Commissioners - Regular Meeting

Okay, all rise for the pledge. I pledge allegiance 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. Welcome everyone to the Porter County Board of Commissioners meeting Tuesday, June 2nd, 2026. Consent agenda.

Approval of payroll May 22nd, 2026. Approval of claims May 21st, 2026 and May 29th, 2026. Approval of minutes May 19th, 2026. Weights and measures monthly report March 16th, 2026 through April 15th, 2026 and April 16th, 2026 through May 15th, 2026. I move that we approve. Second.

We have motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye. Motion carries. Announcements. We have an appointment for the Porter County Public Library Board System. Board of Trustees.

I move that we reappoint Stu Summers.

Second. We have a motion to appoint Stu Summers. We have a second. All those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Motion carries. Thank you. Second appointment is for the Plan Commission to finish Arvid Merkner's term.

I move that we appoint Eric McDonald.

Second.

We have a motion to appoint Eric McDonald to finish Arvid Merkner's term. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Motion carries. We have the point for the Porter County Airport Authority.

I'd like to move that we table that.

Yeah, we had a lot of really second. We have a motion and a second. We have a lot of really good applicants, and we need more time to interview those. So I have a motion and a second to table that. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Motion carries.

And that, Mr. Chairman, that really goes for the applicants that we receive, applications we receive with most of these appointments, certainly. Most of them are very good. It's very difficult to pick just one sometimes. But those people should be discouraged and keep looking for an appointment in the future. Keep your application in. Keep applying.

Yes, we have a lot of, and we appreciate everyone trying to get involved. Hard to get good people to be involved. Okay, next we have a bid opening amendment. Amendment for the Porter County Commissioners Meeting Minutes March 31st, 2026 regarding Good Oil Company. Second, Tony Mack Amendment 597 West, US 30, Belper, Arizona, Revising Zoning District from CH High Intensity Commercial to CM Medium Intensity Commercial Reflecting Approved Permitted Uses Containment Agreement for Written Comments.

Mr. Jaber. Yes, sir. Good morning, commissioners. At both plant commission and at the commissioners' meeting when you had first and second reading for this particular zoning amendment, there was a list of permitted uses that would not be permitted permitted under the CM zoning. You have that in your packet. I can read it for the record if you wish. It's not . But I just want to record as we put together the commitment document that will accompany the ordinance. So if you have any questions, I could read those off if you would.

Yes, please.

Following uses which are normally permitted by CM will not be permitted as part of this zoning amendment for Good Oil Company and they are Agricultural crop production, raising a farm and exotic animals, banks, machine or an ATM, banquet hall, bar or tavern, billiard or arcade room, coffee shop, delicatessen, funeral home or crematory, mortuary, single movie theater, single screen, a quick cash, check cashing station or office or store, a restaurant, a restaurant with drive-up window, a tattoo piercing parlor or video rental. Those uses would not be allowed on that property. And what we're asking is that your meeting minutes of March 31st.

Do we need two motions, one for the amendment and then one for second reading?

Yes.

OK. I move that we approve the amendment with the non-permitted uses for the rezoning of the case that we're considering.

Before you do second reading, we did have some reading already you did approve.

It's been approved since the last meeting. So if it's just amending the minutes from the second reading, one motion.

Okay. All right. Then I move that we approve the amendment to the second reading on the zoning map change from CH high intensity commercial to CM medium intensity commercial reflecting the permitted uses as well as the uses that have been stricken from that list.

Second. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Motion carries. Thank you. Second item, Bridge 132, County Road 200 West over Salt Creek Tributary.

This will be the bid opening. This is a bid opening.

Bid opening?

So we have a bid opening for the Bridge 132, County Road 200 West over Salt Creek Tributary, Liberty Township.

The auditor's office receives six bids for this project.

That one was sealed. Sure. Ellis Construction Company Inc. Ellis Construction Company Inc. Base bid, $1,207,018.47. $1,207,018.47. And I don't see any alternative bids. Milestone Contractors LP. Milestone Contractors LP. Base bid $1,087,211. $1,087,211. Reith Riley Construction Company, Inc. Reith Riley Construction Company, Inc. Base bid $1,117,327.02. $1,117,327.02. Laporte Construction Company, Inc. Laporte Construction Company, Inc. bid $1,385,086.27. Gary Up Construction Company, Inc. Gary Up Construction Company, Inc. FaceBid, 1,179,500. 1,179,500. Dunnett Bay Construction Company. Dunnett Bay Construction Company. Base bid, $1,082,861.67. Base bid, $1,082,861.67. Commissioners, we'd like to look at these and make an award at the end of the meeting. I believe so.

No, close. OK, they're close. 5000 different.

Thank you. One more.

Next up facilities. Oh, I'm sorry. Next up is Skillman. Mr. Paul?

Good morning. All right. Just have some pay applications here, so I'll read through these. At the jail, we have H&T Electrical, payout number 13 in the amount of $59,099.14. Quality Control, payout number 12 in the amount of $195,865.97. F.E. Moran payout number 18 in the amount of $51,757.90. Stans painting payout number 10 in the amount of $46,336.72. Kleckner interior payout number 12 in the amount of $13,745.07. Garriott payout number 13 in the amount of $173,591.60. I move that we approve the payouts as read.

Second. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye.

Motion carries. Highway. Highway Department, just one pay application here. That's for Hill Fire Protection Pay App number 10 in the amount of $8,376. I move that we approve. Second.

We have a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Motion carries. Thank you. Facilities. Mr. Phil. Good morning. Receive a request for the highlight to install two or three 25-foot commercial grade external hell-eared flagpoles in the amount of $7,200 to be paid out of the bond. Yes.

I'd like to do three. And that's the total price for all three. Total price for all three.

And just can I have a question real quick? The bond that you're talking about, that's not the highway garage portion of the facilities portion. That's mine. Okay. I second.

Okay. We have a motion. All those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

With clarification on that, what were you just discussing?

She was making sure it was coming out of my bond, not the highway bond. Clarification on the bond.

Why is it coming out of the highway bond?

Why isn't it? I don't know what their bond or how much they have. You guys just asked me to get the flagpole, so I was just paying for it. So it was coming out of your budget? Yeah. It's coming out of my bond budget. The 2024.

Or what was the bond in your budget originally taken out for?

For all the county buildings. For all the buildings? Yeah, for any county in the buildings.

Right, that's what I thought. So, again, I don't understand why the cost of the flagpole on the highways portion of the bond is not coming out of that.

I mean, we can wait and I can check to see if they have the money for it.

I know they got the money for it. You could check, but I know they have the money. They have room in there.

Well, it's just this was never brought. I mean, this was not a request from the people in the highway department and brought up during budget. So that's why I was wondering.

It was, Barb, it was brought up several times by me. And I know it was brought up by Jim to have those flagpoles.

Yeah, Jim and you were the ask the flag to skill.

They still here. Yeah.

Well, check on that.

You get back back with us. OK. All right. Thank you.

Thank you. Next, JDC, Ellison Cox. Good morning.

Good morning.

Morning.

How are you?

Super. Super.

Well.

Peachy.

I'm okay.

Okay. Let's move on.

We have an ordinance establishing a non-reverting fund, number 9183, the Community Corrections Outreach Prevention and Intervention Fund, second reading.

I move that we approve.

Second. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Motion carries. We have a second ordinance establishing a non-reverting fund number 9140 for the JDAI FY27 grant fund. Second reading.

I move that we approve.

Second. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye. Motion carries. Thank you. EMA, Mr. Lastbella. No? He doesn't. So we have Norton-Sanding Chapter 3095 for the Porter County Code establishing EMA-DHS reimbursement grant front second reading.

I move that we approve.

Second. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Motion carries. Assessor Suneff. Good morning.

Good morning, everyone.

Good morning. Good morning. We have Eagle View messages agreement for picturometry for flights for term of six years. And that's for like a GIS.

It's a GIS that is specific to the assessor's office. It's specific to Porter County and it's something that we can use for reassessment and for many things actually. We allow 79, there's 79 different users.

Can you pull your microphone closer?

Seventy-nine different users that can access this pictometry, all the photos. We allow like adult probation, assessment, analytic, well forget them, that's a vendor. Our office has 24 users, the auditor's office, the building department, city of Portage, city of Alpo. the airport prosecutor's office, the sheriff's office, surveyor's office, town of Chesterton, and then another vendor that we allowed to use it for a total of 79 different users. This information is invaluable to us. As you know, when we do reassessment, if we go up to a home and people yell at us and say, get off my property, this allows us to look at that property and make sure that we are assessing it as well as possible. This is a six-year contract. Scott has reviewed the contract and he found it acceptable. And the total amount of the contract? The total is for $126,6497. This is a 4.5% increase over the last time we signed. So over six years, that's not too bad, right? But again, it's information that's invaluable to us and this comes from my budget.

That price, is that for the life of the contractor annually?

It's annually, the same amount annually.

What would keep us from buying our own drone?

There's rules about drones. This is an actual airplane that flies at 6,800 feet. We're not getting into privacy issues. Drones can create real problems if we try to do that ourselves.

Plus, you'd have to have staff then to use those also, correct? And they'd have to be properly trained? Correct.

And with this imagery, we've been using them for quite a few years. And I can look at a certain property over the years and see the progression. Again, it's.

No, I'm not questioning how it's. And what was the number that you quoted? The total for the new contract amount for each year will be $120,664.97.

Again, a 4.5% increase over the contract that we signed six years ago back in 2020. That's over $700,000. I'm sorry?

The contract's value is exceeding $700,000.

1.2 million, yes.

Per year?

Per year. I'm sorry, million. I'm sorry, 120,000 per year.

Right. Let me ask you a question. I mean, you're happy with that?

Yes.

Okay. But I, you know, we're, in my opinion, for what it's worth, I mean, we're exceeding When we get to these kinds of figures, why aren't we bidding this out or looking in to see who else may be able to do it?

There are other contractors out there. I promise you they contact me every year to look at what they can do. But we are very happy with this contract. We're very happy that they... fit us in at the time that we need these flyovers done. For instance, we can't have them done in January because there's probably going to be snow on the ground. We can't have them done in April and May because of the leaf coverage.

So the fact that companies are aware of that as well.

Sure, of course.

And I'm happy that you're glad you're happy with it.

So if we were to go with a new company, it's very possible that we go to the bottom of their list and they're going to do their preferred customers who have been with them longer and they're going to get their flyovers before we get our flyovers. So I feel that this company, we've been with them a long time. We get preferential treatment. And we get those flyovers when we need them done. It's a rather precise timing. So like this year, they started at the beginning of March. And they were essentially completed at the end of March. There were a couple, as they review all the pictures, all the photography that they collected, occasionally they'll find that, you know, one day it was a little bit cloudy or it got a little bit late and the shadows got a little strong on one side or the other. So they'll redo some small areas. But they have been awesome in getting what we need.

I think one contract. that comes close to these numbers that we don't bid on. And I understand that you're happy with them, but they're public tax dollars. We have to make sure that we're getting the best bang for our buck here. I don't know that they're getting an automatic renewal here, and that's basically what it is. That we don't have cost creep going on here. That they're, well, we're just up at 4 point something percent from what we originally looked at.

Well, 4.5% over six years is at end another important item. This is a six-year contract, but if next year something catastrophic happened with our budgets and we said we simply can't do it, we are allowed to not do it. Scott, I think I mentioned that. It's we can cancel that contract.

I mean, that's with most of our contracts, honestly.

Okay. I just, I find that important.

You know, I would love to have you come back here and say, see, Jim, we took proposals on them, and they are, they're giving us the best price. I would love for you to do that. But I, honestly, I don't feel comfortable approving this without us seeing it. that there may be something out there that is just as good but, you know, a lot less expensive.

Well, again, if we were to look at a different vendor, it would be a completely different software package and I could never compare my photos from one year to the next.

Well, if you're not looking at other vendors, how do you know it's a completely different software package?

This is, I can't think of the word, proprietary. Pictometry software would be proprietary.

That, I hate that word. Because what that does is guarantee them that we have to re-sign with them. That's a dangerous precedent to set.

Well, another contractor would be proprietary as well because it would be their software. It would be their program. So, you know, any one of these contractors would have their own.

The only one I'm looking at is this one.

Well, back in 2020, it was bid. There were several different vendors. I guess I'd have to go back and look. I was in the office at that time, but I wasn't obviously the assessor. But I know that it was bid back then, and there were other vendors that bid, and they were the lowest, most responsible, responsive bidder at that time. So, again, the fact that we're just.

My question is why aren't we doing that again?

Well, what I just mentioned, the fact that we want to be able to compare the data from year to year. And if I had to get out of one software package and go into a different software package and then try to compare them side by side, it would be very difficult.

But Sue, I'm saying because we haven't dug into that. We can't say that that would necessarily be the case. I just don't, I don't. I don't know. I just don't. I think you're telling me it's priority. Our software package, they're the only ones who can deliver it.

Within that software package, yes.

That intertwines with us, which we have to sign with them at that point. We have no choice. That's not good. That's not good. We have to leave that door open for us in the event. You know, these companies are bought and sold all the time. And a new owner comes in and owns that company and says, you know what, we're not charging enough. We're going to charge more. They've got to take us. They have our software. That ain't healthy. I don't know. What's the pleasure of the board? What's the pleasure of the board? Well, I don't want to leave Sue in her office hanging. Do you have the ability to look at some other companies and maybe have them send you a proposal?

I could reach out to other folks and see, but I can do that. I'm just saying that it would be inhibitive for our use that we would have to go to a different vendor because these software packages, it would be going back and forth between software packages. But if you'd like me to get another quote.

If those quotes prove that to be accurate, then we have no problem. disagree if we're we're locked in here we're locked in here i don't i don't like it but what else can we do but we're not going to know unless we reach out to other companies that do this to find out okay a lot of money okay okay i'm going to back you up to your office

no well let me let me ask you this sue um is part of the reason of the expense is because we have 79 users and we share this software with so many other entities no we can we can have um the software allows us more users than we're even close to um i believe it's like

I don't want to quote a number, but I'm sure we're not even close to our user limit, and it's not a per user fee. It's, we can have as many users as we like.

If I'm some kind of contractor, whatever business, and I come in and I want some of that information, do we sell it to them? Can we sell it to them?

Well, we really only allow other governmental entities to use that data. So I don't know why we would sell it to anyone.

I don't either. I'm wondering if we did.

I mean, the important thing with this information and these photos that we get that's different than a GIS or a Google Maps. I can turn the picture and look at all sides of a house, let's say. I can look at all sides of a house. I can measure things on this with some pretty good accuracy. So, you know, if someone said the size of my garage is wrong and I can measure it on there and verify what's on my property record cards.

What is that, nylar? that's Nylor.

I'm not certain. I'm not familiar with Nylor.

Yeah, where they can shoot that. You can move it around to 3D and

And this software also interacts with my NCCAMA, which is my mass appraisal system. Once I get the database from Pictometry, because they just did the flyover recently, I should be getting that any day now. We can then load that into our CAMA system. So from the CAMA system, you can click on the map and see the property, the aerial of the property. And I'm.

That technology is amazing that they use today.

It is. It is.

I'm sure it's well worth, you know, and understand why we need it. Just over $700,000. Again, I can't think of a single thing we approve up here that reads those kind of figures that we don't make other department heads. You've got to go out and make sure that there's not other alternatives here, less expensive alternatives that we're not taking advantage of. So you have something moving forward. What threw the red flag up to me was the contract. There's no price on it on our agenda. We have to have those figures on the agenda.

Okay.

In the future.

Okay. I can certainly make sure that happens. All right.

All right. Thank you.

That's certainly not something I was trying to hide. I think you guys have copies of the contract.

No, I wasn't implying that you were. It's just, you know, we need to have that on the agenda to the commissioner. Because, you know, what would have happened, I would have called you before you got in front of me. And that way, we don't, you know what I was going to say before you got up here, which I think is healthier. We're not wasting everybody's time.

Okay.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you. Next, highway department.

For the countywide sign replacement project, this is a federal share, 90% match project. We did receive bids at the last meeting, which I announced. This is us seeking approval to submit our local match payment, which would be in the amount of $111,040.59 at the time the NDOT does ask for us to remit payment. The contract has not been approved. This is just kind of a preliminary just so that when we do receive it, we have a certain number of days to respond and keep in line with the end out schedule. So it's their standard contract language just asking for permission to execute it once you get that DocuSign notice.

And you're okay with that, Scott? Okay. I move that we approve submitting the local match payment to NDOT and executing the contract with NDOT for construction.

Second. We have a motion and a second. All in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Motion carries. Thank you. Thank you. Development stormwater management, Mr. Jabo. First one we have is Four Corners Winery and Wedding Venue.

So this is the one we haven't done the second reading of.

That was what I handed out at your last meeting. You asked to include uses that would not or would be permitted with this CM zoning. I think you were all definitely in favor of the project. It was a very nice project. The petitioner did a good job of presentation. At the Planning Commission meeting, they did decide and agree upon the uses. That is the sheet labeled Exhibit 1. And then I took that and overlaid it on the CM zoning uses and then yellow uses the peer so you can see how it against the others. And those were agreed and forwarded by the Planning Commission for your consideration on the second reading. Petitioners here, I'll let them introduce themselves and they would like to speak to them.

Hi, my name is Deanne Sasser. We are the owner of Four Corners Winery and Wedding Venue. We've been operating variants, I believe, since 2011, and we're seeking commercial zoning CM so that we can continue our business without fear of the variants not being granted every five years. So we've been here several meetings. I think everybody likes the project. We've talked about the project, and then we're here. today to follow up with anything that you guys need.

I think there was one use that you thought you would like to include.

Yeah. So on there, it's one I would like to include is the animals. So under the agricultural uses, raising a farm exotic animals. So I don't plan on raising any exotic animals, but I do have a lot of free range chickens running around. Occasionally I rehab opossum and baby birds. But I'm wanting to add that and include that so that we can have the free range chickens still roam the property. And I don't plan on having exotic animals.

Mike, do you want to just read the list of permitted uses then?

Sure. The following uses would be allowed, agricultural crop production, sale of agricultural products, storage of agricultural products, a banquet hall, a farmer's market, office general, party slash event store, photographic studio, plant nursery, recreation center slash play center, restaurant, retail, low intensity, studio arts, and then the petitioner would like to add Raising a Farm and Exotic Animals to the List, if you're so inclined.

What is a recreation play center? What does that include? What is that?

Well, we have 11 acres on the property, so people will roam the property. They hang out. I don't plan on having any, like, basketball courts or anything like that set up. But people do come out there, hang out. They might throw a frisbee, a football, things like that. But I don't plan on anything beyond that. We have a couple yoga classes that come out on occasion in the summer months.

I think the way to look at this is, you know, doing casual frisbee and things like that, that is a secondary use to what they're really intended to do. I can see your point, recreation center, play center, the whole reason of having these permitted uses in the event the petitioner decides to sell the property, it's zoned with certain restrictions, the new owner could exercise any of this list that they wanted to. So that's your choice and your decision to make.

So what you're saying is, Scott, you may pipe up here if I get off. The commissioners can't approve all this with the conditions that if you just sell this property, it goes back to its original zoning.

No. No. today would be a rezone the rezone would be permanent and that is why the written commitments are part of the potential rezone because the written commitments were designed whether the commission agrees or not but they were designed to remove those zoning permitted uses that the plan commission did not feel should go on with this zoning change and leave basically the items that would allow this operation to continue and to allow the property to remain marketable into the future was the idea.

This would be a recorded document filed with the ordinance as well.

Okay, so basically we will allow all of the agricultural uses, none of the institutional uses, and select number of items on the commercial uses.

That is correct.

So in theory, according to this list, a new owner or even you down the road, if they want to put in a strip mall, they could. Retail low density.

I suppose.

I'll let the next person sitting here worry about that when it comes up, right? I think you folks run a good business. You've been very pleasant to deal with. I notice here you've got no loud music sending through our ordinance. You're just willing.

Correct. I have one more thing.

Oh boy.

No. In the uses, I guess the commercial uses, the middle rung of things, we have a winery and then potentially a brewery down the road if we ever get that far. There was no particular category within there that fell. into winery or brewery, and it was just a category bar or tavern. So I don't know if that is some sort of amendment that has to be made, if it's just already a foregone conclusion that that's what we are and that's what will continue to be, or if that has to be added in, because there was no really category that fell within winery brewery.

Well, that is a banquet center and all that.

They can serve.

More restaurants? A question I think I can clarify. Attorney McClure, could they put a condition commitment on there as specifically our winery, even though it's not on the list?

Or does it need to be? I'm not sure if it falls under restaurant, because we do have a restaurant license. We have a license to serve the beer and food. And then we have, of course, our small farm winery permit, which we manufacture and sell wines.

I think it's that description that I think needs a little clarification, because if you're serving it as far as a banquet center or restaurant, that's a secondary use. Whereas you are a winery by your name, right?

Correct.

You would be using your own to make the wine.

No, we don't have enough property for that. We could probably make a weekend worth of wine with the property that we have. So we outsource our grapes from California and Michigan.

I think between the agricultural crop production, along with those statutes, along with the banquet hall, along with the restaurant, I think we're covered. And I think that's how we got here. I think if we go to add any more specificity, we're going to run into some other issues. So I think this is what it needs to be, in my opinion.

Do you actually sell bottles of wine? Yes. So then that would fall under the retail low intensity, right?

Correct.

So like the combination of banquet halls, right? The restaurant, the retail, low intensity, and possibly the agricultural.

Yeah, I don't have any questions. We're not approving a bar.

No. I mean, we have a wine tasting bar. That's what they call it, but it's not a bar bar.

So when you make your motion, you can refer to this list, adding raising a farm and exotic animals to the list.

So moved.

Second.

We have a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Motion. Thank you.

Good luck. Thank you. Big load off my shoulders. Oh, I just have one more last question. So, at one of the earlier hearings, we talked about the entrance to the winery on both 300 and 600 that we had to, I guess, put asphalt or concrete to go into the drives. Who would I seek approval or who do I deal with to get that done?

Come to our office.

Your office? Okay.

All right. There'll be a permit involved.

Okay.

all right thank you you're welcome thank you okay next is notarian west llc zoning magmen north and south 1500 north pine north pine township approximately 0.3 miles east of 500 east michigan city indiana pine township revised zoning district for rural residential arctic greenway gw second reading

This was, again, heard at the last meeting. I think after the explanation by the notorious professionals, you concurred that this was probably a good thing for the property, reverting it back to Greenway, which gives it protection. In addition, petitioners also got some conservation easements that provide even further protection beyond that. I have with me, introduce yourself, your name and address.

Sure. Yeah. My name is Brianne Bunger. I work for Naturian West. Previously, you talked to my boss, Lyndon, and I'm here as the project manager for this.

And they brought one of their engineer professors?

Mm-hmm. Tom Slowinski with B3 Company, 7325 James Woodridge, Illinois.

Young lady, and who do you work for?

Naturian West.

So if there's any other questions, this is the second reading.

Motion. Second.

We have a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Thank you. Motion carries. Thank you. Thank you. Next are the bid awards for the Bridge 132 County Road going west for Salt Creek Liberty Township.

After review, the apparent low bidder done at Bay Construction was the lowest responsive responsible bidder. So we do recommend award of contract in the amount of $1,082,861.67 as it conforms with our bid review.

Who was the next?

Next was Milestone Contractors.

The next highest. Who was the next low bidder?

Milestone. And then who was after that? Yeah.

I believe it was...

I can't remember.

Next was Reith Riley, yes.

So your recommendation is to?

Is to award to Duna Bay in the amount of $1,082,861.67.

I move that we approve.

Second. We have a motion and a second. All in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Motion carries. Thank you, committee.

Real quick, an update on the bridge and that project.

Yeah, so the contract completion date as of right now is September 7th due to delay in bearing fabrication. So we reached out to fabricators ahead of time to try and accelerate as much as we could, but that's as tight as we can make it with material fabrication.

First, second week of September.

A couple weeks of school, it's going to be closed, but then it'll be open after that. And we do have the possibility of early delivery. If we do have early delivery on those items, they will have to accelerate the schedule to meet the delivery dates. Okay, super.

And then maybe, Martin, could you give them an update on NDOT's project? Because all the West Liberty townships kind of got bridge closures everywhere.

Yes. US 6's closure east of 149 should be open by the end of June. Meridian Road will be open before, should be end of June as well. so and that's a that's a safe schedule too so it might be in the face of that they're moving very well on meridian project so your recent salt reach yes yes good all right thank you very much thank you thank you thank you okay we have one more not on the issue god

Yes, this has, ultimately this is a resolution of the Porter County Board of Commissioners to establish an hourly rate for the use of Porter County Sheriff's Department squad cars pursuant to Indiana Code 921-235 and requiring the execution of the identification agreement. The state legislature passed IDN code 92123, July 1st of 2026. It goes into effect establishing a traffic enforcement on private roads pilot project where certain qualifying homeowners associations may enter into an agreement with employed or off-duty law enforcement officers for the enforcement of state traffic laws on private roads within a subdivision This has been talked about since the pilot program was being put together downstate. I know our sheriff had a lot to do with that process. Ultimately, this resolution calls out that we recognize and enter into this pilot pursuant to the statute. Extra duty solutions will be the provider of the actual manpower Extra duty solutions will also be basically our third party biller for the county as it relates to the vehicle usage itself. That vehicle usage at this point on this resolution would have the reimbursement at $15 per hour of use of the squad car while this pilot program was being done. That billing again would go through extra duty solutions, be paid up here to the auditor's office. There is the agreement that the Lakes of the Four Seasons needs to sign. That's also part of this resolution. And this would allow once this resolution is passed, if the program were to modify and any other homeowners associations qualified, we'd be able to utilize the same with the same indemnification agreement. I know that the sheriff and the Lakes of the Four Seasons board and the commissioners have had quite a bit of conversation about this and the rate, and I believe this is where the parties ended up on the last conversation as far as what would be a reasonable reimbursement rate at this point in time.

And the information to MOU, if... the price of gas would skyrocket or our insurance rates would skyrocket. It does not.

This doesn't lie. It's the current rate until this board passes a new So if we saw gas go up considerably or if we saw our insurance or some other factor that we don't have now, this is not.

We're not shackled to that.

We're not shackled to this. And then also to be clear, the resolution is written in a way to avail us of the pilot program. If that pilot program goes away through sunset, through the legislation itself, this also sunsets. So right now this is getting us, I believe it's almost 24 months in the pilot program. So at that point, we'll have more information and be able to go from there.

So what is the only thing that we're agreeing to is that they can be, that the off-duty officer can be using one of our vehicles, correct? Correct. Now, who's responsible for paying for gas and that sort of thing?

we are that's why we're charging 15 that we're ensuring we're gassing we're outfitting we're maintaining and when that car is being utilized under this program it's 15 an hour reimbursement back to the county that just doesn't seem like with wear and tear and gas and i don't disagree commissioner yeah i mean you know we looked at some numbers i think uh dave you helped us with that and

These were what we came back with. I think it's low, but it seems to be what the average was once we put it in. But again, this is a pilot program. It's something that was done by the legislature, and it's new territory.

Well, I think it's put the Sheriff's Department in an awkward position. I think it's put the Commissioner's Office in an awkward position. And if it weren't for just trying to help the residents of Lick's Four Seasons, mine would be a great big fat no. I just think that's an extremely awkward... and expensive way to provide traffic enforcement within your community the way that this is being done. I don't know why Lake's Four Seasons would even agree to it, but if it's a pilot program, okay, if it helps the residents out there short term, but evidently somebody needs a hard lesson that this isn't the way to... to finance your traffic enforcement in the private community.

I just can't agree with it being as low as it is. I just think we're going to end up subsidizing it, and this is a private subdivision.

Well, Commissioner, if you want to throw out another figure, I'm more than willing to listen.

Well, I'd really like to see what it should be, not just putting some low-ball figure out there of $15 a day.

Well, I believe, let's slow down. $15 an hour, not a day?

Oh, I'm sorry.

$15 an hour a day, and I do believe that number started out of the auditor's office. I think the initial proposal was $8 an hour, and after our auditor's office went through it, The numbers they had available, $15 an hour got us allegedly to that math, closer to reality. So I don't want you to think that we threw a dart against the wall. And if we go back to the math, the number may move, but it's not going to go from 15 to 45 an hour. We're in the range somewhere. I'm not saying it's perfect.

Yeah, there were some statistics looked at. and broken down the type of hours that they use, whether they were going to use a 40-hour work week, 25-hour work week. But that is per hour, not per day.

Per hour, it's three days a week, four hours a day.

Everybody needs to come in mind before you get all tickled about these figures. None of that money comes back to this building. None of it. That goes to the officer.

The car rate comes back to the building. the officer gets paid directly and they will be paid whatever they're paid.

And then the, well, I think that's where Barb can speak for herself, but I think that's where the concern is, is that, you know, using our car out there, you know, I don't, I don't care if it's four hour shifts, you know, three, four days a week that, you know, 15 an hour, in my opinion, for what it's worth, I don't think it covers that. That is a very expensive automobile and it's, there's more expense put into it to outfit it and for, you know, to utilize it for $15 an hour.

I think that's the bargain of the year, but, but

I think the sheriff was put in an awkward position. We're put in an awkward position. So, okay, it's temporary for two years. We'll see what happens here. But I don't know why, again, I don't know why Four Seasons would ever agree to this because it's going to get extremely expensive for the residents out there. So, anyway, that's all I need to say.

Yeah, I mean, it does. It seems, you know, I thought it would be a lot more. But, you know, the numbers that I went through in the auditor's office and the comparisons we had, you know, it was right in that range. I think there was one more example where it was a little bit higher, but then there was different rate shifted, you know, per the officer's rate. So it was kind of a different subject matter altogether.

I think that, honestly, I think that Lake Support Season should look internally for what the solution may be out there. We don't have this problem in any other... a private community, you know, in the county that I'm aware of that we, it's ever been brought to our attention. So I don't know why they've got preponderance of speeders or whatever. I don't know.

Dan, again, you know, we're dealing with special legislation, you know, so it's, it's a little bit of a odd situation or something that was done special, much like you see a lot of the Marion County bills, you know, you get special legislation. So, you know, we're all kind of putting an awkward position in this and the residents are kind of caught in the middle. So it's a pilot program. You know, it could always be re-looked at if we tend to see that the costs aren't adding up or if it's costing us more. I mean, we're really not going to know until we get into it to some degree, you know.

Is that more useful?

This resolution allows it for the pilot period itself, but the resolution can be modified. So if we get into it in six months from now, we figure out that this really should be $22 an hour or $13 an hour, whatever the answer is, we're not shackled to this for the entire portion of the period. pilot. I mean, the purpose of the pilot is to start it and figure out what doesn't work and what does, and that's what this two years is supposed to do. This is our opportunity to figure out how much it really costs for us to have a squad car on the road per hour.

Can we say that we agree to that $15 an hour for six months and that it has to be revisited, that we actually look to see if we're you know, if we're covering our expenses or if we're subsidizing it? Is that possible?

I don't know what we're going to gain in the next six months. Okay. That's going to radically change the math.

Okay.

If the math hadn't been done, I would agree with you more. But again, I don't think we, it feels artificially low, but it also feels artificially low to the person doing the math until they got to the end. And so. Okay.

I personally don't think the problem is going to be the dollar figure. I think the problem is going to be because we're doing this on private property that the owners of that private property are saying we're either doing too little or we're doing too much. And therein lies the problem.

What if nobody volunteers to do this?

Great.

Oh.

I mean, they'll have to go elsewhere, find some other off-duty officers to do it. I mean, it's going to be up to the officer.

Well, can we stipulate that it has to be our officers using our equipment?

Oh, yeah. It has to be. It's already, yeah. Okay. It's already content. Okay. We're not renting our car to other officers.

No.

Yeah.

Yeah, we're not doing any of that.

The price would go way up.

Yeah. We'll put it, it's starting July 1st. We'll put it out there with Extra Duty Solutions, which is our side job. And if they sign up for it, they sign up for it. If they don't, we'll tell Lake and North Season that officers aren't working it.

Because we don't do this anywhere else.

No.

No.

No, especially in our place.

You need to understand that. And because it's traffic enforcement, there's a very good chance that you end up in court as an officer. Correct. And they don't get paid to do it. They won't get paid to do it. That's not in the MOU. So we'll see. It may work fine for three or four months, and then all of a sudden, nobody wants to volunteer for it because they don't want to go to court.

OK. Doing great. Did we have a motion? We don't. I have a motion to approve. Do we have a second?

I don't like it. Sorry, I can't second it.

Okay. Again, just real quick, I'm going to hold my motion because I don't want to, I don't want to, what is your issue with it, Mark?

I would just like to see the math. I would like to understand. I'd like to talk with your department and just get a better understanding of what this is all going to entail and the impact.

As the sheriff has said, this has been going on for at least a year. I know he's been talking to like four seasons trying to find the best thing possible to do. It's gone through even give us money to hire a full-time officer and put a full-time officer in there. So Sheriff Allen's did everything possible to help them as much as they needed. I agree with Commissioner Biggs. This is going to cost a lot of money for traffic enforcement. And we're not going to force anything HOA related or anything like that. We can't. And this is only on the Porter County side. So what happens on the Lake County side when they're over there? It's going to be another issue.

Would there be a big, if we hold off on this until our next meeting to give Commissioner Briggins and the sheriff some time to meet up and discuss in detail, you know, so she feels more comfortable with the information. I don't want to jam this through the board.

It's not, we're not in any rush. It's like we said, it's going to take place July 1st, but if it takes 1st August 1st, it's just the.

Well, I rescind my. my motion and motion to table this till our next meeting.

Second. We have motion and a second to table. All those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Motion carries. Thank you. Thank you. Any other matters which may come properly before the commissioners? Would anybody like to speak? Yes, I'd like to come to the microphone here and state your name.

My name is Doug McMillan, lifelong resident. I just had a couple questions. The appointment that you had for the airport authority, first of all, I'm very encouraged to see that there was a number

that they need to be evaluated.

That certainly shows the interest that the public in general is taking in that. Realizing that Mr. Struble's term is up June 30th, first of all, I wanted to find out how long is the tabling? I mean, is it just to the next?

Just to the next meeting.

Okay. How many applications did you have? I mean, is it five? Is it 20?

I don't have that number, but it was more than five.

Excellent. Okay. And then the last question I had is, are you going to be doing formal interviews? Yes. You are? Okay. And when would the applicants be advised of that? Because I do have some out-of-town.

You're representing the applicants?

I am representing myself. I am one of the applicants for the airport authority, yes. Okay.

We'll have Melody set those up.

Okay. That's all I wanted to know was when it was going to be because I know his term ends June 30th.

Right.

And there's only four of them on the board June 23rd.

June 23rd is our next meeting.

Okay.

So the.

Would you like to have the applicants present for that or will they be notified ahead of time?

We don't notify applicants we don't select beforehand because it's this board that decides it has to be public meeting. That would mean that we decided before we got into the public meeting, which isn't.

That's a no-no. Yeah. Open door. Okay. Thank you very much. That was the only clarification I needed.

Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else?

Good morning. Andy Vasquez, President of the County Council. I would like to comment on the commissioner being tabling his request or his motion in regards to the Lake of the Four Seasons. I think we need more information on that. What concerns me is you brought up, Mr. Biggs, that somebody may have to go to court and not want to, and that takes an officer off the street. And so unless we dedicate an officer to the Lake of the Four Seasons, which would make the question why that one and have other subdivisions. So a little bit more thought may go into it, and I just, like I said, would like to commend the commissioners on that, taking a little bit more time in looking into this, because you also have the liability issue of the officer's safety who's off duty, and also the liability issue of the vehicle in question. Those are the only things I wanted to bring up, but thank you. Thank you, Andy. Thank you.

Next.

I just wanted to bring back up the flagpoles. I've dealt with Skillman through emails, phone calls real quick. They're good to pay with it through their bond. I'd just like to get it approved this meeting. Super. Okay. Thank you.

What did you just say? Can you say that?

Oh, sorry. I emailed Skillman and talked with Paul, the guy who's dealing with it. They're happy to pay for the flagpoles through the highway bond and everything. They have the money, no problem.

Perfect.

So I'd just like to get it approved this meeting.

I was just trying to figure out which bond is getting paid. Right.

Because we've got multiples.

Okay. I just didn't know what plans you had.

No, I have plans, but that's why I was like, when we were getting it done, it's hard sometimes to get them to respond to you.

Doing my OCD, walking through this building, I could empty that bond in a month just trying to fix stuff in this building.

100%.

Okay, so then we're going to, we'll need a motion to install a two or three 25-foot commercial brakes to help your flagpoles in the amount of $7,200 be paid out of the highway bond.

Correct.

So moved.

Second.

We have a motion and a second. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye. Motion passed.

I just want to tell you that walking up here this morning, the front of the building never looked better. No, thank you.

Okay, anyone else would like to speak? Seeing none. Our next meeting will be June 23rd.