Last  updated: Feb 5, 2024

Council Working Session Meeting Jan 31, 2024, 8:00- 5:00. A long day.  (Audio to be posted by the council). The meeting started at 9:00 am.

Disclosure:  I am running against two-term incumbent Jerry Pittman for Commissioner, District 3, in the May Republican Primary.

This was a follow-up meeting and advertised as a County Council Work Session. the purpose was to discuss “the Sheriff Department’s salary increases.”  (Just looked it up – The meeting announcement was posted in the Jan 24, 2024 edition of the Democrat, Legal Section).

Update: This was a county “council” working session meeting which means no formal vote on a decision could be made. The purpose of a “working session” is to gather and discuss information that may lead to a decision (vote) at a council meeting.  The Commissioners can attend a council working session but as observers.  Commissioner Pittman participated in the meeting and discussed, and provided information regarding the capital improvement plan and a proposed new bond despite any opposition from the public regarding the amount. No specifics yet  (just general ideas and estimates) on proposed projects and estimated costs.  Ref: Indiana Public Access Counselor

No Money. The Sheriff had notified the council on at least three previous occasions, that they would continue to lose personnel (deputies, jailers, dispatchers) if they could not provide competitive salaries. Several hours were spent discussing needs and options. The council could find NO money in the budget to sustain a salary increase.  This is expected to lead to more turnover. The risk to the county of an under-staffed Sheriff’s department was not discussed. Less personnel does create more payroll money that can be used to fund the higher salaries.  This option has been identified as a strategy for the county.

A Way Ahead.  The county’s new financial advisor/consultant was present as was the council’s new attorney.  These are needed and critical resources that may help the county recover from years of overspending, financial mismanagement, and lack of due diligence.  It is expected to take years to recover.

• • New Financial Advisor: Greg T. Guerrettaz. Financial Solutions Group, LLC, Plainfield, In
  • New Council: Susan Bevers, Lorenzo, Bevers, Braman, & Connell, Seymore, In

Illegal meeting?  Two Commsiooners (a quorum) also attended (Wolpert, Pittman), and their admin assistant did most if not all the talking on their behalf. The meeting was not announced as a “joint meeting.” Nor was there a separate commissioner meeting announcement.  Their attendance may have been in violation of Indiana’s Open Meeting Laws. I have filed an inquiry with the public access counselor. The “council’s” attorney who was present at the meeting did not comment on the situation.  She declined to offer commissioners advice when it came to an administrate vote. The commissioner’s attorney was not present at the meeting.

General Obligation (GO) Bond.  In addition to the discussion on the sheriff’s salaries, several hours were spent on financial planning and budgeting. This included brainstorming (which was curious) a capital improvement plan (1) and discussions on a new bond (debt). The three million dollar bond expires at the end of this year and was financed with an interest rate of around  1 percent or less.  Council wants the new debt to be “revenue neutral” which means they can claim that your taxes will not change.  But with higher interest rates, the amount borrowed may need to be less.. Or, the length of the loan may need to be extended from 2-3 years to 10 or more?  The county does impose a property tax to finance the bond.   Note the county has to borrow money for capital improvements that include the repair and replacement of infrastructure. Infrastructure can include software leases, office equipment, vehicles/

Capital Improvement Plan. Until this year, county elected officials – commissioners and council have REFUSED to demand and support the development of a capital improvement plan and budget. The motivation was likely because the required funding would compete against other favored funding priorities and has contributed to our financial train wreck.

The financial advisor suggested using an “owner/rep” to help collect estimates on repair/replacement projects.

The lack of a plan was a consistent recurring audit finding by the State Board of Accounts (SBOA) which county officials can and do often ignore. It is up to the voter to elect citizens who will do the right things.

Financial Goals:

• • Target fund balances at 15%
  • Develop Five-year Capital Improvement Plan and Budget
  • Establish a Health Insurance Reserve Fund

(1). Commissioner Sanders.  Newly elected commissioner Ron Sanders has been working this year on developing the capital improvement plan.  Commissioner Pittman publically criticized Sanders for not being at the (illegal?) meeting.

The commissioner’s office is dysfunctional – Sanders was not the preferred candidate of the local GOP who has a monopoly on political power, and who prefers that the admin assistant (secretary of the local GoP) take more of an active administrator-type role in running the county.

New Work Session? Capital improvement planning and budgeting needs its own working session meeting.

Financial Report.  Councilman Kemp provided a budget/expense report ($15.00) where he shared his research into our budget and challenges. The council’s financial advisor helped in explaining the needed  “government context” to include the difference in terms and concepts between the private and public sectors. The 1782 the most important document.

The council legal rep also clarified that county budgeting is different than a household budget.  Such as rate relocations.

Jail Capacity. Currently 44 inmates with the capacity of holding 117. The option of housing more out-of-county inmates was discussed – the conclusion was that costs exceed revenues. This is a revenue stream for other counties.

Salary Increases – All Employees. Further, the council identified that any salary increases would need to be across the board.   If there is no new revenue, increases in salaries have to come from available funding, Options would include hiring freezes, re-organizations, contracting out, et.al.  When losing/cutting personnel and using available payroll money to fund higher salaries, the risks need to be identified.  Any reduction in personnel needs to be supported through a “workload analysis/”

$$ Music Center Admin Agreement $$. Commissioner Pittman stated that “unelected” officials granted their permission for our “elected” officials to reduce the excess revenue distribution from 75% to the Foundation and 25% to the county to a 50/50 arrangement.

I have asked Commissioner Sanders to request county attorneys to publish their opinion on this Admin Agreement. Why isn’t the county receiving a 100%?  Note that the Council can approve a distribution of innkeepers’ tax revenue to any area in the county that supports tourism – arts and crafts, history, preservation, sports, wellness, solar eclipse et.al.

Payment instead of Property Taxes (PILOT). The Music Center does pay the county $54K to compensate the county for the loss in property tax revenue that we would receive if this was a privately owned venue.  Council members discussed that the tax should be higher and the assessor agreed to re-assess the property as she would for a privately owned commercial property.

Zoom Votes. Councilwoman Swift-Powdrill attended the meeting via Zoom. She can vote as long as she can be seen –  which she could be. And, the state allows only one vote per elected office per year when not physically present. The Council voted to table any decision on the sheriff’s request.  Note: Woking sessions are used to understand an issue (s). Votes to approve/disapprove a policy decision MUST be made at a regular meeting.