County Council - Special Meeting

Are you going to do good? I don't think so. I don't think so. We have an agenda here with the public hearing coming first for the local income tax ordinance adoption. I'll call the public hearing to order. If we have any comments from the public, please do so now. None. Um, I'll close the public hearing and ask if there's any questions or comments from the council. What ordinance number would we use?

Oh my god. Upstairs, y'all. Well, I'm sorry. Take your time. while I'm here. I like 10F. Well, what Well, can we go ahead and just move I I would move that we uh Excuse me. Well, I I just wanted to ask questions the two attorneys that there's some changes that have been marked out and so forth. Would it be okay if Mary initials it? Would that work? What about the the the the auditor corrected all of them? Oh, well, yeah. I don't see I don't see anything cross that. Okay. Yeah. Not in the one.

I was going to say there shouldn't be any other changes. The final copy in our packet is the corrected copy. Is that what you're saying? Okay. Okay. Yeah. Okay. eyes behind the e-ball and

just Sarah and and I did check it out and read into the minutes and so it's for the public that the uh 2025 geo bond is uh an amount of $5 million with $1.1 million allocated for the Hancock house $750,000 allocated for P911 $800,000 allocated to the sheriff to department which includes needs to purchase essential equipment for the department and the replacement of aging patrol cars and to maintain reliable, safe, and effective law enforcement services and 3.85 million for a new Hancock County government building to be out by the um sheriff's department. So, um, now we do have an ordinance number

2025-10 before we that I told you. That's what I said. Before we proceed, um, a did we open and close a public hearing? And it has already been open. I thought you said it. I just want to be extra sure it happened so fast. And then the only other thing I'm sure it's addressed, but the uh special purpose rate is that is that affected at all by the conversations we've recently had with the library? No. Okay.

-10- What? F as in Frank. F as in Frank. So, do we have any other questions or comments from council? I move that we approve uh ordinance number 2025-10-f. I'll second. Oh, I'm sorry. I thought you were done. Were you done? Yes. Okay, I'll second. We have a motion and a second. All in favor? I opposed. Motion carries. Gosh, there's so much paper here. Uh the next um you want to get Bill. Yeah, he's in that little room. Sarah, quick question.

He's in that little room right there talking to the highway department. Would you mind asking Bill or telling Bill that we're ready for him? Whenever he's ready. Morning.

Good morning. I'm here on behalf of Commissioner Gray who had requested that we increase the amount u that we give to animal control with Greenfield for this budget cycle to $465,000. They're still working on the numbers to make it a fair and equitable solution by 2026 where the city will know how much they need to pay for animal control, the county uninccorporated would know how much they would have to pay for animal control, and then the municipalities would know how much they would have to pay for animal control. I pulled the 2026 proposed budget and I saw that we had uh proposed a certain amount and reduced it and I can't recall why we reduced it at that time. Maybe it was in anticipation of the uh municipalities participation but with that not being done as of yet then it makes sense that we our share until we get that worked out. So if 465 is a good number, that was a number that was suggested by Ray to support our our animal control payment.

Yeah. And we were at $443 right in the budget. So it's a [Applause] $22,000 difference approximately. And they're not arguing over the philosophy of we should my understanding and this is a question that I don't think they are arguing over whether uh our fair share is for the unincorporated areas only. It's the u the inaccuracies in counting what is unincorporate, what numbers they've got for unincorporated versus the incorporated or the incorporated areas minus Greenfield. So they're still working the numbers, right?

Yes, that's correct. Um annexations happening all over. That's always going to be a moving So, I don't know how we deal with that end, but I think it's one of those things every year you're going to have to go back and find out who was annexed and what there there's probably some model that can be created to uh figure that out.

I it's and they can correct me if I'm wrong. Uh with us already adopting the 2020 budget that what we would have to do now is just give this thumbs up that we're going to do this for the 2026 budget come January. and um make a motion to increase it today because we cannot increase the budget after we've adopted it and wait till January. That's right. I think we have to wait till Jan. I think that correct? Yes. Yeah. But then that should be fine because they're not going to spend the $443,000. It's January one. That's already budgeted.

Adding the 20ome,000 to it. One thing I'd like to look at as the discussions continue and we've been saying for years that we're on the cusp of working out the municipalities. So I don't know if we can draw a line in the sand on figuring it out in the next cycle. Uh but one thing I would be really interested in if you can just make note when you're provided data is what the cost per run actually breaks out to. You know we operate they operate animal control. we chip in our share. But is it $1,000 an animal? You know what I'm saying? Like that's I think it has

that has been done. I've attended a meeting with Janine at McCordsville at the time and the discussion was with how much time and running into was going on and there just couldn't seem to be an agreement reached at that time as to what was a fair number and so it just it never moved forward. So, it's just still I think I've got the numbers here that we could do. We can bring that all up. But yeah,

because at some point do we also say, you know, not to exceed X dollars per run because when I left the city council and came here, I had been part of yes, we need a new building. Yes, we need to be better staffed. Yes, these people aren't paid that, you know, fairly. And so we increased the budget and then I came over here and it's like the city of Greenfield just raises, you know, without without recognizing that other people have to chip into that. And that can be true. And the first round of numbers they did a few years ago being in Spring Lake that's very small. We had one run and I can't remember the number, but what they said Spring Lake owed for one run made me go, how much are we letting animal control cost per animal? You know,

I believe the numbers that they're looking at, and you can correct me, Bill, is these smaller municipalities are not included in what is being considered an amount we're trying to collect in the future from the larger municipalities. Say the town of Shirley or Wilkinson. Uh well, nobody's been included in that yet. I mean, it's all been uh the city of Greenfield and in county. I mean, in in having going out and actually having meetings and discussions, it's been with the larger municipality. Yeah, I think we discussed that some of the Spring Lake, for instance, may not even have that in their budget. Some of the really small ones that we could possibly cover them.

Yeah. And I'm not even suggesting that Spring Lake shouldn't have their fair share in the budget. But what I'm saying is is you know if uh since we don't control the budget itself then okay we agree we get the municipalities out we all agree to a number but then 3 years from now is that number where you know runs went up 25% but our share went up 50 you know like where is the control in how much we will commit even for our share if we have no control of the budget itself what are the preautions questions. They're the numbers. You can Oh, yeah.

I can say that for seven years, we've been arguing about this issue. We've had several iterations of negotiations uh as to what the county should pay. And then previous administrations have requested and gotten some information on where these runs are happening. But there is, you know, some argument there that the county is paying a lot for what it really is getting for the animal control, but some runs are probably for horses and some runs are for rabbits. I mean,

it's the the problem with it is is I think it's um you know, breaking it down and understanding exactly how it's going to be allocated based on some information. It might or might not be back accurate. So, there's we've had that issue, too. Yeah. It's not a it's not a draw line in the sand. It's just the goal has been for the last few years is to figure out how to stabilize the cost and include the other people that are responsible. Yeah. And they're still on that goal. I think they're closer now than they've ever been

trying out at one time, right? Things like that. And I think you all met with different,

you know, government officials there and municipalities. To make an example, in 22, it's easy math. Spring Lake had one run. So that says they should pay $840. So $8.40 a run. By 2023, they had three runs, and that comes out to $945 per run. So you know, at what point do we go, okay, well, the cost of having a building, utilities, etc. Divide that by runs, and then and then you got two people spending two hours with a vehicle and some fuel that have benefit. I mean, can it get up to $1,500 per run of cost that we're not paying attention to how the system itself is staffed? And you know, where we end up paying a lot per run. I just hope we can look at some way to be cognizant of that going forward in the calculation.

I don't think a run is a there all kinds of runs. So, they may go out and have to chase. guys have a study group that you're working towards a goal of having some numbers available for next year. Correct.

Yes. Janine and the mayor and whoever else is involved in that. Yes. And you can just tell like right now how challenging it is. Here it is. We're seven years down the road and we still haven't been able to nail this nail this down. But we have made progress in that Greenfield does recognize that I think that we we want to be responsible and they agree that we in a fairness uh uh act we should only be responsible for the unincorporated areas. So, we have made progress,

right? The end goal is still, like you say, it's to have the city pay for its share, the county to pay for its unincorporated share, and other municipalities who are part of that system pay that share as fair and as equitably as bigger. And for the taxpayers looking at uh animal control, it makes sense, doesn't it, for there to be one animal control uh organization and everybody else contribute rather than having animal control in this little town, that little town, just like E911, we uh merge two into one for

uh long-term u lower costs for today. Then we'd like to give a thumbs up to uh agree that we will fund animal control in the amount of $465,000 and uh handle that at our January meeting. Thumbs up. Y everybody good. So we have a majority for that. Indigo, that is an invoice, correct? Sarah, that's okay. Yes. Morning.

So, before I start, hello everybody. Um, HCSS was given a $150,000 check from the city of Greenfield that was in ARPA money. So, I'm the one who actually does the quarterly reports for HCCS with uh INDOT and Indigo. And I just wanted to let the council know that we did receive them. they received a check as our subreient uh for 150 and um I've asked them on future invoicing to line item that ARPA so we're not comingling federal funds um which is really important. So that money has to be paid before the end of 2026. Typically every quarter it's around 133 to 140,000. So that should probably balance out by the first quarter of next year. So we should be good on that 150 that you guys had asked the city for.

Are they committing to do the same then in 26? I don't know. I was just following the chain of of that 150 because I was trying to figure out how we were going to report that when it's Indigo uh federal and uh ARPA money. So, um, but I've asked them just not to invoice it, but to report so I can report each quarter if that makes sense. Does that make sense to everyone? Want to make sure I'm doing the right thing. Deb provided a breakdown. Uh, it should be there in your packet that there was an insurance reimbursement that was deposited into the general fund and that what we're talking about today is just a balance.

Those are two separate things. and the screen. Oh, there you go. Thank you. So, the second uh reason I'm here is I'm requesting that this invoice be paid. Um and we will need an um agreement created by Indigo, but I need a fund number. So, the reason I'm showing you this quietest is because in 2024, there was a van that uh senior services um had destroyed. We received this check for $38,500 and then Gary P filed for a grant which was granted. So you have the granted grant, you have the invoice um and you have the um invoice. The invoice is for 40,000 441. If you subtract that 385 um from that plus the um the grant money we should only round about and have around 1,900 really that's due out of that 40. I just need to get approval for the invoice and I need a fund that it's going to come out of, but the the actual quitus actually went into the general fund. So, I didn't know if we needed to follow that general fund.

And you're needing an additional $1941 to to pay the total. Correct. No. Well, the invoice is for 40. We need the full amount. I don't think we appropriated any of it. But I'm just letting you know, but I want to know what the to I'm trying to get to the total. Total is 40, 441. Yeah, $40,441 and the uh reimbursement was already deposited into the general fund. So, we're talking about an additional of $1,941

with knowing that part of it already sitting in the general fund. Okay. I just need a funding number so Indigo can create a agreement for the grant uh for Bill to sign and get this invoice paid. Uh so we'll thumbs up today to advertise for additional appropriation from general fund number uh what's general funds number one for $40,441 for senior services. Thumbs up, right? That what you want today, Sarah?

And then authorize that then the invoice be paid through the general fund once the additional has been appropriated. Okay. And just just as a note, next year that this all should be clear in that we set up senior services with its own fund. So it won't be going in the general fund. So if we have insurance stuff or whatever, it'll go back and forth in that fund so we can watch it and we put $600,000 in it. And if like Greenfield pays their 150 directly to them, it will just allow our fund to accumulate.

Who seconded that? Uh it's not a motion. We just thumbs up to advertise to Okay. Well, um that is everything that was listed on our agenda. Is there anything that the council wanted Could I just mention that um some of you participated in the SNP uh rating uh call and we did uh get the results of that and we continue with a double A+ uh rating and I think the bond uh Robin you say being sold today back on the go bond the $6.5 million G we know the date.

When will we know the rate after it's sold? Yeah. But what's the date? Do we have a date? Do we know when that's going to be today? It's being sold. It's going to be sold today. So, we'll know after today. So, we'll know before our next meeting. Yeah. We have to by the budget meeting. Oh, yeah. We hold budget meetings. Yeah. We have to promote the I move we adjourn. Second. All in favor? I. It was quite You weren't ready, right? I got another meeting. Boring as can be. Well, have to