Joe's ETJ Indiana code only required prior to 2019 I believe Andrew if that's the date I want to use or 2009 I'm 2009 2019 anyway Indiana code only required municipalities to have an ETJ boundary in their comprehensive plan to be able to practice planning and zoning. The county had no say whether or not up to two miles outside of their jurisdiction if they would if they would be allowed to do that or not. They just Indiana code automatically allowed it. Now with the interlocal agreement, the county has a little bit more control over areas and what's within the actual agreement itself. So um

and our last comprehensive plan um was 2001. Yeah. And it had the existing boundary in there. Yes, but based on the document and obviously this is all up for discussion. So if you guys have any issues with this um feel free to bring them up. The more you take away from me, the less I have to deal with.

And like Chris said, it's not I I didn't want a vote today. I want to get it in front of you guys so you have plenty of time to review. There is not a rush. It's been many years. Um we're going to take it through plan commission. We still have some more things to review on the comprehensive plan. We're making some adjustments. Um something that was not included in that in general. Um before was a um future land use map. So that's something we're putting in as well. You know, these are the areas that we would like to see this type of development. So that's something we're putting in as well because it just wasn't there. We called it out in text um in the in the narrative of the comprehensive plan, but it was never included as a map so people could easily see it. So, we're trying to clarify some of those things and make it easier for people to actually read through.

Is there some growth out your to your south there? Look at um there's not a lot of growth currently. Uh the only real growth right there would have been and it was actually approved in 2022 is a parking area um on a field. Uh trying to remember the exact address, but and Jared, do you remember the exact address of that? That's across from your guys's H&W Transport. It had been approved in 2022 and they had never done anything with it, but it's basically for storing um uh travel trailers before they're down gravel.

They've got a big pile there to spread and and put down a parking lot. They just haven't finalized that yet.

And that was actually in the last few months. But as far as we don't really have any large new development. Forest River is down around that area and they would like to they had they had bought up a chunk and we're going to put up a whole new facility basically. They have not done that because of the downturn in the economy and the demand. They still would like to do that at some point, but currently it's not, hey, we're going to do this in the next few months or anything. It's like, yeah, we'd love to do this sometime in the next, you know, four to five years are on this here, those blue lines, property lines, correct? Y property lines.

Y asking I see there's some very small ones. Here's why it's asking for the growth.

Andrew, I assume that when by expanding the ETJ, it'll also expand the area that the city will be taking care of the building permits. And we actually don't take care of any of our building permits currently. Um the city is small enough and we have a small enough number of permits each year that it is not advantageous for us to retain our own building um inspector. So we actually we put in a inter sorry we put in an improvement location permit. We give that to them. They come to the county. The county gives them a building permit then does the inspection and each year we pay the county for those inspections as part of an agreement. And we actually recently did the same thing with the county's permitting software because it wasn't advantageous for us to get our own permitting software. It was cost prohibitive because of our size. So we actually um rely on the county for that as well. Now we're trying to the county has in my opinion has really good processes. Um you guys um the zoning administrator staff etc have done a really good job at putting together processes. So, I I often run into scenarios where as I'm looking for a procedure, I can't find a good example of a procedure. Um, so I rely on the county, we take your guys' procedure, um, you know, morph it a little bit so it fits our needs and we're really trying to kind of align with how the county does zoning.

So, you basically approve of the location and what's going on, but actually the the actual inspection of the building itself and is run through the county, right? Yep. Well, does this does this come in front of us or does they approve the site and we do the inspection? Exactly. They approve the site where the where the building would be going and we have our own whatever it would be. We have our own plan commission and everything. So, um you know, if we need to go through a development plan, etc., we take that through our own plan commission and give final authorization. Does this follow the same code as the county does for what? For this, you know, as far as their planning and everything. Oh, we have our own.

No, they have their own. We have our own zoning ordinance.

Um, but once again, on a number of areas there, in my opinion, our zoning ordinance is actually pretty good. Um, spells things out. We're making a number of changes now to update things, things that were historical out there that kind of didn't make sense or even building materials. I think there was a section in it that allowed asbestous materials. Um, so some of those, yeah, so some of those things we're trying to update and get those removed, but um, each time we do that revision, our source of let's go here first is the county's ordinance. You know, let's see what the county is doing and then let's try to take that and make it work for us or see if it needs any changes. more questions for Mr. Proines.

One more. How many acres is a new uh the new uh ETJ will involve real? Yeah, I was going to say I haven't done the exact calculation on that. If Chris wants to on his computer here, what's it? Five miles and five miles. No. 71

can't do can't do more than two miles outside of the 716 what I was thinking I also intend obviously before we move forward with this we'll have discussions in our own plan commission but this will come back to you guys for you guys for a recommendation like I said I we wanted to get this in front of you so you had plenty of time to review it and if you know think about it before the next plan commission meeting where we'll be coming to get an actual you know recommendation or no recommendation or 97 about 970 acres total for the new area.

Yeah, but is what I meant is it's five miles. Oh, the length length from east to west and then it looks like just a mile mile. Part of it's just a mile. That's about two and a half east to west and half a mile north to south on the southern border. and a mile on the L. Yeah. Half mile between roads. I'm just going off the roads. Yeah. Every road is supposed to be a mile, half mile,

mile city people trying to I've had enough of it this week. I don't think Suzanne's a city person. She's a country girl. Almost got thrown on the courthouse when arguing with city people. I'm both.

Everybody in the courthouse heard me. There any other questions or concerns about what we have what's been proposed as far as expansion's been like said we've been looking at doing this actually. What's the plan? And then retired Vivian This is finished. When that will get adopted, we would like this to mirror when that approval is or or be shortly after that.

And then Chris, the maybe Andrew, both of you could answer this. By the time this is approved and then recorded and they've got the ETJ, will Butler's uh plan commission what what will be on the day that it's approved? What will be the zoning in this area? So that will be our zoning still grandfathered in or will they already have new? They'll have to they'll have to do a public hearing for this plan

and then correct and then the plan commission would make the recommendation to the the city council. city council would then so the zoning would be could be part of this interlocal agreement. Um problem is that when it changes the zone map is irrelevant. But we would have to create a zoning map um or the newly proposed boundary. Um and then that would have to go through the proper channels through plan commission city council. And I'm actually glad that you brought that up. Um, yeah, because you could have this implemented and in place and then wait three or four months for the zoning process to come.

We this this may get slightly delayed just based on that. Um, something I'd like to do is talk to some of the land owners that are well all the land owners that are in this. So, we have ETJ egg right now. So, we have egg that is meant for our ETJ district. Um, it's rare that we go outside of that for our ETJ. We do have like high indust or high industrial um within our ETJ that we've said okay this is this was industrial we're bringing it in as he or heavy industrial for us. Um our egg is slightly more restrictive than the counties which I don't want to bring in new property that's coming in through an ETJ at more restriction than it currently has. I don't think that's fair to land owners. Um, so something I've been discussing with Chris, uh, is the ability to find out a way, what I would like to do is say in this ETJ, if you're coming in as a, there are a set of historical uses that allow you to do exactly what the county allows you to do today up until the point at which the land is sold, you know, sold to another entity. So, if um, let's say that you wanted to do something with your land, but our new ETJ doesn't allow it, one of two things will happen. I'd either like to change our egg, so it does allow the same thing as the county, which I don't think that's feasible because the county has A1, A2, A3. We just have one egg designation. Um, and I don't want to change that across the board because the other parts of the ETJ have been there since 2001. What I would rather do is say as this comes in, we're going to make an amendment to our um, a district and if you if you have owned the land when this went into place and you continue to own the land, you are allowed to use the historical uses. if you sell off to another party. That's with the understanding that the ETJ, our normal egg, is in place for restriction. So, that's something I'm actually looking at doing with Chris so that we

can not hinder anyone to what they can currently do with their lands. What kind of restriction are you going to put on?

Um, I I don't I would have to literally pull up both side by side. Our uses are just slightly less than the county's uses. The counties are more replete, and that's across the board. This is one of those things where the county has actually accounted for many more uses than we have. Um, and it would just be a process of a variance if it were, you know, or accepted use case. Um, they could go for that to our hearings officer. Um, but I would rather just call them out specifically. Put everything the county has in those accepted uses into the historical uses. That way there's no question. Yes, this is a use by right as long as you own this land before the ETJ went into effect.

So, I pulled up Butler's ordinance real quick and um really the only thing that's not allowed is um um yeah, how did it go away from me? What are you considered a kayo? Uh confined feeding operations above IDM regulations. So you could still have raising of farm animals, agricultural crop production, storage of products, tree farm, plant nursery, single family, manufactured homes, farmstead, orchards, stables. Um those things are all currently in our ordinance as well. The only thing that's not in there is um confined feeding operations that are above IDM regulations. So those could go through a use variance through the BCA if they wanted to. Um, if someone wanted to come in and actually do a confined feeding operation um, with IDM regulations, they could go through the the board of zoning appeals and do a use variance. It's not like it's not allowed at all. It just has to go through a

But there could also be other scenarios where if they wanted to reszone to residential, then if they reszoned inside that ETJ, our residential may be more restrictive than the counties as well. Correct. I want to account for those scenarios. if you've already own the land and these are what you were allowed to do. I don't think it's fair for us to say now you can't do that. So those are I've never actually seen that done around but discussions with Chris I think we can actually do that and I think it would be fair to the citizens that are

yeah you could do that it would just have to be done through a some sort of commitment that runs with the property so title companies can search for that. Um, I was talking to Andrew. The hard the hard thing is is then the city planner becomes when property get transferred police, right? Like he's going to have to figure out or someone whoever has his job is going to have to figure out when properties transfer what's then allowed. So if title companies can find that on a title search, then they know and they can let potential buyers know, hey, this confined feeding operation or whatever it is won't be allowed once this transfers hands. Is that what you're wanting to do? Or whatever it was.

That would just be in the covenant. Correct. It would be a covenant that gets and it's extra work, but yeah, I think that something along those lines would be more fair everybody involved. too that for new buyers, all they're going to see is the Butler Act, right? Their zoning. Right. Right. And that would buyers are going to know we can't do certain things, they'll be on notice of it. If the realtor if the realtor lets them know what the zoning is, right? We get that a lot where someone comes in and says, "Oh, my property is zoned residential and it's zoned agricultural." Aren't we told that all the time, Meredith?

My property is own zoned residential because that's what my realer told me. Well, it's actually zoned agricultural. The the how it's assessed is not how the property is zoned. Assessment is based off of how property is used. So, I'm just saying if they looked at the zoning, they wouldn't think they they'd be able to get away with historical uses just the new zoning. 90% of people buying properties don't look at the zoning. Chris and I were having this same conversation. How do we what's the best way to make people doing research aware? Yeah. of what is and isn't allowed. And the only way to do that really is to have it recorded with the property. Ideally, someone would read the ordinance and say, "Here's what I can and can't do." Oh, I'd love it if people did that. Yeah. But it doesn't always happen. So, Right. It's It's few a few sophisticated Yeah.

buyers that would do that for us don't know to do that. I like it when they call the city planner and say, "Hey, I'm thinking about buying this property. What can I do? Here's what you can do." Yeah. Right. That's nice. That's nice. Any more for Andrew? All right. If you guys have any more questions, let me know.

Does anyone in the public wish to comment on this? I guess it's not really a petition, but on this item, Lyn Reinhardt, 4224, County Road 71. And I guess this kind of came to my attention in recent flight of what had transpired in St. Joe and work with their ETJ. So, I was just curious and I guess I found out a little bit this morning that they the city of Butler will have a hearing. I don't know if that means the property owners will uh individually be notified so to make sure that they're aware of it or not or if that's just a a general public notice. Seems like that those involved should have a a notice the same as a neighbor would on a zoning change or something. So, I don't know if you knew anything about what those requirements are or aren't. And I understand that that has to do with the city uh more so than you. Uh but you will ultimately making the final decision on if you approve it or not. It doesn't sound like you will have a public hearing. I think that should be allowed those people that are part of Decalp County, part of the zoning jurisdiction of the Cal County Plan Commission um before you make the change to turn their properties over to the city of Butler. I guess that that's that's my only comment. Doesn't directly affect me. I don't have any property that would fall within it, but

yeah. So, the uh city of Butler would have their own process for changing the zoning. So, we can't dictate what they do or how it's done. So, I'll leave it up to Andrew to comment on that if he wants. Um I wasn't talking of zoning per se. I'm talking about the expansion of their ETJ which would give them zoning authority ultimately. Correct. And so talking about the process get there.

Correct. Public hearings are required for the change in zoning. Public hearings are not required for intellect. So the zoning change for Butler changing it from a county designation to a city designation would be done through the city of Butler. The interlocal agreement is not required to have a public hearing. It's public meeting gets voted on as a recommendation from the plan commission to the county commissioners, but that is not required to have a public hearing. It's just required to have a public meeting. So, we would do it similar to as we would do um contracts really um between us and and anyone else. So, um,

and Chris, I think one thing that Lynn may be asking too is, and I don't know without researching it, I don't know what the the rule is on that, and maybe Andrew know, but, you may not know either, if when this when like uh St. Joe or Garrett or Auburn or Butler does an ETJ, as far as I know, there's no requirement that they send out a written notice to all of the land owners. And you're saying it might be nice if that was in the law for that. I don't know if it is or isn't. It is not. The creation of the ET the creation of the ETJ in current Indiana code does not require that local agreement and it doesn't require all the land owners and I think that's what you were asking. That was part of it. Yes.

But the zoning does but I was zoning change requires a public hearing. The way people would get notified is when the zoning changes, right? But the ETJ sort of just happens through the comprehensive plan process more than individualized notice, I think. Right.

I guess I would just ask as it goes forward that you as members of the plan commission consider each one of the individual property owners and I don't know how many that will affect in that area and not just look at what the city of Butler is asking for. So I think that's your responsibility of appointed or elected officials for Decalp County. Thank you. Ain't our hands kind of tied. If they want to, you know, move on, they're allowed to do it by the state statute, too.

So in the with the current ETJ area, yes. the they could continue practicing their ETJ and really not even update their comprehensive plan. Um the law changed in again I think 2009 or 2019 I can't remember what date it was but that requires when a comprehensive plan is rewritten or updated that the interlocal agreement is required with the county. So the interlocal agreement, the verbiage is required, but they can still practice the ETJ. The expansion is kind of what is triggering this as well. Thank you.

That answers your question. Well, it just makes it more foggy. Well, you can thank your state legislators for fogging. Are you trying to say that can the can the county say no to it? Is that kind of what you're asking? Or no to part of it, yes to part of it, no to part of it? We can't. I mean if they want according to what I understood that if they want to expand out there there's basically they can do there's nothing we can do right uh the county could not pass the interlocal agreement um and if not passing the interlocal agreement they could still practice in their current ETJ we could negot theoretically if you wanted to negotiate their expansion right area that could be done

yes to these four blocks no to that before we passed before we agreed to the interlocal agreement. We could negotiate directly on that. Curious. I'm not expansion.

Yeah. Yeah. I think that the code is better now than it was. Meaning that the county has negotiating rights with the ETJ with a with with a new ETJ. Um before they could just go up to 2 miles outside of their jurisdiction if it was in their comprehensive plan and the county had no say in it. Well, that's why I asked is that's what happened up to Ashley because they were going to take their e and go around clinics because he didn't want to be involved in it and then they you know they got threatened. Ashley's kind of backed away because they got threatened the lawsuits that you're not going to take Clink in it. Why are we taking this 500 acres outside of it? And and now I don't know what the process is now that he's passed away. But I mean that was part of the deal. They give a lot of money to Ashley.

I'm not familiar with the Ashley stuff there. No, I'm not saying you are, but that's just what happened here. Uh, probably 10 years ago when it was still your dad. Your dad was still our attorney. Yeah.

And they all a sudden dropped it. Of course, it didn't help any two of the guys really pushing it passed away. So, the curse of Ashley carries on the curse of Ashley. Remember that Ashley prayed 10 11 o'clock this Saturday. Any other questions or comments on that ETJ boundary? If not, I'll just work with the city of Butler and get this tightened up and bring it back, I would assume, sometime before the end of the year.

No more new business, Chris? Nope. Do you have an update on the comprehensive plan?

I do. Um, tonight is the uh Corona um open house if anyone is interested in coming. Um, it's going to be at the park there on Michigan Street, I believe. Um, under the pavilion. Um, HWC will be here. We have a uh stakeholder meeting today from noon to 1:30 and then the town of Corona open house from 4 to 5 and then we have on um September there it is 18th um I believe it's from 6:00 to 7 is going to be the big ideas openhouse that's we're going to be sharing um the proposed um visions and goals goals and objectives um that we've gathered over the last uh few months. Um the stakeholder committee's been been kind of reviewing those um over the last I believe week is when they sent them out. We're going to be discussing them today and then getting those um updated and um hold that big ideas open house on the 18th of September. Um so that's kind of that update for now. What time did you say on the 18th?

18th will be from 6:00 to 7. We'll have stuff set up probably by 5, I would assume. It's in it's in here, right? Yes. Sorry. It's in the rotunda of the courthouse. Um we're going to do about like a 15minute presentation at 6, 10 to 15 minute presentation at 6 and then give people the opportunity to go to the various boards and and offer input. Um, so yep, that's in the rotunda of the courthouse. Thanks for that reminder. And we'll see all of you at Corona tonight. What time was that again? 4:00.

What time you want it to be? Huh? Right in the middle. Well, just put your cows away and they'll they'll be fine. or bring them.

We have any updates and reports from cities and towns meetings.

Last meeting was finalizing the Saddleback edition near the golf course forward. Auburn didn't have a meeting this month, but I'm not sure when the meeting was when they discussed Auburn, East Auburn estates. And that was a packed full house, standing room only from citizens um because it had been sort of advertised as could be trailers, could be modular, could be stick built, and everybody was up in arms about that. Um, and I think that the the board president, who was also a member of the city council, did a really excellent job of of moving that through and getting stipulations about instead of having private roadways in there, they would agree to have it annexed, they would agree to city streets, they would agree that there would be no trailers. He did a lot of things that that made it more palatable. So when they had their reading at the city council meeting, not one person showed up to make any comments about it except for me and I didn't make any comments. I just wanted to see what was going to go on. So he did a great job of that and then there was no meeting this last month. This month met on Monday. um we were not able to secure the ochre grant on the third try. Um it seemed there was a lot of inconsistency in the way it was scored. So um so instead we are proceeding with this they're proceeding with a strategic plan. So instead of a whole comprehensive plan a strategic plan u scaled back uh smaller scope but still

be able to address some of the concerns of the city and to do some planning. there'll be opportunities for um public feedback. The um redevelopment commission is agreeing agreed to fund that. Um so they should be proceeding looking at tenatively a client kickoff um a kickoff starting in September and and public workshop in October is sort of the who's the uh contractor or the H HWC. Okay. So, it's a $25,000 scale back, but still at least being able to address some of the issues and planning. Um, so it would sort of be an amendment to the

um to the comprehensive plan, not necessarily changes to that, but at least being to update it instead of instead of a broad comprehensive plan. It's more of a five to 10 year plan, be able to continue to move forward. And Chris, I think I've talked to the new town manager, Britney Patrick, about reaching out to you. building issues. Okay, you're kind of an expert at this stuff, as one may say.

Hamilton is going to have a meeting later this month. Um Chris went over the Butler comprehensive plan. Andrew went over the permitting software. Uh the mayor is still waiting on money for the Bon Aluminum plant, uh the grant money. Um they're uh the uh they're still investigating the possibility of a hotel along US Highway 6 in and around Butler. And then um they also want to expand the events at the uh monster truck museum um to coincide with possibly helping get a hotel in the area. So we'll see what that does. And that's it. thing. Ashley's dead.

Still dead. Still dead. No one calls me. I talk to them. Call me if they're doing something. They're behind the county's back. It's too bad.

There any comments from anyone in the public on any matter? Len Reinhardt, 4224, County Road 71. I guess I would just like to, and I know I've talked to a couple of you individually, uh, but looking at the ETJ uh, from St. Joe and the way that uh that was done and the fact that they might have approved it in 2011 or 2014 or something but over 10 years ago and the fact that they haven't implemented a single step uh forward with that ETJ that if uh the county planning commission isn't in agreement with that ETJ if there's a possibility um that you could pursue in any way that it wasn't in effect due to that lapse of time that they have not done anything with it. They haven't done any zoning maps for that ETJ. They haven't established a plan commission with members um from the ETJ area or anything. So passed it on paper, waited five years, recorded it for some reason at that time. I've waited another seven years, not done anything. they had to be aware that things were coming to the county. I think they said there were a list of

40ome items that the county had acted on uh between that time and today. Um, I think precedent shows that the Cal County Plan Commission has been is and should be responsible for that zoning unless they come forward uh with a new plan and go through the process of developing an interlocal agreement today. So, don't know what any of the rest of your thoughts are on that, but just wanted to present that to the plan commission as a whole. Thank you.

What we sent, we did send a letter to um I believe it's Eric Weber, that's the attorney for uh for the town of St. Joe, requesting that they grandfather in all of those changes. That was the initial letter. Um that's kind of a I would say that's a sin summary of it is we're requesting basically they grandfather everything in that's been decided. Well, what and part but we've gotten no response yet. Right. Part of it was we wanted to we wanted to have a legal opinion that their ETJ is valid. Yes. I think we did say we're not we're not fighting that 100% that it's valid or invalid either way,

right?

But that um they're they know now that things weren't done and I I don't believe it was in Malice that it wasn't done. It just it's the town of St. Joe. Um it's a small small small town and I don't I don't believe it was in Malice. So anyway, we're working on um Andrew sent that letter um you know, and I'm still meeting with the town of St. Joe and and working up um helping them work up uh language for um boundaries. They still have a moratorium on areas that are within the ETJ area on zoning. Um but you know, I think they hope to have that completed by the end of the year. Um, so I'm helping them with that. Um, as I said at the last meeting, but the kind of the last big big thing was we wanted to h make sure that there was no case law or something that says you've sat on this for 10 years as as Lynn just said. Um, so you lose your rights. There's nothing in Indiana code that says um, you know, it's it's a comprehensive plan that was done prior to 2009 or 2019. prior prior to that time. So there's nothing that says they have no jurisdiction.

I'm not aware of any time frames. That's not to say that I mean there's a legal there's a couple of different at least a couple of different major deadlines in in legal issues. One is a statute of limitations. There could be a statute that says, hey, you know, if you create an ETJ, you've got to do your zoning within so many months or so many years. There's nothing that I'm aware of that says that or that Chris is aware of. The other idea is uh more of a

excessive delay idea called latches. That's the fancy legal term for it. Um and that's kind of uh along the lines of of hey, did they wait too long to do this? I'm not aware of anything at this point. Um, it would be I think it would be helpful if uh the town of St. Joe was able to show for sure that they've got this all in place and it's legal after all this time frame and so forth. But right, so I think

the county's for lack of better situation, it's an unusual situation and the county's hands are tied in a in a sense that the ETJ was established prior to July of 2019, which is that date that says you have to have an interlocal agreement. The only way to do an ETJ before that time was to put it in your comprehensive plan. It was in their comprehensive plan. So the county can't So they've got the ET. They got the ETJ the zoning the question is what do you do with the zoning never created any zoning right and nobody until

it appears the new town board and new or some me new members of the town board brought it to my attention I didn't even know about it obviously as I've said before I don't go and read all the town's comprehensive plans and make sure that they're in compliance with their own laws and regulations. Um, so it's just something that that got overlooked and unfortunately the county can't say, "Oh, you've not done something for 10 years," we're taking it back. And the other thing about cases or case law too is that much as we'd like to think that like the Indiana Supreme Court has made an opinion on almost every important issue out there, there are significant areas where if if something doesn't happen very often, like if this is the only

thing this has happened to, you know, in in 20 years, then there's not going to be any appellet case that's gone up where somebody's disagreed with a local judge's decision on on it and appealed it for an appellet court opinion. So that leaves it still kind of certain things as open or gray areas at times. I'm not saying this is one of them, but that can happen too is there's not a case that comes down on every legal point like we'd like it to be. Is is St. Joe incorporated? Yes. The town is obviously.

Okay. So do they have a town manager? No, they have a city clerk or town clerk, um, Angela Snder, I believe is her name, and three town council members. So, the the town council members are the ones who init reinitiated the ETJ. I don't know if I would say reinitiated's the term I'd use, but but they dug it up. Yeah. They're the ones that re that realize we have an ETJ. Yes. It brought it to light, I guess. Yeah. Yeah.

Am I remembering correctly from our last meeting, Mary had indicated that it was on file and recorded and there we were going to validate that? Have we validated? Yes, we did. It did get recorded prior to the July 1st, 2019 date. So if they want to update their comprehensive plan, that would be the only way that we would have any input, discussion, whatever at all. Correct. Correct.

Right. So what they're working on now is creating zoning districts that basically mirror what the counties are for the county for the ETJ and then also updating their zoning ordinance. So big undertaking for them that I'm helping them with. But um yeah, they're they're taking that on. So then would that get how would that work into their comprehensive plan? Would that be like an amendment into it? It's already in their comprehensive plan. Their zoning and stuff is what zoning doesn't have so the zoning would have to go through zoning amendments. So it would have to go through their plan commission and their town council.

So it's a big undertaking but not big enough to be a rewrite of their plan. No, because the boundaries already there are in the plan. They don't have to have the zoning in the ETJ is all about the boundaries and not about the zoning in it in a right for the comp plan. We don't control the zoning within the ETJ. We control We have input now on the size of new ETJs potentially some input on that. Yeah. But back then when they did theirs, we didn't even have input on the size. Right. There's no other discussion. I would say we were ajourned.