would like to call to order Monroe County Board of Commissioners work session for Thursday,
December 4th. And the first item, I don't, Mr. Schilling's not here, but you have it. Okay, thank you.
We had one, I think it was when they were mowing, one of our highway workers damaged a fairly sophisticated
gate. And so this is to,
to settle with that for the repair cost of what was damaged. And we need a motion? Yes. I move to approve
the settlement agreement between Monroe County and Marion Reeves in the amount of $7,495 for replacement
repair of the automatic gate control panel. Second. We have a motion. We have a second. Questions? Comments?
Any public comment on this item?
see none. All those in favor of approving the settlement agreement with Marion Reeves, signify by saying
aye. Aye. Motion carries. 3-0. We send our apologies and deepest regrets. All right. Next we have is
Ms. Nestor Jelen present. Oh, she is. She's online. Ordinance 2025-44.
Thank you so much. I'll keep it quite brief. I'm hoping to send this to the regular meeting
of the commissioners if there's room on the agenda for the 11th. But this section that was in the packet,
this gives a good overview of what this ordinance change includes. So this is the itemized list of what
is being changed
Without going into too much detail, basically, we are correcting some Scrivener's errors. There was
a house bill that was passed that impacted stormwater that then required us to go back through and make
some changes to our code. Then just in using the code, we've realized that things are being prompted
or triggered in areas that don't necessarily make sense. For instance, we're removing a requirement
for a trigger for sidewalks on this certain corridor that we have on our alternative transportation
map. As a side note, we're also working with Parks and Rec and the Highway Department to update our
transportation map so we get the sidewalk requirements right.
But with that, I can take any questions you might have about some of these changes. I did strike through
this other text amendment at the top. This was presented to the plan commission, so I just wanted to
be transparent in some of the changes. This is an ordinance that's still in front of the plan commission
and could be forthcoming, but was not yet passed on to the commissioner. So this is the only text amendment
before you.
Thank you so much. Any comments, questions at this moment? No, I don't. Okay. So thank you. And so we
have a little reading to do. And anyone with questions can contact Director Jelen. Thank you again for
all your hard work. And we can put this on the agenda for December 11th. Okay, okay.
So we will do that. Ms. Freeman will take that note and she will add this to our agenda. We appreciate
it. And thank you again for your patience and waiting around and all of the changes we've done to our
own schedule today. So thank you for that. Absolutely. Thank you. Thanks. All right. Next item is the
capital improvement plan for economic development income tax.
Um, we do hopefully still have members of council here. Um, and again, yeah, today's been out of our
control. We've just been rolling with it. So if, um, council members could be made into presenters,
um, I will ask, uh, first and foremost, uh, Mr. Cockrell to explain why this is something we have to address.
I think I included in the packet the last year's or the 2022 plan that covered 2023 through the end
of this year. So our current plan expires at the end of this year and then I also included the statute
that requires us to have a capital improvement plan for and this is for economic development income
tax purposes. So the statute with economic development income tax says you have to have a plan. The
plan has to
account for at least seventy five percent of the revenue that is coming into to the county during the
time of that plan- and I calculate- we're gonna get a twelve million three hundred and forty six thousand.
In twenty six that's what was estimated by the the state and we're double that to twenty four- six nine
two so three quarters of that is basically eighteen and a half million.
put together a plan that includes spending at least 75% of that. It's kind of awkward because we're
only gonna get two years worth of revenue in this at this point in time. So you could have a 10 year
plan, but it still has to have the 18 million. That's the requirement of what you're going to receive.
We do have a fairly healthy cash balance in there. So if you wanted to go above the 24.7 million,
that we are expecting to collect in the next two years, I think that would be acceptable as well, because
we need it in the plan so that it can be expended for those purposes. I guess the purpose of the plan
is that the executive kind of puts guardrails on what these expenditures can go for, and then the council
appropriates it within that scope. And so that's kind of where we're at. I guess I would note that I
think the county council appropriated right around four point
six, seven million in this last year. So our plan could include a project that says for operating expenses
and include that number in it. Clearly, our last plan said we're going to use it all for the justice
facility. And that's what we all thought was going to happen. And we don't have a timeline for what
that's going to do. And the code requires a timeline. Right. OK.
And so are there any council members present online? Okay, great. So we're just looking for council
input on what you would want in this plan and what timeline goes on it. Well, thank you commissioners.
Can you hear me all right? We sure can.
Great, thank you so much. You know, there's been a lot of unprecedented things happening at the state
level, which we just did not see coming. And we, so what we're asking for, I think here and other council
members will join. I clearly only speak for myself, not for the entirety of council, but we would be
looking for maximum flexibility as this is one of the tools in our fiscal policy toolbox.
As you very well saw, as you were following our budget process, you saw that we used this to help balance
the budget for this year and ensure that we had. Am I good to go? Yes, we can hear you. Okay. All right, great.
And just wanted to make sure that as we are talking with all of the department heads for the upcoming
budget cycle into FY27, that we do have that maximum flexibility and as many tools as possible in our
toolbox. Just wanted to thank Mr. Cockrell for outlining some ways forward and those sounds like
I think good good ideas and I would just again say that the number that we put in last year may not
be the number that we have to put in in the coming year or years. So flexibility is really the the keyword
here. But but I guess the point is that we need to have a plan for 75% of the total at it coming in
over two years and
And while we understand the 4.6, et cetera, million that you all allocated out of edit for budgetary
items for county general-ish for county operations, that's not 75%. So the question is,
And just to clarify, and Mr. Cockrell, correct me if I'm wrong, if we don't have a plan, then that money
can't be spent. So we need to have a plan. So the question is, what is the council planning, Mr. Cockrell?
And I think that's part of it. The other part of it is that the funding that is associated with that
gets put into a
a separate account by the treasurer that can't be touched until we create a plan. And if we don't create
the plan within three years, then that money gets distributed to the other taxing units. So there's
a little bit more to it than just you can't spend it. You put future revenues in limbo. So, and I think,
Mr. Cockrell, you had a series of other suggested
um options um since I don't know that that the council wants a justice center so um if the plan is not
yeah let me speak yeah yes please Mr. Iverson I do want to speak to the idea of a justice center in
the in the the votes that the council took unanimously earlier this year uh we still recognize the need
for constitutional care
for every single inmates here in Monroe County. And we certainly understand that our staff and anybody
working for Monroe County deserves to be working in an environment that is conducive to that work and
is free of any environmental hazards. And so we certainly want to move forward with some type of action
that addresses those two concerns. But at this point, as we articulated,
many times, the state has really tied our hands by only allowing us to spend 25% of that lit. And so
whatever we can spend on, you know, it's really hamstrung legally in terms of being able to spend on
justice issues. It's not that the council doesn't want to. And I invite my colleagues to jump in anytime.
It's really, if there's anything you all want to add.
I understand that, but I think a vote on a property purchase that says we want to wait and see what
the state's going to do is different than no. And it was a no and it wasn't a postponement.
And then I heard, oh, we don't like the site. We don't want it so big. We don't want this. We do want
that. I heard a lot from different council members about what they wanted. And so I don't know that there's
a path right now and again it has we need to put a timeline in the plan and we can just you know and
this plan can be updated yes i mean i hear what you're saying but that's not what the vote was the vote
was no and and if it's different property if it's different it's not
and see what the state's going to do, if they will help us, if they will amend SEA 1, what they're going
to do. So I think we're a little flummoxed because we don't know what to do with the plan. Like, what
plan should we put out there? Do we just say all of it goes to the justice center? Is that what the
council would want?
I'm gonna repeat what I had said just earlier and I see that my colleague David Henry has his hand raised.
Right now, because we have the humility to say we cannot tell what's coming in the future, is to say
we need flexibility in this plan to be able to address some of the fiscal choices that we have to make.
David, what do you wanna chime in on that? Mr. Henry?
And I had just hopped in, so I'm getting caught up. So it sounds like where I'm at is we're discussing
the mix on what to present as a two-year, three-year plan, capital improvement plan, is that correct?
It's 2026 and 2027.
Because the lid in 28 of course I just want to make sure it's clear we're only getting revenue in 20
right now in 2026 and 2027 right the plan has to be at least 2 years long.
it there in the statute does not give a maximum amount of time that the plan can be for so it could
be for five years but really the revenue is only coming in those two years so i just ah i just want
to clarify got it and so and so and so i understand it too because we already have revenue we've collected
we want to protect the revenue that we have and and designate its use right so it's not just the incoming
revenue it's the 20 million
present a plan and make sure that plan is up to date. Is that correct? I may answer Mr. Cockrell. Right.
Yeah, Mr. Cockrell, you can repeat maybe what you'd said at the outset. The plan has to include 75%
of the revenue coming in. It could include every dollar we're going to get and every dollar we've already
received, but the minimum standard is 75% of the revenue that's coming in.
and so that is I would I would yeah I mean I have I have a proposal I've not really discussed with my
peers but I I view this as a technical fix and I feel like um the plan as is obviously also has a price
point for the jail and justice center of 100 million that's no longer accurate anyway right because
we're well past that based on the last design is presented and voted on by the board of commissioners
right so it originally called for 100 million dollar
plan for the facility now at the 225 and the plan was already kind of stale at that point anyway, once
the price points move well beyond what the capital improvement plan called for, right? So to me, the
technical fix is a discussion about what the new risk tolerance is for the cost of a jail and or justice
center. And then an understanding that the council
did not commit more than 25% of the edit to balancing the budget under Indiana code for lawful purposes
that are allowed, like the economic development things that we use the edit for when we balance our
budget for next year. So I think there's something about identifying, and Mr. Cockrell, maybe you have
some language we can use that says that no more than 25% of the edit will be used for allowable purposes
under Indiana code for
or economic development activity, which is what council did, right? Which is what we did with the budget.
And then the balance could be still reserved out for the Jail and Justice Center, but that price point,
we need to come to an agreement on what is our risk tolerance based on the SCA-1 and projected revenue
over the next two years, of course, which we don't have, right? Does that make sense in the room? I
know it's one of those echo chamber situations where I'm talking and it's the voice of God in the room here,
Does that make sense to people in the room that you can hear me with that? I've got a couple points
I want to make because I don't I don't want people to think that the 100 million was the total project
cost ever for that was provided in the previous plan. That was a plan for 100 million of that money
to go toward the creation of
the justice center. That was never the budget. That was what was coming out of edit for two years. That's
the budget. That's all. That was never presented as so so people should not think that suddenly,
you know, the whole budget of the projects balloon because it's not 100 million. 100 million was a number
that was used based on potential edit revenue and creating a plan. So don't take that 100 million to
be any more than what that is, which is just
a plan for a hundred million dollars of the total project. Well, we're respectfully, especially in that
point, um, the, the, the edit has never gotten close to generating a hundred million in that revenue,
right? In a two year period. So, so that was a pretty generous estimate that we'd be able to generate
that level of revenue off of the edit in a three year plan. But what I'm saying is please do not say that
that was ever the budget for the entire project because it never was. Not here anyway. It was to say
100 million will go toward the justice center from this project. So Mr. Cockrell, do you have anything
you want to add? Well, I guess I don't know if I need to add it, but I think I'd like to make sure I
understood what Mr. Henry had said.
I think what Mr. Henry had said is that the council this year and I think into the future would like
to have 25% of the edit funding go towards operational costs and then the remaining part be allocated
and this is where I kind of lost it a little bit because I don't know if it was towards the justice
center or there has to be some kind of risk analysis
that would include what we think the state's gonna do, and I would say, and what we think the building's
gonna happen in the building, I think that's part of the risks that I would look at. But I don't know
if that was, and then allocate at least 50% per year towards that project and have 25%, and then you
hit your minimum, and then you could amend it later if it goes beyond that or not.
I heard the 25%. I thought pretty clearly. It's just what was beyond that. I guess that's what I heard.
But I'm not confident that I heard it correctly. Right. And to be clear, I don't believe the council
has made a decision as a group about what they want. But our problem is this isn't just a technical
fix. This is something where we reach out to the council to say, we're trying to be partners in this business.
of county government with you and there is something that we're required to do and we're not just going
to build guardrails without talking to you first but now we're getting pushback like we've done something
evil we've done something to retaliate for something i don't know what no we're trying to make sure
that this money is available and so we want to know how the council wants this
plan to read for the next two years. And again, it can be updated. But we need to put something out
there. Because if we don't, we need to put something in a plan that covers 75% of the perceived potential
revenue for two years. Because if we don't, then that money is going to sit in essentially an escrow
account until we figure it out. And so we'd really like to do this before the end of the year. And I
know that council is going to be meeting next week.
I don't feel comfortable proceeding. And I do appreciate both of you being here, by the way, Mr. Henry,
Mr. Everson. I personally don't feel comfortable writing up a plan without having that council input.
I mean, and I don't, I don't know.
doesn't want us doing it without their input. What does that input need to look like in terms of format?
I would just really like a list of what they think the income is going to be and what the 2026 spending
would be based on the estimated revenue. And we know one thing, which is the 4.6 million, which is going
toward county operations. But we need the rest.
you know, and it's up to us to okay that. I mean, it's not necessarily a rubber stamp here, but certainly
we're trying to get input so that we can do this in a way that fits with council's plans. And one of
those things is, you know, when this edit was passed, it was done with an eye toward getting
the justice center built. And if that's still the case, then we still should put a timeline in there.
So I don't know if that answers your question. Yeah, I think Peter has his hand up to you. Yeah. Mr.
Iverson. Thank you, Commissioner. I do want to try and reduce the temperature of this conversation a
little bit as I think we're all on the same team here. And I think the real struggle is
that the state is making things extraordinarily difficult for us. We deeply appreciate this opportunity
to have this conversation in public. And I think both Mr. Henry and I deeply appreciate the opportunity
to be able to speak on this important topic. I know the other counselors wish they could be here, but
schedules and whatnot. I do think that council can come up with revenue and expenditures and we can
have those
ready in pretty decent time. And, you know, as you've watched our proceedings, there are some really
big ticket items, costs and expenditures that we are perennially discussing. Ituminous, self-insurance,
there's there's lots of and the list goes on and on i don't want to list all of all of those those items
but there's quite a bit of specificity that we can get into in terms of some of the larger pressures
on the budget and i i think that uh to your point uh commissioner uh we'll need another conversation
um and you know we're we do have a meeting next week uh which is after your meeting um so you're meeting
on the ninth
We have a meeting on the 11th. We also have a meeting on the 18th. And we know that there's, you know,
4.7 million that we really need to put in this plan, but I'm not comfortable passing an incomplete plan,
so I really don't want that money sitting in escrow in 2026.
I'm just kind of, to put a finer point on it, if we could get something from the council sooner rather
than later, that would be helpful, Mr. Cockrell. Yeah, and I would be remiss if I didn't say that I
hadn't thought at least a little bit about this, particularly in the context of what are we going to
do with the justice facility? I kind of assume that that, what would I do if that was off the table?
And so I came up with a list of three or four things.
you guys can do whatever you want with it. One is that we've been perennially talking about an airport
terminal building, which is a $20 million, and I guess part of this is truly, I was thinking about it
as an economic development thing. And so clearly one of the things in my list is the funding of the
4.68 million
that was appropriated, I think that is. And then I also had, you know, we've talked a lot about housing.
I mean, can we use the economic development money for expansion of a sanitary sewer? One of the things
on my list, and I don't know if it still should be, because after this morning's news was funding,
you know, annual funding for the transit and our transit issues. And then the last one is, you know,
we are feeling the crunch. I think the state has made it clear that they are going to want a lot of
consolidation and particularly a fire. And so would it make sense to use some of this money to help
support and fund some of the initial upfront costs of fire consolidation, if that's the direction we
go. The high capital costs, which are things like fire houses, fire and fire equipment. Yeah. Right.
Okay. Would you be willing
Council. Mr Cockrell to forward your list of thoughts and ideas if if you all are okay with it to the
council so they can look at it and consider it. Um, really, you know, the transit issue is one that
that needs to be addressed. It's going to be addressed on Tuesday, even though the agenda item could
be dropped, but I'd still like to have that
that's part of the agenda item to have a conversation about what are we gonna do about transit? And
I did ask Bloomington Transit for some information on the 13 line. So I will have that hopefully in
time for Tuesday so that we can have that discussion with council. So there's still transit for a couple
of years that we still to deal with. So yeah, so if you wouldn't mind sending your list,
to the council. What I'd like to do is I'd like to wait till after tonight's meeting at Steinsville
and talk to Dustin to maybe flush out the fire stuff a little bit more and then send it to him tomorrow.
I like that. Yeah. Does that work for you guys? Yeah.
Mr. Henry? Yeah, I mean, I guess I put my hand up, though. I don't know. I think we're just in a discussion
mode. So I think that's great. And some of these are new ideas that I'm hearing for the first time about
alternative uses of the edits to fund economic development. I think all these are novel. And so I'm
all ears as to how we can put taxpayer dollars to work that we've been holding on to for several years anyway.
If it sounds like that's a little different than the spirit of the email that called for us to be here
today, which was settling two parts of the plan, which was what to do about the justice center and what
to do about the appropriations that were made by council for this year's budget. So if we're reimagining
the whole CIP to include transit or opportunities for airport improvement,
Yeah, this is a good conversation to have. So I look forward to taking this to our council colleagues
and exploring other ways to put that money to economic use in the community. So I'm all ears with Mr.
Cockrell's suggestions. I think that's all I really have today, other than, again, I think Mr. Thomas
painted it correctly. This is one person's opinion in terms of what I've offered as to a technical fix
to the plan. But I think we have an opportunity to reimagine the use here. So I appreciate that,
thank you. And I do think,
That's what we're hoping for, is to get some information. But I also think that if the decision by the
council is to not include a justice center in whatever form or fashion it comes in, then I think you're
sending a signal. And I think you want to think about that. And I'll just be as vague as that. Mr. Cockrell,
did you have anything to add?
Yeah, we do have more hands up, but yeah, I just want to see if you wanted to add anything. No, I think
that's great. Okay. Mr. Iverson? No, I don't think I have anything constructive to add at this point
other than I'm looking forward to working on all of these ideas and putting dollar figures next to them.
And again, it can be revised, but I think we have to be very clear that taking the justice center off the table
And I think that's where that point came from, is are we saying we're not going to put any money towards
it, then what are we saying we're going to do? Because we need the edit money if we're going to proceed.
And if the legislature changes things.
So maybe we could even, could we do a plan, Mr. Cockrell? Let's ask it this way. Could we do a plan
that says, if the legislature makes amendments as needed, we would like to spend the money on this.
If they do not, this is how we'll spend the money. Can we do a plan A, plan B in the same document?
I think you could have an explanation. Okay. Because right now, and I think our current plan has project
one, project two. Yeah.
I think you could have project one this and you could put in the kind of the preamble that project one
is really important and that if there is an opportunity opened up by state legislation to accelerate
that, then you would want to fully utilize the money for that. But if not, then project two, project
three, project four, are things that you guys would be interested in. All right. What do you all think
about that? OK. All right. So something else to think about. And you can add that into your notes. Hope
Spring is eternal. Yeah. But we do have to have something so that the money can be used. And we're willing
to hear, because these are ideas for other potential uses,
But we're looking forward to hearing what the council intends, and that's how we're going to act. So
are we good? Ms. Purdy. Sorry, I just wanted to share, because councilwoman Crossley has sent me a text
saying she'd been trying to attend. She's had to change some schedules. I don't know if she's able to
really still be on. So she just wanted to let you know that she was trying
And she also understands that you have no control over how things went. Yeah, yeah, yeah. We certainly
didn't. We did not intend for this. We have a hand raised. Hi. This is the public comment portion. This
is Seth Mechler, Menor County resident. Sorry. Sorry, Mr. Mechler. There is no public comment on this item.
Okay. Yeah, I just asked. This is just a work session. Sorry, I didn't know who you were because everything's
veiled here on our end. I just saw initials. But before we take a vote on this, we will have public
comment on it, as will the council, I assume, at their meeting. So there will be opportunity to offer
input and public comment. We don't want you to miss out. But this is a work session, which is just sort
of bandying ideas about it for the public to see.
how the proverbial sausage is made. Thank you, sir. I don't see anyone else from the council on our
list. Okay. And I do understand. Yeah, I mean, to this day, it's been totally out of our control, and
you just kind of go with the flow. All right. We're going to end that part then, and Mr. Copperle will
at some point tomorrow send council members
some information about some additional items that we've talked through at various junctures in case
you really don't want to work on a justice center. And thank you both for being here. I know the timing's
been crazy, so thank you both. We have two more. All right. Thank you so much. Thank you. We have two
more items, and we got to be out of here in eight minutes. No pressure. I'm going to make a motion to approve
Signature on the official bonds for three elected officials, the sheriff, the recorder, and the auditor.
Second. Right? Correct. That's it. We just got to do this and sign it. Just get your signatures. Great.
Any public comment on this item? All right. All those in favor of approving the signatures on the three
elected officials' bonds, signify by saying aye.
Are you a yes? Are you a yes? Are you a yes? Oh, yeah. Oh, I'm sorry. Yes. Sorry. We're going to have
you do four things at once. This is our life. All right. Mr Cockerill, our last item, and we're going
to do it. Yes. And the final item is our bonds got bid. The general obligations bonds got bid yesterday.
bidder was people state bank at a 3.2% interest rate. We will need to accept that. That all that that
bid. OK, I'm going to go ahead and make a motion to approve to accept people state banks as the lowest
bidder for our geo bond at 3.2%. Second second.
We have motion and a second. Any public comment on this item? You raise your hand in teams, come to
the podium. Seeing none, all those in favor of accepting people's bank bid for the GEO bond, signify
by saying aye. Aye. Motion carries 3-0 and we're adjourned. Thank you all, we did it.