County Council - Regular Meeting

Right.

Oh, I did. Yeah. Mary will be back in a minute. Okay, we are live. Okay, guys. Uh we'll come to order and stand for the pledge. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Talk about you last night. Yeah. Nobody knows how to say the pledge. Morning.

Even the person leading it. about you. We'll get started. Um, I have dry mouth sometimes and I have a mint in my mouth. So, if I sound like I'm lisping, I probably am. It is. I woke up with it this morning. A stroke.

Yeah, it's a stroke. Um, first on the agenda is um public hearing for 2026 budgets. Has everyone had time to look these over? So, I'll open the public hearing for 2026 budgets and entertain any comments from the council. No comments. Is there anyone from the public that would want to make a comment? Let's look at George.

Seeing none. Seeing none. Can't um close. I close me appearing. See, see why I need Vance. Um we have a motion. No motion. We don't need a motion. You're just That's next month. So today was just to introduce it. Yep. Introduce it. You'll adopt it in October. Public meeting. Adopt it in October. Sorry. Guys aren't that funny. Okay. We gave too much time for the Oh gosh. Yeah.

90 seconds. But I think so this um budget that we'll be adopting is that going to include the solid waste comments that's on here or is that a separate that part of the that is a separate budget? That is separate. So we do we need to discuss that today. It's a sep separate public hearing. Yeah. The way it's listed I don't know if they're separate or were they part of the overall they they are two separate budgets. Yes. So when you open the public hearing, you did mention budgets. So I assumed you were opening the public hearing for both budgets. Well, you can you can open the public hearing. I'm going to circle back just to make sure that there are

any people that might have a comment. Um opening the public hearing for the Hancock County solid waste budget. Any comments from the council? She will stay as an independent contractor. Is that how it ended? That's how it's going to end. Okay. any uh comments from the public. We'll close the public hearing.

Gosh. Do do we need a motion on the That's next one. No, just introducing it. Yeah, we're just introducing it. Okay. So, we'll move on to uh we're running a little ahead, but if the people from Sugar Foods are here, we can go ahead and start.

Morning. Morning. Thank you for coming back. say in theory I'm supposed to introduce the project. On the other hand, they were here and presented it last week when I was out of town, but uh but you had somebody to do a good job for you. Well, that's that's good. So, uh we like to think we have good staff.

So, and Eric is here today as well. So like to present uh you met with these folks last week uh for foods and um this is involving an existing building uh in Mount Comfort. It's the Ambrose building that sits on uh uh 400 West and south of 300 North. And that was a that was previously occupied and I don't know what happened to the prior tenant, but anyway, they abandoned the lease and so it's back on the market and this company is here with the opportunity to uh bring a manufacturing or food production into that long well as some distribution. So I know that they made a presentation last week. I'll try not to beat a dead horse. I'll turn it over to them at this point.

Oh, can I ask you a question, Randy? Sure. uh being the head of HDC, do have you had a lot of uh inquiries about this building? Yeah. Okay. Um [Applause] and and that's that kind of goes to what their incentive ask is that you we've got buildings that are are in year one of abatement. And so there there's a greater market for those that are 100% abated at that point as opposed to one that's in the secondary market. Yeah, it's a fair question. Thanks. Oh, that makes sense.

Um, did Greg Geratas provide anything? We had talked last week about um comparing three and fiveyear numbers. Okay. I've not had a chance to see that. We had asked I'm sorry, Key. I I didn't hear this. We had asked last week for comparison of three and fiveyear numbers and I've not seen it. Was it distributed anymore? No. Greg Geras, can you make copies of it? Yeah, Greg Geratas emailed it to everyone. Do we have it in our packet? I didn't get it. It's not in your packet. I I No, I did. We didn't receive it. Well, it looks like this. And I can make copies. Is that what you have? This is Jim's. I don't either.

Does everyone Does everyone want a copy? Yes. Here we got it, Mary. Okay. And they have two sets of of um their IT equipment comes under different sorry we had asked our financial advisor to uh work up the numbers based on a threeyear or fiveyear um abatement. So uh he had emailed it out but not everybody had it in front of them right now. So they can ask questions if so. I do have a question though on the application. Who marked out the little paragraph about the EDAs? It's lined through like it doesn't exist.

I can answer and I don't know woman. We marked it up because we can't agree to an EDA until we see it. Um, in other words, we only did that we're happy to enter into an EDA. Um, but we have we can't say that we agree with it until we had a chance to review it and we hadn't seen a a sample. The commissioners will be probably reaching out if this is passed. No. And that's uh I was told last night. Yes. Oh, really? Yes. Who? Uh Gary Gary McDaniel and Bill Spalding told me since because the EDAs had to do with the development of the buildings, the construction, we're not be doing this.

Well, then it sounds like they need to get on board with each other. So I I just want to make sure that uh you guys understand that that is something that's a possibility to be negotiated. It's a chicken and egg thing. Yeah. So understood and we we've entered with you know with other communities we've entered into an agreements and Yeah. So if ifments have passed today then that would be the next step between now and then the finalization of the abatement would depend on working out an agreement or deciding there is no agreement with the EDA. But that's what the commissioners that's with them. Sure. But yeah, it's kind of an

we did EDAS before the state changed the regulations for the ability to use money for our DI or RDC to use money for operations. But then after we did the EDAS, then they said, "Oh, well, we better just make it so people can use money for operations, too." And so it's left us in this quandry whether we whether the commissioners want an EDA or not. It doesn't have anything to do with more tax revenue. It's just what the tax re comes in what happens to it. So it's not an additional cost to you. Sure. It's just, you know, if some of the money goes to an EDA or not.

I'm particularly not in favor of them anymore. I mean, but commissioners do the contracts. We're not. But that's why it's in there from back then. And it's a chicken and egg thing. And as long as you say, "Yeah, it's not a something you're totally 100% against," then there won't be no problem. Yeah. And I just want to make sure for the record that it's understood that that being marked out does not uh eliminate the possibility of the commissioners discussing an EDA with you. Yeah, we understand that. Just that that's clear on the record.

Well, okay. We we had the EDA to us. It's a specific thing, but uh the commissioners I think can still make an agreement with them on something else, right? Like Correct. Absolutely. Payments to the probably the stuff for the fire department and that type of stuff will go. Yeah. So it it will all be uh handled through the commissioners. Yeah. Yeah. Um, so, so if I can round, it seems the difference between a three and fiveyear my copy

basically about 4.90 versus 695 of incentive. The three-year abatement would would in equal an incentive of a close to 490,000. About $200,000, huh? About $200,000.

About a $200,000 difference. Correct. $25,000 difference over the abatement period between a threeyear and a fiveyear. And the difference in taxes paid Yeah. The difference between about 3.75 million to 3 5 million that would be the property taxes that will net after the abatements what you're talking about. Correct. Yeah. So the that didn't include the IT equipment I guess. So

yeah those Yeah. Those are on two separate pages. it is not not a big number. It's not uh the uh and they they would be paying about 1.3 million one way and about 1.1 million the other way. So, it's about a $200,000. It's my understanding that the uh 30% floor doesn't apply. Uh they it was to be removed. Uh they're no longer there, but since it's in a tip that the 30% floor stays intact.

That's correct. my understanding. So that's cuz it took me a minute to figure out why it sp it spanned out over 10 years when I thought eventually that floor wasn't going to play a part. But that's what all those 30s represent on this spreadsheet that Greg sent out is the floor itself does not go away. um in the legislation itself if it's interest obviously tipary they're outstanding bonds and so if you if the floor went away then that would impair the ability to repay bonds right um is there is there any comments that I'm curious to see where we're leaning with three or five years

I they've requested fiveyear abatement on the personal property um to me that is not enough difference to um not honor u their request and um uh I'm just um happy we we have um a product or a project coming to us of this nature with some manufacturing with some you know jobs and uh in a building that's already existing. I mean there's for me the checklist for positives is so much more that um I don't know why we wouldn't honor their request

and all of the benefits go to the underlying taxing units. It doesn't go to the RDC right in this case.

Yeah. I guess my only comment is this is my fifth year here and there was has always been a precedent set of giving no personal property tax abatements historically was an exception before I was here. Um I don't know if Amazon but outside of that anyone who's brought one of these in my four and a half years was told no. And you know, ideologically, I I don't know that I believe in taxing people's equipment every year, but we have set a precedent. We're talking about changing that precedent. And so, I think the discussion is beyond sugar foods. Are we um agreeable to everyone who comes in asking for a five-year equipment abatement or is a three-year precedent more a precedent we want to set? um it is $200,000 over however many years. So it's not so much the dollar figure, it's what example do we want to

set? I think this makes it a little different because part of the real estate um abatement is going to be over three years. I believe you said they'll be down to seven years. Is it? That's correct. that that's kind of the offset is to me that's already different that they're already into that abatement, right? And the word president exception maybe

the word president may not apply because we took everything five years ago or seven years ago period. You know what I mean? We were we were with no no factories out there at all when I got on and and you know we would have one application a year. So the the word precedent isn't, you know, it's totally different now. If you want to say we changed the president, when we started turning people down, that was the precedent change because we turned a lot of people down the last couple years. Um but um yeah, part of their tax abatement's already gone um with the with the building. But um I I understand but this too is manufacturing and we haven't had manu everything before has been warehousing or spec and I think that makes a difference too u when you actually have an endgame and they're looking at a longer horizon than you know they said themselves you know why would they do a project for just a few years when they're looking at 10 20 years in their other locations you know

and I think that's the thing for me that really stuck is when they said how long they've been at their other locations. This I don't feel this is going to be one of those short-term projects. And you you told us your lease terms at the last meeting. So you have they have a commitment to that to that building. So that's a commitment to our county and we can maybe be building that profile right now a lot three to five years. what we want to see thinking of forward like you said and the fact that that the 30% floor does still apply to them might be worth considering in the future some people it's going to go to zero right it'll depreciate

it'll go down to five or 5% but they throughout well unless legislation change which in the next 20 years could easily happen but next year from what we know today they are they are capped at the bottom at the 31st cent. Yeah. Yes. And the other exception we made uh was for a manufacturing concern. Suda, I was going to say we gave the things that I want to say check a box for me is the fact that there is a long-term lease commitment in place that you have an established business that has been in business at

a long time. I was trying to think of the number. I couldn't think of it. uh and that you have a a good track record and it's a possibility to occupy some of those buildings that are sitting down there vacant with a a strong commitment it sounds like to me. So, um yeah, as far as abatements goes, I like this one. You you normally vote no.

It's not it's not that it's okay. I've been I'm an attorney. I've represented these um before in the past. Um, for me, you know, I I hear I agree with everybody. I am perfectly fine how you guys vote. I I would vote no on the five-year. For me, I would pick the three-year 50%. That's just me. I I rather give a, you know, something because I do want them here, but at the same time, I don't want to give the farm away and we capture as much tax money as we can. Just, you know, I know 10,000 is a nice amount they're giving to the fire department, but it really doesn't cover as much as what we could get it instead. and and the fire department needs that help. I know in Buck Creek. So, but I do appreciate that gesture and and many of the other things they put in there, the 75% of people being Hick County residents, a lot of it hit for me, I'd rather have a negotiation process. That's just

I don't know how you That's just me as an attorney, but that

Well, and just for clarity in Greg's analysis here for using these numbers, his three-year was based on 100% 66% 33% rather than 50. that would change the math. Um, but I also don't know when you divide across all the taxing units and we concern ourselves specifically to the fire department how close that correlates to $10,000 after you give it to town uh you know the other because the township would still get their cut after abatement plus the $10,000 after schools and and everybody else. How does that actually net out? We don't really have that math here. But

yeah, I'm with Mary. I think, you know, people complain about the buildings being um empty and this is an opportunity, I think, with good people to fill one of those buildings. And that's another big issue for me is filling those buildings. We need to get people in them, companies in them. And plus 5% of their savings goes to us to keep HDC um solid. That's a benefit for us. That comes Yeah, that doesn't that doesn't benefit us. Yeah. Do you guys have anything you want to add to your I mean, you're obviously watching us batted around, so uh do you have anything you'd like to add?

So, one thing I'd like to add, and then Sarah may have additional items. Uh we're my company's advisors to companies around the country on on site selection and and items like this. And about 60% of our business is with food companies. And one of the things I can tell you is that during the recession in ' 08 and '09 and again during COVID, uh, a lot of our, you know, a lot of companies weren't putting investment into facilities, weren't hiring except food companies because people still have to eat. So, it's good to have,

you know, to diversify your economy to have food companies in in the uh in the county in this case. So, I just wanted to add that to you. Thank you. Thank you. Randy, you have anything? No. You want to add? Just the uh what's not in the room is this is a competitive project. We're we're competing with other communities. This is a chance to get a win. It's It's not like they're only talking to us and asking for a favor. We're we're competing with other places. I' I'd like you to pay attention to that. Thank you guys.

I appreciate the discussion. I just wanted, you know, since we historically didn't do it, I did want to have a little discussion about what what it looks like moving forward. Well, and I think we're going to have to start taking all of these separate one at a time because things are changing so quickly. That that's what's really important. I I know there's concerns about setting precedent. just can't have a blanket policy because every deal is different. And so it they're fact sensitive, they're situation sensitive, and so this is a one-off, but a year from now, we may see something like this again. But this you can't compare, you know, you know,

it's not just apples and oranges. It's like apples and cats. They're they're different than what we've seen before. Randy, is this today? Is this designed to beformational or No, this is this asking for a vote on a declaratory resolution. Do you have a number? Yeah. Uh before we finish though, I I wanted to give them um I had asked been asked if the public could make any comments and I said yes. They're always welcome to make a comment. They need to be short. We can't spend a ton of time on it, but if you guys are finished, we have a hearing next meeting, right? We have a hearing for the public on this, right? This is just the initial. This is just the declaration. I understand that. uh since they reached out at this meeting and they're already here.

I'm not going to tell them go away and come back in a month. So, I'm going to allow that today just as a courtesy. So, um we can listen to a few minutes of public comment before we vote. Okay. All right. Thanks, Randy. Have a seat. I had two different people reach out. Mr. Over is over Hos overhauser. Okay. I'm sorry. pass it down.

Thank you very much. I appreciate you giving me the opportunity to comment. My name is Paul Overhouser. I live here in Greenfield. I'm just a concerned citizen about the way the government works. Let me start by saying I totally support Sugar Foods moving into Hancock County. They seem to be a good company with a good history and I welcome them, but I don't support their request for a tax abatement for several reasons. Uh, I've given our county a short handout with some papers that I'll be referring to and I think she's distributed to them to you. Uh, I've also given a copy to Mr. Serell so that he has them just to provide some historical context. Uh, Mr. Fisk, I think you mentioned back in 2020, there was a flurry of tax abatement applications applied for in Hancock County. That was probably the result of COVID in large part. There was a big federal influx of money that was created as a result of that. And uh, interest rates went down to zero. A lot of people with money needed something else to invest in. And I think a lot of developers around here thought building warehouses would be a good idea. So as a part of that, they uh submitted requests for tax abatements for their warehouses. They were uh routinely approved by the council. And now we have a boatload of warehouses up north of I7, but unfortunately a lot of them are vacant. And you know, they they they may not have even been built had it not been for the government intervention of the over supply of money as a result of co and these tax abatements that were granted. And that brings us to where we

are today. Sugar Foods is asking for an abatement on $35 million in property it wants to put into one of the empty warehouses. And I think there are several reasons why we should not approve that. The first document that I provided to you is a article by Professor Hicks and Professor Faulk from Ball State University who studied the impact of tax abatements in Indiana. And they conclude that local tax abatement use tends to be correlated with higher effective tax rates on existing households and businesses within a county. In other words, tax abatements obviously lower taxes for the businesses that get them and it increases the tax on everyone else. And that's why they conclude that tax abatements are not particularly effective. And I think this council should take note of that. Uh second, I don't think this request is consistent with the purpose of Indiana's tax abatement statute. I've in included a page which has an extra

I'm going to stop you there only because this definition of um redevelopment areas and that has been pretty consistently on the books for decades and it it has broadened out that if you read any potential abatement request today uh it's not a typically blighted area which is what's stated in one of the things that you should be looking at. So, we understand that that scope has changed and what really needs to happen probably is a legislature need to update their their verbiage on on how we look at those. But I think consistently throughout the state abatements have been treated a little differently than what these original ordinances said. So, without I'd like for you to just try to wrap up. uh we were only going to allow a few minutes for public and we really don't have time to go through the each of these pages.

Okay. But we can take them home with us and study them and read them before next meeting that we do a finalized.

Okay. Uh I'll be very brief. Uh let me just summarize by I mean saying you know I don't think this is an there's already a warehouse there. I don't think it some an area that's in need of economic revitalization. Uh, next I'd point out the the current owner of that warehouse already got an an abatement on $88 million. And if it's if that warehouse is vacant now, it can use a part of that tax savings to lower its tax rates. I think uh we should be able to have a free market here and Sugar Foods can just negotiate whatever tax rate. Hancock County Carney already gives a lot to people that come here to start businesses. We have a great location, a good workforce, businessfriendly laws, low taxes, good schools, and I think that should be enough to attract businesses without us having to do out tax abatements. And just finally, the final point I wanted to make is I think we should recognize that we're in a difficult economic time right now. Uh prices on food are very high, property taxes are going up, utility rates are going up, and there's a lot of consumer sentiment uh that the economy has some problems that need to be addressed, and it's probably not a good time for the council to be giving big tax abatements to large companies. Sugar Foods is a billion-doll company. They're owned by Pritsker Capital, which just last month got a 3.4 4 billion capital infusion. They really don't need this tax abatement to come in here to Hancock County and it just doesn't look good in these economic times for us to be handing out tax abatements to big companies.

Thank you.

I I had one other person request uh say a few words and that's uh Miss Leman. I'll keep this as short and painless as I can. Um, I just wanted to also agree that I think that this is a great company, great benefits package. Um, I like crunchy onions. I like green bean casserole. Um, I have nothing to add to the abatement discussion. Um, you guys all know much better than I do. Um, I did notice though, and I could be wrong, but it seems like there's already kind of some trouble policing the ones that are in place. So, hopefully we can get that together a little more. Um, because as I understand, these are self-reported. So, I just wanted to make note of that. Um, and like you'd said, I'm glad the buildings are filled up, but as I've also said, there's kind of a catch 22, um, with what I've brought up before, and I know I sound like a broken record, but it hasn't gone away. And that is the traffic right there. And bringing in 105 employees and 50 trucks a day to what is really what I consider ground zero right there. Um, 300 between 300 north between 600 and 400. Um, it it has been backed up all the way to the roundabout. I know you mentioned it. Um, and Gary P referred to that stretch as an anomaly, which that's not good. Um, and you know, I don't want Sugar Foods to be averse adversely affected by that. And the other people who already live there, who are doing business there, and of course, the school that's right there. I was there the other day, 11:00 a.m. on a Thursday, no big deal. and I was passed in the middle lane by a car and then by a box truck which was, you know, not really cool. Um, and I

understand perhaps if I'm right that there are plans for expansion for this road once the EDA money comes in. Um, my concern is that the EDA money, EDA money so far has proven to be perhaps a little unreliable or insecure. Um, so hopefully that that can pick up and become more reliable and secure for us. Um, and that there's plans A, B, and C for right there because they're going to be right by Amazon, those poor people. Um, I hope we can find a solution because I'd really like to see Sugar Foods here. Thank you.

Can I say something really quick? I've been hearing a lot of and seeing it written in the paper and different things. not Grayson. But um and it's a misnomer. It's not true that people have said um these businesses will come without the abatements. We have turned several abatements down and they went elsewhere. So, you know, the thing that oh well, they'll come anyway. Just turn them down and they'll come. I don't believe that's true. It's not proven true so far. Well, just for the record, if I were to go back, this was uh this building was abdated in November of 2020, which leads me to believe I probably voted no on it because I was of that position by then. Uh but I but just because I didn't want the building built with an abatement, now that buildings sit there, one of my biggest concerns from the get-go is we're going to have too much supply and not enough demand. It's going to drive down the value of these buildings because there's too much supply and then it's lower AV, it's lower property tax assessments. So, I do think there's a much bigger picture than abatement. You know, it is a building that's already there whether we voted for it or not. And I do consider this a totally separate consideration.

I I would say too, I mean, our tax rate has gone down every year for the last four or five years. And so to infer that abatements cause the taxpayers to pay more money is probably not accurate for our county. Um I don't know about all the other counties, but if you look at our tax rate, um it continues to go down. So um

yes, and and the combination of a tax bill is your tax rate times your assessed value. So the rate can be going down like Ken said, but we live in an area where everything seems to be appreciating rapidly. So um your assessment is going to go up. So that multiplier is going to make it look like your taxes keep going up, but the county as a whole tax rate is actually dropping. So just understanding that process helps, I think some but that means the people's property is worth more too. So they get a value if they sell out. They're not going anywhere. It doesn't really chair entertain a motion. Yes. I I think we'll end with anybody else had anything they wanted to say. So, yes.

Well, I would move that that we approve a declaratory um what's the number abate tax abatement 5-year tax abatement for personal property- I'll second that. I want to call roll on this one, Dad. Okay. [Laughter] He's only been here so long. I thought maybe you were going to call me. That's why you paused. I was I was I was going to start with you, but thank you. To be important. Yeah. Council member Betram.

Yes. Council member Louderder. Yes. Council member Doe. Yes. Council member. Yes. No. Council member. Yes. Okay. So, we have a declaratory resolution in place and then the public hearing will be next month to finalize and then we'll vote again. Will they be getting in writing with the commissioners? They should go to the commission the details they provided about their intent to contribute annually to the local fire department in excess of taxes. Come back to that in a second. You actually need to be very clear the time, date, and place of the public hearing. Well, devil set that up. It's at this meeting next month.

Our our next month's meeting. What is that? October October 8th 9:00 a.m. 9 a.m. work for public. Okay. Yep. Well, there you go. Very good. Make sure the notice Oh, yeah. No worries. Make sure that the public notice that gets published is consistent with what's in the room. They will they will That's all I'm doing. Yeah. that that's well the other and were you going to address the fire department the money committed the writing um yes between made that commitment and I I've got to talk it's interesting before the we went on the record here Mary had a conversation with Gary McDaniel I had a conversation with Bill Spalding and those conversations were different

so I've got to land the plane I'll run the traps on that and find out what the commissioners do or do not want to do Right. Just any any other incentives that are going to be given needs to be in writing with the commissioners. I I it this may be some sort of an economic development agreement, but it may be very short form. Just just involving the commitments that they've exactly sounds good. So I don't that it's going to be the payments thing that we've seen in the past. I'll verify what's going on. Yeah. You just want to don't want to come back in 5 years and go, "Well, I was never in writing, so that money never happened." That's happened. that fire truck. Me too. Which Walmart swears they never promise that next. I hear it though. I wouldn't make it.

They swear to Okay. Uh, so we're good to go. I just wanted to say thank you very much and look forward to working with all of you. Thank you. Welcome. Thank you. So, next on the agenda is the county funding agreements with Hancock Health. Amanda Ever. Did you sign it? No. Or it's just one signature.

Yes. Thank you, Amanda. Thank you. [Music] Just here just read paper. Well, signed it. Oh, thank you.

Good morning.

Thank you guys for having me um today. So, I am here to present um an update on the Hancock County um justice collaborative or community response collaborative that has been funded by um opioid and ARPA dollars over the course of several years. Um your packet holds a couple of things. I will say in the back when you get to looking at that, one of the things I went ahead and did um as one one of my probably pet peeves that I have is when you attend meetings ongoing and we've been doing programs for now three years when I provide an update. I think I'm here twice a year. Um we're looking at trying to get those on quarterly and then I give you just that quarter update. So, I went ahead and went back and put in all of just in the back you have a quick breakdown of every quarter just to give you kind of that recap. Um, so that you didn't have to go back and dig for that information yourself. So, we'll get to the the money piece of it here in just a moment. I just want to kind of go through. So, if you go through with me um in the packet, the first section just is a reminder of all of the programs um that are part of uh the funding that was received for this collaborative. Um justice navigation and the mobile response team were created uniquely out of the funding for the collaborative, the connection center. Obviously, we were already um in place, but it is um allowed us to expand what we do and support in some of that the prevention efforts. Um that's a space that is just much harder to do when there's no funding, but certainly important in um reaching our youth and in our community and ensuring that they know what services and supports are out there and available.

And then our count Hancock counseling and psychiatric services. Um, again, we've had Hancock Counseling Psychiatric Services has been in the community for 30 years. Um, however, it's what we do now is in that prioritizing individuals that are within our justice system because that was one of the big um primary pushes. So, that is one population that we um do not as long as they're appropriate for our service that we we will continue to take even when we're full, we work to squeeze them in. Um and ensuring that individuals within justice system are able to access a rapid clinical assessment in connection to services within our goal is a week of referral. If insurance and all checks out, we can usually get them in within two days uh for an assessment. So

are these service numbers on the metrics as of uh June 30th? I saw there was Q1 Q2 total. Yes. Is that June 30th?

Yep. So yeah, June 30th gives you that total for 2025. I haven't didn't add anything after. I also went ahead and threw in 2024 just so you can kind of see a bit of a comparison there. We're on track. where we see about a 10% increase in the connection center space um for navigation referrals. It's been about 10 10 to 20% increase in unique individuals served over the last several years. We've seen a significant increase in the mobile response team. We went from about, you know, right around um well, we had 354 in um 2024, 2023, we were down, it was like 150. So, we're seeing a pretty significant increase in the need for mobile response team. Um so the mobile response team is a reminder for those that team is we have two certified um alcohol and drug addiction consultants. So peer recovery specialist is um a more common title used for them. I we we call them the certified addiction and um alcohol and drug addiction consultants because they are level two certified through the Indiana um council. So there is a slight difference than just taking the 40-hour training versus the ongoing and continuing to develop the skills that they do and the services that they provide um in that recovery space for individuals who are in um and seeking recovery responses. Those are critical incident stress management. Those are responses where if we have a traumatic event within our community, um we have a team, I currently have 58 trained um mental health professionals, law enforcement, first responders who are able to then um assist all of the individuals that were present um for that event and we offer a debriefing. We process through their

individual experience and the experience of the collective so that our responders and our our safety personnel can return back to work in a a healthier and um better space so that they can continue to serve and protect us at the best of their ability.

Very good. Um and then rapid assessments for justice that is again that working to get individuals in a majority of those uh 46 scheduled and the 30 attended come from either we have individuals that are being released from incarceration. And so the goal is that when they leave incarceration, obviously when we know that they're getting out and we have this plan, we've been working a 90-day transition plan um and they leave incarceration with an appointment. So they already have the appointment for their first assessment. They're meeting with somebody to talk about insurance and housing and um transportation and stability. So the other big piece within the justice space that we are supporting is community corrections. um to be able to transition from community corrections onto probation. Um as individuals are moving through that system space, they are required to have if they're not currently engaged in treatment services, they're required to have an assessment um and then input to determine those next steps for them. So we offer those as well. Track um be like where are they now? um like after they've went through all the programs, you've done everything that you can do to help put them on the right track. In 12 months, just somebody's have that you check and see they're still this or they're not still this.

We try. Um I will say the challenge is you have to have their permission um to do so. Um some people are willing to give permission, many aren't. They're kind of like, "No, I'm good. I'm I'm graduated." like I but so we don't have a good process to be able to do that consistently so we've not started it. I will say we one of the things that we can look at I've not pulled for here is um we do have individuals that come back to us for support and services whether it's in our Hancock counseling space or within um the connection center. So we do keep like a a list. So, I can say, you know, how many times did Amanda average go to this connection center for support um or an assessment? I can determine that over the course of five years. Um we've just not done that yet. Um but it would be interesting to see some of that. We do have individuals that um I would say when you're work when they're working with a navigator, we tend to see around a four to six week engagement with patients. Um, our peer recovery specialist is significantly longer. Um, we have some patients that have been with our peer recovery specialist for a year. Um, and have been doing well. Um, there have been times like we had one that recently did have a setback, but he like she was his first call. Um, which was great. and then together they contacted um the courts and and probation and worked through that process with support and then an adjusted recovery plan. So

So um I noticed in the negative amount remaining quarter 2 2025 this this was even though it wasn't listed as a grant this actually was a in my opinion a government grant. Oh, 100%. And that's how we're treating it. And I will say, so yes. And so you're going to be like, that's a lot of money that's still left. Yeah. But is is there a a plan for you to obtain another grant from the federal government?

Well, I am always looking for grants. I will say all of the grants that are currently available right now through the state, DMHA, or the federal level, none of them are applicable to our services. Um, and and I've I've said this from the beginning, a majority of I will say a lot of what we do and I think the the value that what this collaborative brought was a gap from what we were receiving from our previous community mental health center. Um those are within this many within the scope of work of a community mental health center or a CCBHC which is the new one certified community behavioral health center. Um and a lot of the funds that are out there right now like through 988 for mobile crisis teams you have to be a CHC. Um so we will we will not ever be able to receive that funding. So what we are doing is working with our newly delegated CMHC which is Aspire um Indiana Health. So Aspire Indiana received the contract from the state over you know and community has essentially divested um working with them to say okay they're responsible now in federal eyes or state eyes in a way to support crisis in our space. we have this team. What can we do to enter into an agreement and support each other as we move forward to ensure that we keep a local touch?

Right. Is that the is that the old Galahue thing or Okay. Aspire um kind of took over progress. Pay a ton to them every year by law. Yeah. About 480,000. Yeah. Yes.

I actually talked to someone from Aspire yesterday. they wanted to have a call with me and said, you know, we're going to be your new CHC and they're um looking at properties in Hancock County Recovery Housing and I told them we have historically felt we weren't quite sure what we were getting for our statutory contribution and I would encourage you to reach out to local elected officials or schedule a presentation or something to tell us how this will be different than our prior relationship. So I think Aspire intends to do that.

Absolutely. And I will say so one of the things that I've done um since we had the crew that got together and interviewed the CHC's with the department of mental health and addictions um is really working to assist in that onboarding process. So like when it's coming to for physical location for example um I have shared you know we have a we are about to move into a new space

thanks to the support we've had so we will have old space that is currently mental health related and works very well so if there's interest there that we can facilitate some of that conversation but yeah when we're looking at onboarding the services prioritizing the need that's been a conversation that I'm at that table with Aspire every week. Um I just met on Monday with all of the the medical director, their senior directors and um local who would be over the local programs to try to also get a streamlined communication tool rather than so Aspire is huge I will say like when you compare to like what what we have. Um, so they had six they have six directors to do the job and the scope of what I do here at Hancock. Um, so six exact level directors. Um, so trying to get some streamlined support on how we can bring it to the community. Um, and then making sure that, you know, everybody is aware of what they're going to be doing. I think that we will see a significant improvement. Um, I've got a group room that's going to be amazing in our new space. I've offered them to be able to jump into IOP. Our planned open date is December 1st. So, if there's anything we can do to support any office space until I can fill those, we're here to support um, Aspire coming in. And I don't been any opportunity to to partner up and collaborate to sustain these services because yeah, grants I would love it. Are they out there? occasionally. Is it going to sustain funding wise? It's it's not a sustainability plan.

And these um these balances have to be expended by December 31. December 31st of 26. Yes. So I assume these are all tracking for that. Yes. And we have like so for honestly since we received the the funding the there are a lot of allocations that haven't been in there that we are working and so you'll see those on the next update that'll come down there'll be the list and then all the receipts and the services. Did you have a question that that was like make sure because it is a federal grant.

Yes 100%. Yes. So we are I'll say one thing that I do want to share that hadn't been discussed before. We will have a donor wall um in our location. Um you know, the hospital foundation raised $4.5 million um to go to an endowment that helps offset some of those costs. Um the hospital also has an endowment that offsets. Um on that there is a building update page. It's this one. This is a rendering of what our donor wall is going to look like. Um, we will have on there a plaque for Hancock County Council and Hancock County Commissioners as well. Um, so I just wanted to let you guys know that too cuz

Thank you. Everything sounds great. It sounds like you know what you're doing and it's just there's full. We appreciate the partnership. It's going to run out of money. Absolutely. And then yeah, sustainability. I'm working on it. I would love to say it's running out of money. It's um it's hard. it. There's just and it's the reason we didn't expand and do this in the first place, right, without your grant funding because it's not possible. Reimbursement's not there. The money at that level just is not there. So, what I've always appreciated is your honesty. You you don't try to act like, "Hey, there's grants. We're going to get grants." I mean, you're very honest about everything, and I appreciate that very much.

Absolutely. I will be 100% transparent as I can because it will only benefit all of us. You got to wrap this up. I think we should have her come back in the first quarter because she's telling us money runs out December of next year. We will be talking about the 27 budget by March. So sometime before that, we probably need to have a more thorough discussion about whether we we can sustain all this and if we can't sustain all of it financially, where do we have to prioritize? And that will be a deeper discussion. I'm going to um end this so we can move on. We have a hearing at 9:30. Got to get

good. So, yeah, I will um we'll do that. Um we'll make sure that we get on in January and that'll I'll um outline 2026 kind of how you may want to wait till February. January will be the first meeting with the new No, not next year. I keep thinking I'm almost out. Got another year. You come whenever you want. You come whenever you want. We'll all still year and I'll outline 26 what that's going to look like and a good idea. Maybe we I can separate it down costwise and what we're looking at. Thank you. Thank you, Amanda. Sugar Creek Township.

No, we're early for that. No, it's at 9:30. We've got a we've got time. You got four minutes depending on what uh what you're going to say. So, I was told I was on the agenda this morning, but I'm not sure why because no one notified me. So, I assume it's for the money for the request for the ladder. Pardon? We have the resolution for reimbursement so the RDC can pay back the EDA fund at a future date. You got a resolution number?

That's 2025-93. Uh, would you like to entertain a motion? Yeah, I'm still looking to see where the We get a copy of Yeah, it's in there. Okay. Yes, please. I'll make a motion to 25-9-3 for resolution for reimbursement of EDA agreement payment to Sugar Creek Township from the uh RDC. I second it. All in favor? I opposed. And then you guys were way too easy on me this morning. I appreciate that.

And then we probably need a separate motion now to uh the attorney previously ascertained that we could do both these things in the same meeting. Right. We've approved the reimbursement resolution and now we can approve the expenditure. This is now in place. Yes. Okay. Voted on it. It's been accepted. Okay. Then I'll make another motion to pay $150,000 uh for capital needs to Sugar Creek Fire Department from the economic development payment fund to be later reimbured by the RDC. I'll second that. All in favor? I opposed. Okay. Thank you guys very much. Yep. Thank you.

Take it so easy on you next time. All right. That's what I'm here for to help. Now you're two minutes ahead of schedule. Yeah, we're going to need a thumbs up to advertise to appropriate that money. All right. So, thumbs up. Oh, I thought we already did the advertisement. You tabled the public hearing signed or approved. So, we don't So, we we've already advertised it then we advertised it back in I thought so. And you was never additionally appropriated. So, we still just need the thumbs up. Yeah, but it No, it was already advertised. Oh, so no, you need a motion now. Yes. And get a resolution. Let me pull up a res. I don't have any of that.

We It was It was a public hearing. We tabled it. So, we had already done this. We had to wait a month. It was published. They came. We had the time. They said, "Okay, we're going to table this till now. Now's the time you can make the motion to approve that appropriation." We just did. We just did. Well, it's already appropriated and I made a motion for the expenditure. Right. Right. I think we're good. Got to be revered. Think we're good. Does it have to be readvertised now? Because the resolution needed to be in place. Resolution was proceeding. So it So do I need to amend? No, you just need to do thumbs up and it'll go next month. Thank you.

It's clear as mug. Crazy. Thank you, Keely. Um, all right. It looks like we have one minute. Is there Nope. It just turned 9:30. Well, and that and that clock's actually one minute slow. Yeah, we we just turned. So, we're going to open the public hearing for the 2025 geo bond for 6.5 million.

George, Lisa, do you have any that you want to give us? Thank you. Good morning. Lisa Lee with Ice Miller uh serving as bond counsel for the county. The public hearing is on the additional appropriation of the 6.5 million uh up to not to exceed 6.5 million for the general obligation bonds. That notice was published uh for the hearing at 9:30 this morning. Uh and then we can look at uh approving that that ordinance and then also approving the uh bond ordinance that was also introduced at your August meeting. I have a couple questions for you, Lisa. Uh, can you remind me if this remains on the track, the timeline track, these bonds would actually be going out to bid.

Um, there I don't have that timetable in front of me, but I know that we're work I'm working with uh FSG on their preliminary official statement, which is the offering document that they put together to sell the bonds. So, we definitely are um looking to sell and close this year and we are still on the timetable that you have right there. Okay. I was curious how the timeline fell uh alongside Fed meetings. Oh, okay. Well, Greg, you know, the thing that we can do is we can always I think they've already sent the OS to the rating agencies to go ahead and get that set for the sale and then we can hold off on the sale and give a 24-hour notice. Okay.

Um if if we're looking at making sure we're on one side or the other and it looks like it was preliminarily set to go around October 21st, but I'm sure Greg will take those consider exactly that he'll take that into consideration. So we get everything done, everything ready and packaged for the sale and then we wait till the right time. Deb, do you know what the earmarks uh estimates that we were talking about with this bond where the money is going on the back of your there's a whole list ordinance? Has the project list approved?

Uh there's the reimbursement for the fairgrounds money that we did. We also did the resolution reimbursement when we did fairgrounds improvements. Correct. between and that resolution is broader. Yeah, that's not an exclusive. It's not exclus The reimbursement was not exclusive to the fairgrounds. You could reimburse for other things that are been paying for that you paid for. That's why the minute the cash hits the uh sheet, then we want reimbursed. Yeah. All All the money's been spent. the sheriff's vehicles that we talked about last meeting, the Lucas devices that we talked about many months ago, the fairgrounds.

I'm just wanting to circle around to that uh the actual estimated cost coming from the bond for the uh building at the sheriff's department. And I've heard two different numbers. So that that's not in this. That's not going to be paid out of this 6.5. No, not at all. That'll be from the income tax from the left over from the bond that's for the jail jail bond. Yeah, this won't be the maintenance. Okay. I I was I was turned around then. Yep. I think that maintenance building it'll almost be like cash. There might be like a bond anticipation note like a real sure bond draw. The money will be right.

There won't be any financing involved. Yeah. I just I've heard two different numbers on that building and that's I don't think you've had more even more than I've heard five million. I've heard 3.5 million. Yeah. Big difference. I think there's yeah discussion yet to be had on that. Okay. I guess thank you. Thank you. Then uh we need to adopt the first we're going to close the hearing. Right. But nobody's here. Let's ask. Right. Right. I just I I'm a little confused on the ordinance listed as 8B and 8 C. The two I have is 8D as a David and HC. Is that I will tell you I do have different numbers of what you have is C and D.

Okay. So the ordinance B is not B. C and D. Yeah. Okay. I wanted to get that clarified too. Yeah. I have the actual bond ordinance as 20258 C and the additional appropriation as 20258D. Yes. Okay. That matches what? Shall we vote on those in separate motions first? Yeah. I haven't finished the hearing yet. Okay. I'm going to see if there's any comments from the public. Yes, we have com

George Langston. Um, I'm concerned about geo bonds. You guys have been geob bonding since 21 excluding 24 because election year 2020 election year. I don't know if you're going to exclude next year because it's midterms, but that's usually what happens. But you guys, based on what I've seen, is planning on doing more geo bonds and like 27 and 28, maybe 29. That all goes on top of our property taxes and we're screaming out here for property tax relief. Um, so I understand why you need this one, especially with the fairgrounds coming in and hitting you up and they needed to. I'm not saying they did anything wrong. County made an agreement to help them out when they gave up their tax levy back in 93. But we need to start looking towards the future and how this county is going to get run. I I I checked out this with Greg Garas at the end of the budget meeting last week. We're right now the countyy's getting only 31% of all the tax revenue coming into this county in that big pie. And you guys were getting 49% in 2012. If that rate keeps going the way it's going, you will be somewhere between 14 and 15% in 2038 of that pie.

And we need to look the ways to bring people into this county to spend money on and and collect sales tax, food and beverage tax, know anything we can do to help fund this county. That's our future. We can't be living on geobonds all the time. And that's what we're doing. I I'm not disagreeing with this one because I understand what you're trying to do. But we need to stop. I did not want to do this in front of the sugar. I didn't I thought that was inappropriate. And this is what I've been trying wanting to talk to you about. And we've been because of you guys running late. I've never got a chance to tell you guys this. So last night at the tourism meeting had a very great tourism meeting last night and if I'm saying it's great, it's great. Okay. They got a good idea. I'll let Key inform you because she knows more about it than I did. And um but it's one way to help you guys fund this county and I hope you guys all support what they're trying to do. Okay.

Thanks. Quick. There's George. Hang on. George, I just want you to know on behalf of the council and the commissioners, there's no correlation between doing go bonds and the like. I understand that it looks there's an appearance which you pointed out but correlation there. Well, nobody's deciding that they want to do a geo not based on whether Yeah, but we're we're it seems like we're living off of them. Oh, I understand your point. Year to year. Yeah, you had two in 22. I know. I understand. I just want you to know that there's there that's not what this council and the board how they operate.

George, I want to tell you one more thing. I know you'll appreciate this. It's not always been the case and in the future it may like likely not be the case again, but over the last several years, we've been able to earn more in interest by holding on cash than we get uh with our strong credit as municipality to borrow. So there's actually a margin of I won't use the word profit but there is a positive net margin that has taken place over these years that we've been using them where we are earning more interest to sit on the cash than we are charged to borrow.

I understand it's a strategy. You know what she's saying is the projects that we have to do, we deem are necessary enough that if we didn't geo bond, we would have to pay them out in cash. We'd have to use other funds. And um so on on top of that, the these go bonds aren't 25-year bonds either. They get paid off. And when I first started coming on, we started doing we were paying other bonds off at the same time. So it's not like we have this big net net all these bonds just stacked up. The other ones come off too.

Well, I I I do realize the bonds come off, you know, for this building and AT&T and all that kind of stuff and 911 center and all that. But that 31% you're talking about, if we didn't, first off, if we didn't maintain our facilities and we didn't do some of these important projects, if we didn't bond, the state would take whatever money we were using to pay bonds that year, they would take it away and that would escalate that 31% would drop even faster. But

we were George. Um the thing of it is um way back when in 9 10 and 11 even a little bit of 12 we didn't have hardly any money at all cuz it was basically a recession and we didn't do anything to our buildings and when you have some of these buildings are 247 and when you don't do that I know because I was the auditor and people reported all that to me and our building's gotten terrible disarray and and despair or not repaired like they were supposed to be. And I think we're still catching up on some of that. And like I said, I you know, I'm not thrilled about bonding, but we have to do it. And it's either we raise the taxes or we bond. And uh the one good thing that you mentioned about bonds is it's the only tax that goes away. You know, usually when you put a tax on it stays, but bonds do go away. And these capital projects we have and we can't let our buildings go to nothing. Um I don't know how it can be helped.

And and one other thing when the food and beverage was committed to I was totally against it. I was in this room. This room was full of everybody saying don't do it. Okay. Now with what I'm seeing your funding and all that kind of stuff, I don't see how we can't live without food and beverage. I know there's a sunset clause and I think it was extended here recently and all that kind of stuff. So, you know, I'm kind of go leading that and we can't get rid of it because it's it'll be detrimental to the county. Real quick, I'll tell you in 9, 10, and 11, by October, we were out of money. The food and beverage is what kept our lights on. Um, it kept everything on. Our health insurance, we didn't have money for that. And if it wouldn't have been for the food and beverage, I don't know where we would have been. Well, we we maintain what we've been able to maintain because we we got 18% growth for years now and we only get recognized 4% of that growth and without food and beverage, we can't bridge that gap.

So, it was it was a godsend that that was done and they the the commit or the council at the time took a beating over it. Um, just like you said, everybody was against it council at the time, but I look back and it was one of the best decisions and and it should stay on when when I can't imagine being on the council and not having that fail safe sitting there, especially with the growth. And the reason it's big now is because of the growth, right? So, it helps it helps us bridge that gap on growth. If we weren't growing, if we were like some some county way down at the very southern part of the state or something weren't growing, it's different. But we we get slammed because the state don't give us what we what we really need to grow with.

A lot of that food and beverage is non-residents cuz if you were to correlate with the tourism inkeepers tax, those are a lot of those are people coming through town. And if we can get some going back to Bob Massiey's big ball of twine, we don't have that. No, we need that desperately here. We got to have something that pulls people into this county and spend money. They're trying over tourism to cooking up ideas over They got a really good I'm telling you they got a really good idea to help do that. Well, and we like the depot that has a lot of people.

That was one of the bestund,000. You know, we spent $100,000 on stellar grand $25,000 went for that project over there and stuff. And best money I've ever seen spent. Well, thank you, George. I we appreciate your comments. They're always good. And um but we're growing. The county's almost doubled in size since since I've been watching. Okay. And and that's also why the property tax percentage, whatever you guys call that, is going down is because we got more people in the county and it's getting spread out over a larger amount of people and that needs to be recognized as well. And I thank you for your time.

Thank you, George. Are there any others out there that haven't wanted to? No. Right. Then uh we'll close the public hearing. Make a motion to adopt 25 geo bond for $6.5 million. Do we have a motion? Yeah, I was already motion to adopt ordinance 2025-8 C. Second. All in favor? I opposed. Motion carries. Motion to adopt ordinance 20258D. Second comment.

Yes. just uh this this is where we approve uh the monies in that um bond and from here on out the commissioners can spend it on anything they want that's part of the bond just as a point and and I would say that we need to uh direct the auditor to the minute the cash hits the bank that we get the three reimbursements done immediately. You want to add that as section four if that's allowed. No. No.

Oh, just a comment. Okay. Yeah, that's we got a motion to Can we Can we have it in the meeting? Yeah. So, you thought

Yes. the uh radios Dawn's project and um this is $150,000 and the sheriff's cars I I amend the motion to include that I call for the question that means we need to vote I understand all that and I don't think it's your place to call for the vote yeah I can anybody can call for the question and then I'm going to answer his question with it's Robert call for a vote All in favor? I opposed. Motion carries. Second. Well, me and Kent both did. I think whatever, whoever, me or Keely, whatever you want to put on there.

Who wants to claim it? It doesn't matter. That takes care of need additional appropriations. Let's see. I just want to make sure there's nothing in here that you know do we need to talk about that. All right. Then we will go on with a public hearing for additional appropriations. Uh first on the list is fund 10001 which is county general fund for a dispersement to planning for 62 million300. Whoa. 62,0002.

Oh my gosh. Look where that comment is. Mary typo. your glasses. Please, please, please, please. Well, there goes all our money. We're closed. Yeah, shut the door. I apologize. I Yes. For 63,000 62,37325. Uh, is there any comments from the council? Go on record. Um, you know, being on the planning commission, I just think it's I think it'd be great if, you know, once once we set a price, then, you know, the the department has to stick with the price. Like, here's your legal fee budget. You need to do a better job sticking to it. I think

What do you think is the solution to that outcome? I think I think if you know like she knew we knew that there would be a lot spent on the UDO and so she we should have had a bigger budget last year to say, "Okay, we're doing this UDO. we're going to have to have our own legal team review it. We need some more money. Now, the things that come up like, you know, somebody comes and says, "I want to build a project here," or something, that you may not foresee. Um, and so that that that's understandable, but you know, you don't want to be 62. You rather be close, like 10,000.

And we're working on trying to identify any of those that can be reimbursements through the RDC that the legal services were required in that area. So we will hopefully this and the applicants too anything that they're I think it's accurate that some of those were part of the right and some of the applicants Mary I'd like to ask something too would it be possible because Gary is our consultant to have him come in and give the council an update on where we'll be in the next year or two financially because we're directing a lot of things towards RDC and I think it would help all of us to know exactly where we are financially with RDC. That that was the budget we just did.

Yeah. And put on notice that we will be expecting reimbursements to the county for projects that were legally processed through. Well, we're waiting to find out about that grant. We'll be fine if we get that grant, but it's too early. Not as generous as they were. Is there any comments from the public? Seeing none, then we will close the public hearing for the uh county general planning request for 62,37325. I make a motion to fund 101 county general planning for the legal services in the amount of 62,37325.

Second it. All in favor? I opposed. Motion carries. Uh we'll continue with a public hearing for additional appropriations fund 10001 county general for the board of commissioners capital $282,46943. Someone remind me which capital. What? Yeah. Who didn't sign this one? Deb. Oh, no. I know. Um, do you have any you can add to what the capital project is for

we have our reimbursement resolution in place.

That it no public comment. Okay. Uh I was waiting to see you guys are okay. Do you have a comment? Public comments. Yes.

But we just really want to thank you for pushing this forward so we can get these things out into the field. Um this this you know again we do have some out that the career departments have but the volunteer departments have never had these. And this is going to make a huge difference for everybody in this county. And again, I speak from experience with my dad from two years ago. And again, you would not realize that he was basically deceased for 27 minutes, but because of this device, lives a normal life is I mean, again, it's normal if you can be, but um so I truly truly appreciate this. We will be doing a media event you'll get invites to um in the next couple weeks here. We will have the devices as soon as this is over. basically we can order and we can start moving forward. So, thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

I think the biggest thing for me is just making sure that everybody is trained on them because some of the smaller departments really some of the volunteer departments, there are so many people that come in and out. Training is is key. How do they use it? Who has it? How does it get there? And so forth. So, that's kind of my big thing. Yeah. We talked before. Yeah. huge push for it. I I know they they need it, but it's the training that'll be important. The nice thing is that they are relatively good. I can do it. I'm non EMT, non-medic then.

And I just wanted to echo what John said on behalf of the Hanok County Mutual aid association. You guys have just put life-saving devices across the county. So, compliments to you guys for taking the notice and doing that. It's going to be a huge thing for our community. Even if just one works, it's it's well worth it. So, thank you guys. It's truly remarkable that you did that. And Lucas doesn't need a pension or health insurance. So, that's my favorite thing about Lucas. Yeah. Again, thank you. Welcome. Thanks. My favorite thing. If there's no other public comments, then I'll close the public hearing and ask for a motion.

Motion to fund 101 County General Bo Capital in the amount of $282,46943 for Lucas devices. I'll second it. All in favor? I motion carries. All right, it looks like that has taken care of budget meeting update, but we just approved the budget. Yeah. Oh, is there any update that needs to be done on this? Jim, did you add that to the any budget meeting update? Jim. Oh, yeah. Sheriff, I think, wanted to say something. He's not on the agenda. Well,

that won't stop you. Auditor business then. Sorry. Put I'm just trying to Yeah. Is it about the budget? Maybe. I think it was about your budget, was it? Is it about the cars? No. Oh, I thought it was about your budget. We're out against him sit down. I don't know. That was Harry Potter. No. Wow. We need a hint. Kind of running through them here. Too many in

I'll tell you. So, um, so I found out after, um, Penny, my bookkeeper, um, payroll person and auditor's office that I made a error on my 144s. Um, it won't affect the budget. Um, it's not doing that, but I need to get a basically a motion to allow the auditor's office to accept these new 144s. Um when I did my calculations and it's just for the jail. It affects the general fund and the uh jail lit 1 2 3 4 fund. Um it I don't I don't think it'll affect the budget next year at all. I think we'll be able to compensate for my error. Um but I figure my my matrix on the wrong matrix, the 3% on the wrong matrix. It was one that I had been working on and it was not the one that we're currently using. And so it changed my 144s. And so we caught it um when we we started looking at the 27th pay. Um I've worked with the auditor's office and Sherry um they got the correct ones now. Um everything's squared away and good to go. Um they just felt that you know it should come before you to go ahead and prove them to go ahead and accept those 144s um for the next year budget. Um like I said, it doesn't affect the bottom line right now. I won't know that till maybe towards the end of next year if there's any effect, but I don't think it will. So,

you're just saying you think you have enough margin to budget transfer that? Yes. In the end, but I I I mean, we won't necessarily talk about that until towards the end of next year to see where we're at. But, I think we're we're good. So, it just changes what we got right now. And it's just the 144s. And then as far as the motion to accept his corrected 144s as far as state timelines and all that go, I mean, is now you can do that. You can do that right now.

We went ahead and that reflecting this change had a chance to that in front of you. It doesn't change his like you said his budget or his amount of money but it it's with his matrix it's a little bit different. So we wanted to make sure that you're okay with it but we went ahead and we've started doing all of that already. Okay. I'll make a motion. um for the auditor's office to accept and process the corrected 144 second. And properly second. Uh all in favor I post.

Thank you. That's all I had. That wasn't that You didn't guess that, did you? I like it when you come to us. Easy things. Yeah. Didn't guess that one, did you? Well Well, I did I did, but I didn't want to say it out loud that you messed up on you. you. Okay. I didn't want to say you messed up on your budget. Brad, what what were you there? One of the things from the budget meeting was the payment for your cars. Do you want to Is there any new info?

So, I'm working with we're working with Kelly right now, Chevrolet, to see where we're at. I have not got an invoice um from them. I haven't got any information from them saying that they want to do the 500,000 now or just wait until, you know, everything works out for the total. So, I'm still I'm still waiting to hear from them on whether they want to do that. They may send an invoice just for the five. They decide what they want to do, but I'm still kind of in limbo waiting to hear what their what their thought is. So, um if they want to wait, that's great. I just don't know where Yeah, the cash ought to be there in like mid October. Yeah, I think so. So, and and they're clear on that. I mean, they understand that. So, they may wait. I just don't know where they're where they stand on, you know, needing money for the 20 cars that are sitting there. So,

Okay. Okay. Okay. Thanks. Appreciate it. Uh we we did uh look at all the funds and uh the balances looked okay. We agreed to go ahead with the budget which we did. Bernie Harris asked for a new media IT employee and I was trying to I think what we said was he could go ahead with that and we would follow up later with how we're going to pay for it. general. Well, that's an opening. We appreciate money in his budget from people he hadn't he could shuffle things for a while. Yeah.

And we did discuss the shortfalls and the jail lit and the E911 lit uh coming into play in 2027 looking at the change in the library lit to make up for that. So the question was where we where do we stand with the um DLGF on the lit changes? Yes. Have you heard anything?

I was ready to provide an update on that. So, I sent the proposed ordinance out on so by statute they have like 30 days to do. Who's the budget? trying to get this review. So 30 days of course we'll expire here in Oc. So hopefully we'll have that answer of that for the October budget meeting.

Yeah, maybe. So budget hopefully there won't need to be really changes to expect. Thank you. We agreed to submit uh a maximum levy appeal. I think Greg is working on that. Uh the commissioners did uh issue a 5-year capital plan, which by the way, we have to have that in place in order to uh our um levy for the King Capital Fund. So, we have to they have to do that. Uh there were no numbers with it. They're going to work on getting some numbers with their items and done everything else today, I guess. Yep. That's it.

Okay. So, I move we approve the minutes for July 29th. Second. All in favor? I motion carries. I'll abstain for absence. Right. I'll move we approve the minutes for August 13th. Second. All in favor? I abstain for absence. I'll move we approve the minutes for August 20th. Second. 20th. That was a special meeting. A special meeting. No, that's for your motions for August 13th and August 20th. No, it was I did them individually because some people we didn't vote. Yeah, we did. and she is stained and then uh because key is stained for the 29th we did the 13th and then now we're doing now we have a motion

I'll second the motion to approve I I oppose carries and the auditor has her hand up well that's it's our business time I just want to make sure that we don't you don't dismiss before I have an opportunity to say this um so today I'm going to be heading downtown with Miss Mary. No. I'm just going to take this moment to embarrass her just a little bit. I nominated her for the golder golden hooser award and she received that. So she's we're going to go downtown that she can receive that. And that has What is the golden award? Well, you have to be golden. No. That's what I'm asking.

It it it has to do with your your civic um and community involvement throughout the years. Um now who? I thought I thought it was an age thing. No, I just wanted to recognize her for that and let you guys know. Tell us. Yeah, she would she would never tell us. We're going to take pictures when we're down there, though. Yeah. Speech. Speech. But yes. Well, I will admit that the award has the word golden in it. And as you can see, I'm becoming very golden. So, thank you. Thank you for all your years of service.

I think that's Mary. You know, I didn't go into like my adulthood thinking I want to get into politics, but I was 33 when I became an elected official at a golden living and I've been one ever since and I'm 70. So, so that's I it's So, you met the golden you met the met. Well, part of it she had to be active in the last three years in other um outside of you know governmental stuff just the work that she's done. So being on the Amplify board, the education board allowed her to meet that criteria. Aren't you glad you got volunte? [Laughter]

Wait till December and we start doing new appointments. You're all in for it. No, I'm I'm totally out. That said, uh, Deb, do you have any auditor's business? Good. That was that was her business. Wow. All right, then. So, we have the Buck Creek Lip public safety safety application continued. Yes. Um, we have a letter that came from Mickey um in your packet that should be there. Oh, yeah. Unless I just was got it.

And again, yeah, I got it. Here it is. uh distribution of their uh public safety income tax. They listed on the second page what their needs were. Um I don't know what they total fund a little over $800,000. Um I I don't really know what our action is on this and it is all capital. I think I didn't I don't think we any action. I don't think we have any money to share. we need it all. Or or if there were certain things we were going to do, if we had some money,

we talked about the uh EDA money possibly uh contributing to some of their needs on the second page that we had already. I assume that it's going to the Sugar Creek Township request has been taken care of. So,

yeah. And as of today, someone corre can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think after the Sugar Creek request was approved, the RDC won't be able to budget reimbursement for that for a couple years. So, there might be something like $16,000 left to play with. And we don't know when the next EDA payment will come in. There was 300 some projected for the next calendar year, assuming it all arrives. Um, but that's a ways off. So there's some money owed that working on that's already passed due. Yeah,

that's good. I I think patience is in is in order, but um I I you know, we do need to know what we're going to prioritize when funds free up, but for Well, there's supposed to be a committee meeting to do that. Yeah. Now, Mary kind of um was in charge of that committee, but committ $3 million payment from the state that right now nobody's sure it's going to come to us or not. Gary uh it's for the the road projects that are in and he hasn't got there yet because do slowed things up

and so we're really on hold until we figure out if that 3 millions is going to hit or not cuz that that changes then our priorities on a lot of things. Are you suggesting that if that comes in that the RDC has room? No, not this year. Not this year. No, but but we're already giving 750 we do, but that agreement will end in a year or so and we'll have to come up with new radios,

right? We'll have to come up with new um with new prioritizations for money for Buck Creek and that type of stuff after that agreement. But um yeah, so we're in a we're in a hold mode, especially now that we got another 3 million waiting. But this request is for let public safety. That's correct. And I guess my opinion is we don't have any to give to anybody. I don't know if I Well, that was a state statute that they put in there that allows them to do that, too. It doesn't mean that it it was also an unfunded statute. No, it doesn't mean that it has Do you want to do you have comments that you'd like to add to what we're talking about?

Just looking at the whole picture. There's a lot that's been covered in this conversation. So, I just want to make a couple points. One is is that from the RDCOU, we made a request to extend that and that request was denied. And so, that's a conversation that we're going to revisit and I'll get on the agenda for the 30th to specifically cover that so that both the commissioners and council can have comment on that. The second piece to that too is I know that there's been comments and again I'll bring this up at the 30th of Gary P's talk about the impact the financial impact that the tiff and the the overall impact to our budget is $250,000. Our accountants took a look into that and they're showing that that impact is actually closer to $2.8 million not $250,000. So again I'm going to bring that to you guys because we had talked to Geratas offline about that. He said that those numbers were from Baker Tilly not from him. So, I think it's important to get that clarity because I think having that clarity on the actual impact that is happening to Buck Creek Township and the support that's being given by the county needs to be very clear and make sure that everybody's on the same page from that

as your frustrations, especially talking about the the money coming down from the state or coming from a federal level. I wholeheartedly feel that because we feel that coming from the county side as well. And so, that's why we want to make sure that we have that communication from the public lit request. You're right. It is an opportunity for funding that we could ask for. And so it would be it would behoove us to take every opportunity that we can just as we're doing from grants and everything else to try and fund some of the projects and things that we're trying to do to get caught up and then get to where we need to be. So I got a question for you, Chief. Yes, ma'am.

So if we take the renovation line item out, there's four other uh items that aren't as large. bay exhaust system, lution system, turnout gear, and station 472 generator. How would you prioritize the level of importance across those four items?

So, the location system we actually moved forward on because it was something that was requested by uh John for us to get moving and we've actually had that we finally got that installed. We're finishing up a couple minor issues from that perspective from a turnout gear from the um exhaust system and from the generator. I would say that that would probably be the order that we're looking at doing. We're working on trying to use some of our capital funds and some of our Kim fire funds to be able to cover those projects if they're not able to be covered from other other avenues. But then that it's it's one of those if we're able to get funding for those, it allows us to use our funding for additional projects similar to the same thing you guys are running into with trying to use RDC for the sheriff to be able to open up funds for other things as well.

Were you talking about September 30th meeting? the evening meeting. Yes. Uh we don't have that. It's been cancelled. That's what I was wanting to bring up. Appreciate that. We don't have to take any AIC. I don't I don't anticipate us not having future plans, agreements, you know what I mean? I know that the current scenario, we haven't dove into all that yet. But um cuz the the original one is still in place.

Correct. But um uh I mean I'm integrate on what we're doing with McCordsville as well as what we're doing with Buck Creek and stuff like that. And I do think there's some tweaks need to be made, but it's it's not a detriment in my opinion to Buck Creek. It's a you know what I'm saying? So I I I uh so I don't want you to believe that from from my opinion or even I think I can speak somewhat for the council that that Buck Creek is not going to continue to be a tie a top priority with RDC funds even after this initial agreement's over the the commissioners have to you know be a part of it and and uh and decide what's what's prioritized stuff like that. But, uh, when you said that it the original agreement was denied to be extended, I'm assuming it's cuz we need to prioritize and think about what cuz I don't believe the 700,000 in the future is adequate. Agreed.

And there's money for for us to extend that, too. But just not we're not talking about 26, you know, right? 20. The agreement extends through 26, but as we're trying to plan out both our capital planning beyond for the next 5 years and as we're looking at the staffing requirements that we're going to have with some of the growth that's coming into the the township, we're trying to make those plans as well. What I was saying about, you know, originally there was $21 million designated for McCordsville. And you're still spending through 28, right? Right. We've got a $6 million commitment at this point, but there has to be a hard look on that other $15 million, right?

There has to be a hard look. Well, I did, you know, inquire with Gary P at a high level if does stop there for now, could uh some of the money that we don't have budgeted for a long time for parks be brought up into sooner years so that we could have parks sooner than seven years from now. some of that longer term. We had budgeted out in 2032, but if we're not going to do those projects, we might be able to really do something cool with parks sooner. But the there is supposed to be a committee working on those priorities. Who's the committee? Me. Oh, you are on it. Okay. Well, it's myself. Um

I'm on it. Kent, um Bill Spalding. Um, and another the problem I had starting out is hurting cats. The people that I just mentioned all have either a full-time job or their commitment time is taken somewhere else. And it's not, you know, you guys that were on the uh fair or the uh county parm uh all happen to be in the building at the same time on the budget meeting day. So, it made it easy to get all you guys to just go ahead and continue your uh committee. Our problem is um we just agreed to the budget today. Yeah. That we cannot like

so I guess I will just have to start scheduling meetings and I I want there to be all of us there though. I don't want it to just be two people. I would love to be part of those discussions. I did the RDC for a minute and watched that budget and I'm happy to prot I'll circle back but I still don't we can talk but I don't think there's going to be any votes made for well there's no money for a year or two so you know that's what I mean

and all it is is predictions it's it's a vision board basically of what we see so with that said I didn't see the urgency I tried to get couple meetings together and it never worked out and we just kind of we dropped it. What threw me into a a a holding pattern was that we're not getting the the funding from the federal government that we thought we were going to get yet. And I think that that is and it's not it's not a couple hundred,000 millions. So that and I'm hoping in the next two or three or four months we have a resolution for that.

Well, I am of the belief that Bud Creek Fire is a top priority. I certainly want to see that extended. I would love some clarity on actual fiscal impact so that that could be considered. U but to Mary's point, there is just no money for the taking in the next anyway. But we are trying to get new projects to prioritize Bug Creek also. Yeah, I know that start and and because we do kind of feel like we got duped a little bit once before. So fool me once, you know. Um but

well, we're working with the developers as well as some of the entities that are already in the township to try and pull funding for some of these projects. So, I don't want you guys to feel that when we make the the public the lit request or that when we come to the RDC that that's the only ask or the only direction that we're going. We're trying to take a shotgun effect and if we can pull one project from one place, a second project from another, then all of that comes together and helps. And even some of them we're looking at doing a joint project. So, if somebody can't cover all of the turnout gear purchase request, then trying to get two of the developers or three of the developers to come together to accomplish that. And you qualify for excess levy stuff also. and we're applying for that our board meeting last night that was approved for our accountant to apply for that.

Is there a discussion with the commissioners or um the ranks of impact fees that could feed straight back to the uh fire department? I don't know that there's I've not I've not heard of discussions heard that term fees have an impact just passed that. Yeah. Uh Walmart told me that they talked to you about trying to pay for something on a one-off basis not to exceed $50,000 or anything. I don't believe that made any progress.

So, we had a meeting uh Randy Serell orchestrated a meeting with some of the Walmart executives. We had had a meeting previously that we were able to facilitate and the gentleman that we had met with apparently is no longer with them. So, we had a a stop in communication and didn't understand why. And so now with the executives that we met uh with Randy, they had given us that insight into why that communication had stopped. And so in those conversations, Walmart has their spark grants that they do from the distribution centers and the stores on a regular basis that cap out of $5,000 that we have been applying for and using those for some of the projects to not only benefit the department, but the community. Uh with one of the ones that we're looking at doing, they did also commit that they had some additional fundings. They talk about 50,000 being the amount and gave us a path to be able to use to make that request. And so part of trying to not ask for the same thing from everybody and getting everybody going yes and then going okay wait a minute. Um we're we've been trying to meter where this lit request would fall where our board would be. And then I actually have a meeting later this week with a group of u the developers to talk about another opportunity. And so it's one of those that we're lining them up and trying to make them appropriate from the responses that we're getting to what the forward request is so that we're not I don't want to say duplicating efforts but having multiple places contributing to the same project as opposed to looking at the entire project or the entire list of projects.

You're doing a great job as far as I'm concerned. And we don't I don't mean to be negative every time I talk to you guys, but we got to be real with the numbers. And uh but it's patience and uh government is patience. It takes forever, you know, to to to effectuate anything, but that's the reality. I'd like to keep an eye on these itemized items that you had listed on your second page and just maybe at some point if there's something that we could possibly do to help with one or two of those, I would be open, very open to listening that proposal.

Some of the product so the turnout gear and the reason why I indicated it as a first is our turnout gear has a 10-year life that we're able to use it before it becomes non-compliant. And so we're cycling through and we're at a point. So, that one is one that one way or the other we'll have to move forward on whether if we pull capital funds from our side or if we're able to fund elsewhere. Um, and then the exhaust system is a is a is a health safety for the crews and the bays that we're working on as well.

So, I'm happy to share with you our capital improvement plan that we've put together um that goes through and we've laid out projects for the next I've I've gone out to 10 years. I don't have everything mapped out 10 years, but the next 5 years is definitely mapped out. Obviously, it's a living document and things will change as funds are available um and as we're able to accomplish those projects, but I'm happy to share that with you as well so you can kind of see the vision of what we're building out and some of the projects. And if there's some of the I'll refer to it as lowhanging fruit that you guys are able to assist with, by all means, we would be happy to to partner in doing that. I would consider once the GEO bond is finalized reimbured we're going to dump

we're going to get reimbursed back to food and beverage a bunch of money we had to put out before that bond could be done. So they're saying end of the year, last couple months of the year. Once that reimbursement is processed of food and beverage, I would certainly entertain. I think he said you're one and two is turnout gear and the bay exhaust which is 143,000. And I once that reimbursement comes back, I would certainly entertain it. We've always helped the departments with turnout gear. Always. That's mostly been the volunteers. So, mostly. Yeah, that's true. Okay. Thank you. Thank you.

I appreciate it. Come back and see us always every meeting. All right. Um, we have now the uh corner approval of their budget transfer.

Oh, here we go. It looks like last page I think. Yeah, it looks like that uh they're asking for three transfers from different funds, two different funds with transport to fuel dues and subscription to supplies and cell phones to supplies. That's the request move. I'll second it. All in favor? I $100.

Motion carries. Last being the resolution recommending the maximum levy limit [Applause] has something to do what's the resolution number that would be 2025-9 [Music]

resolution reads um of the county council recommending the 2026 property tax levy limits for taxing units. Witnessed that and then it it's a typed out pa one page. You want that read into the minutes or are you okay with acknowledging we have it? I don't remember doing refresh my memory. I was gone last. This is where we're just telling them to stick to the four point the the 4%. Do we do this every year? Yes. Yeah. Well, yeah, we have to apply for the maximum levy.

I move we approve resolution 2025-9-6. [Applause] Second. Second. All in favor? I opposed. I move we adjourn. Second. All in favor? I I give it to Tammy. She was enthusiastic. I was the I was enthusiastic. No, I believe for everything but the embankment, I think. Right. Yeah, I know. I know. You want him shued? Come on now.

Now, do you see why I had I raised my hand so I could mention award? Because as soon as you mention a journey, every like good luck getting those people Don't when you said committee I thought it might it might give us a little indication